• Version
• Download 0
• File Size 736.84 KB
• File Count 1
• Create Date February 27, 2025
• Last Updated March 12, 2025

NATIONAL ASSEMBLY HANSARD 27th February 2025 Vol. 51 No. 29

PARLIAMENT OF ZIMBABWE

Thursday, 27^th February, 2025

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

PRAYERS

(THE HON. SPEAKER in the Chair)

*HON. NYABANI:  Good afternoon Mr. Speaker Sir. I rise on a point of national interest.

THE HON. SPEAKER:  Can you raise your voice?

*HON. NYABANI:  Alright.

THE HON. SPEAKER:  You do not say alright.  Withdraw that.

*HON. NYABANI: I withdraw Mr. Speaker Sir. My point of national interest is to commend the police with regards to the excellent work they are doing on arresting drug dealers, those who are brewing illicit beer and all the thieves.  It is disrespectful that there are people out there who are beating the police yet they protect our country.  Commuter omnibus drivers run away from the police. Police officers are supposed to be respected because they protect us.  If there is no police, we are not protected.  All those who are harassing the police should face the wrath of the law so that they know that attacking the police is attacking the country.  In this way, they are making the country undignified.  The police work for the country and its dignity.  That is my point of national interest.

HON. M. MAVHUNGA: Chitungwiza Central Hospital flighted a notice early January entitled, ‘Hospital User Fee Policy Implementation’.  The main purpose of that policy implementation according to the notice is to align hospital fees with a directive or a Cabinet circular of 2006.  I went through the circular – it is referenced d/1/13.  That circular is entitled, ‘Circular on Review of Fees and Revenue Enhancing Measures at Public Health Institution’.

The main feature of that policy is to direct that all children below the age of five and elderly people below the age of 65 are now compelled to pay for all the services that are provided at hospitals except consultation fees.  In most cases, consultation fee is probably less than five dollars, so they are only exempted from paying consultation fee according to that circular.

Mr. Speaker Sir, we are shocked that this circular is now being implemented at this stage which is almost two decades ago and obviously it has been inherited from the First Republic and we are not so sure why this retrogressive piece of legislation is actually being implemented at this particular stage in hospitals. Not only that Mr. Speaker Sir, it is not an accident that it is being implemented by these hospitals now and it is also not imaginable that the parent Ministry or Government is not aware of this implementation. It is a cruel piece of legislation. You will agree with me Mr. Speaker, it is barbaric. We are talking of old people who cannot afford, we are talking of pensioners who are not getting any pension from anywhere to compel them to pay those user fees. Even the able-bodied, Mr. Speaker Sir, they are unable to pay for services, let alone to expect such elderly people and young children to pay for user fees.

Everyone is aware that the economy is not performing very well. Most people are suffering, unless you belong to the Chigananda clan.  Everyone else is suffering.  I implore the relevant Ministry or the Government to actually withdraw, with immediate effect, that particular notice if it is still in circulation. If it is not in circulation, then we need the relevant Government Ministry to actually publicly announce that this particular notice is no longer applicable at the moment. Otherwise, as we speak right now, Chitungwiza is one of the hospitals where young children and elderly people are being turned away. That is my point of national interest.

THE HON. SPEAKER:  In future Hon. Member, do not canvas the Speaker's position or the Chair’s position.  I have never agreed with you in what you were saying. I only listen and direct accordingly. I suggest that you put that as a question next week to the relevant Ministry because it is a very important observation. Thank you.

         *HON. MAVHUNGA: Thank you Mr. Speaker Sir.  Wednesdays are problematic Mr. Speaker Sir as most people want to appear on television.  I will try to do so Mr. Speaker. 

         THE HON. SPEAKER:  Do you want me to agree with you? It is alright.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Thank you so much Mr. Speaker Sir. I rise on a point of national interest to bring to the attention of this august House, the recently released 2024 Corruption Index, a flagship initiative of Transparency International and also a recognised indicator under the Structured Dialogue Platform for Debt Resolution.  In this latest index Mr. Speaker, Zimbabwe is ranked as number 158 out of 180 countries with a score of 21 out of 100 and therefore, making it one of the most corrupt countries in the region.

         The last time Zimbabwe recorded such a low score was in 2015 and this latest ranking signifies an erosion of the country's capabilities to deal with the cancer of corruption. Given how disastrous the effects of corruption are, including the crowding out of social services to the citizenry, this House cannot be silent on this matter Mr. Speaker Sir. In an era characterised by the rolling back of international aid and development, the prudential use of national resources cannot be overemphasised.

         After all, Parliament has the responsibility of oversight and to ensure the efficient use of national resources. I, therefore appeal to you Mr. Speaker, for the Minister of Justice, Legal and Parliamentary Affairs to favour this very House with a Ministerial Statement on how the Executive is tackling the question of corruption, including how far the Executive has gone in terms of the whistleblowers’ protection legislation and the witness protection legislation. I so submit. – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] –

         THE HON. SPEAKER:  Thank you very much.  Do not believe in some of these indexes. – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] – You have a President in the western hemisphere accused of corrupt activities, over 400 cases and he has been exonerated by the courts, democratic courts of his country and today he is still a President. So, be very careful about these indexes. – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] –

Why do they escape such blatant information happening in countries which are supposed to be the citadels of democracy?

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Sorry Mr. Speaker, if I can – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections] –

THE HON. SPEAKER: You want to say something?

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Yes.

THE HON. SPEAKER:  Yes.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:   I just wanted to say Mr. Speaker, what I referred to when I was giving my point of national interest, this index is actually agreed on by our Government in terms of the structured dialogue platform as one of the key indicators in terms of reforms. So, I think, we need to pay attention to it as Parliament.

THE HON. SPEAKER:  I am not sure about the agreement. What I can only advise in support of part of what you have said is the Whistleblowers’ Bill that must come as soon as possible to this House. As for the indexes, I have my reservations. – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] –

COMMITTEE STAGE

BROADCASTING SERVICES AMENDMENT BILL [H. B. 10, 2024]

          House in Committee.

          Clause 1, put and agreed to.

          On Clause 2:

           THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  I propose the amendment standing in my name that On page 3 of the Bill, by the repeal of the following definitions— (a) “Chief Executive Officer” and the substitution of the following— “Board” means the National Disability Board established in terms of section 4; (b)“Commission” On page 4 in the definition of “Director” delete “section 52” and substitute with “section 5”

           HON. MUSHORIWA:  Could the Hon. Minister explain the basis of the amendments that he is bringing so that we will be able to engage him?

           HON. TOGAREPI:  Mr. Chairman, the Hon. Minister is trying to locate a functional mic so that he is correctly recorded.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE):  You may proceed Hon. Minister.

         THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  Thank you Hon Chairman. Perhaps I did not quite get his question.  I think if we are to recommence the proceedings as you have called upon, I propose the amendments standing in my name that The Bill is amended in clause 2⸺ (a) on page 1, in clause 2 line17 by the insertion of the following definition⸺ “internet based broadcasting” means a broadcasting service transmitted over the internet including radio, television, podcasts and other digital media platforms;” (b) on page 1, in Clause 2 line 18 by the deletion of “established by this Act”.

             THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Hon. Mushoriwa, may you repeat your question?

              HON. MUSHORIWA:  Thank you so much Chairman.  I was asking the Hon. Minister, because generally when we do the debates here, not only do we do it here but we also do it for the other people that are not within the House.

 

So, I had requested that at least you explain the amendment to the clause, what you intend to do, so that at least we will be able to engage you well. Rather than for us to just start to engage you, the others that are listening may not be privy or have access to the Order Paper. It may not make sense to them.

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  Yes, Hon. Chairman, perhaps I think the Hon. Member, if I got him correctly; I think he wants me to clearly indicate that I propose the amendment as reflected on the Order Paper amendment of Clause 2. The Bill is intended in clause 2 (a), On page 1, in Clause 2, line 17, by the insertion of the following definitions. Internet-based broadcasting means broadcasting service transmitted over the Internet, including radio, television, podcasts and other digital media platforms.

(b) On page 1, in Clause 2, line 18, by the deletion of established by this Act.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: I do not have a problem with definition that the Minister proposed but I was going to suggest to the Hon. Minister another definition that I think needs to be included under Clause 2. I want the political matter to be defined within the definitions and my suggestion is that political matter refers to partisan politics, so we include it like that so that political matter will not be ambiguous because it is within the Bill. If we then put the definitions, we then define what political matter is and we say political matter refers to partisan politics because yesterday you came clear to say that it does not stop the community radio stations to discuss the other general things that are within the community.

         I thought what you meant on political matters; you do not want stations to participate in partisan politics. So, that is my suggestion that let us have the definition of partisan political matter included in the Clause 2.

         THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): I think we discussed this matter yesterday but at the same time any position to further elaborate to the Hon. Member in terms of the classes, the major differences between community radio broadcasting is his question and I get it. The difference between a community broadcasting service licence and a commercial radio licence. His point yesterday which has been repeated today again is that he would prefer community radio stations being a political platform. I want to elaborate further to the Hon. Member that we have different classes in terms of licencing framework for example, we have the national broadcaster.  Its major mandate and obligation is national issues including political issues. Then commercial radio stations are precisely licenced to deal with commercial issues and community radio stations. The discussions around bridges and schools are not political matters in that context.

         At the same time, there is no need to define the political matter in this particular clause. So, there is no debate about that. A community radio station is there to deal with community issues, and heritage-based broadcasting and it covers a certain jurisdiction. Let us say a total perimeter of around 40kms or 80kms depending with the infrastructure that has been put in place. So, we cannot politicise community radio station. At the same, Section 20 of the Broadcasting Services Act is very clear that political organisations cannot own radio licences. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Mushoriwa, you are reminded that normally it is procedural that you submit any amendments before, rather than bringing them here as it is the structure of the Committee.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: Yes, one can actually present the amendments to the Journals Office but specific Committee deliberations are there to make sure that there is an engagement with the Minister to actually persuade the Minister to see things because us backbenchers will be seeing it. If he then disagrees with our views, it is well and fine but I just believe that this question on the political matter, the Hon. Minister actually missed my point.

         The point is that when you say that community radio stations can discuss about bridges, roads or anything within the community, you cannot remove the politics aspect because when you complain that your Councillor, Government, Council or MP has failed this, it is the realm of politics.  If you then limit the definition of political matter to say political matter means partisan politics, then you have covered the community radio stations so that they could discuss matters within their confines without this fear of getting into politics.

         Secondly, there is something that you need to take cognisance of.  One of the major challenges that you have, how are you going to define that a community radio station is getting or dealing with a political matter unless you have given a definition?  This is something that you need to consider because it will come to haunt you as the Minister responsible for this legislation.

         HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Thank you very much.  I associate with the thinking of Hon. Mushoriwa.  Politics is simply  political scientists.  It is who gets what, when and how.  So, what it means is everything is political.  The definition of politics is so wide.  The issue that we are trying to cure here is partisan politics, which is why we need to be very clear in terms of our definition of what we do not want to see, which is partisan politics.  We do not want this community radio to be seen propping up certain politicians or certain political parties.  That is what we do not want but issues of community development are political in nature.  It is very important for us and we also know that community radios are finding it difficult to discuss community development issues in fear that they are going outside their mandate as prescribed by the law. 

         So, it is important Minister, for you to consider this and to include the definition of politics as partisan politics. 

         HON. MUGWADI: I want to disagree and I am with the previous speakers to confirm my agreement with the Minister.  The Minister has properly chosen the proper ways in the context of the radio stations being secured from discussing issues of a political nature.  It is important to come to the context of our community radio stations.  There is a new addition to our broadcasting infrastructure.  You are pretty aware that airwaves are an important area of national security.  It will be geographically and administratively difficult for the Minister to be able to check the content of every radio station across the country.  That means giving them or narrowing the word of political nature into partisan politics will create a Pandora’s box. In fact, it will be tantamount to opening a can of worms because then it will be difficult for the authorities to determine what matters can best be defined as partisan politics because if we then narrow the word of a political nature to partisan politics, it means those in charge of those community radio stations will have latitude to go on a frolic of their own and engage subtly or through nefarious means into political issues hiding by the word partisan.

So, the phrase ‘of political nature’ as an all-encompassing phrase, it is my humble submission and my well-considered position that it should stand as is, otherwise we run the risk of creating a Rwandan 1994 situation.  I am not sure about the date, I am sure I should confess about that but we may have challenges of an editorial nature but with serious security consequences arising from some of those radio stations.

So, the phrase ‘political nature’ as it is, is all-encompassing to say they are prohibited from engaging in a lane that is otherwise not theirs to ensure that there is community harmony.  There are so many things to discuss in communities, including marriage issues.  Our chiefs are doing so many things in these communities and we are so happy that some of these online radio or television stations are publicising.

There are so many and so it would be very dangerous for this House to seek to prescribe the verses and chapters of the operations of these radio stations in the context or with a bias on politics simply because all of us here are therefore confirmed open, blatant politicians and therefore we would want to behave in this House as if everyone is.  I am sure that is not the situation.

It would be a good idea for the Minister to proceed as is and then if there is any need to narrow down the definition, the House is a permanent institution of Government, it will always be reviewed on another date but so far so good.  Thank you.

HON. MAMBIPIRI:  Thank you very much Mr. Chairman.  I think the basis of the laws that we make in this House is that they should be very clear and not vague to ordinary people as they interpret and live with them.  On that score alone, I would urge the Minister to at least appreciate the differences that are there already in terms of interpreting political matter as it is used in this proposed Bill.

I would rather the Minister consider two options.  Either a definition of political matter as in this clause, as has been asked for by Hon. Mushoriwa or to drop the clause that says political matter under community radios and clearly articulate that particular clause using the phrase partisan politics because in reality, we cannot, for all intents and purposes, stop community radios from discussing what are ideally called political matters.

When a community discusses the pass rate at their local school, why the students are failing at their ordinary level subjects, that becomes a political matter for all intents and purposes.  When a community discusses why they have no medication at their local clinic, it becomes a political matter according to some other people's interpretation.  Therefore, in order to support and allow our communities to freely discuss and engage in developmental community issues without the risk of being branded people who are discussing political matters, I think Hon. Minister, you simply need to provide a definition under Clause 2.  Thank you.

HON. DHLIWAYO:  Thank you Mr. Chairman.  I would like to support the position that has been outlined by the Minister and Hon. Mugwadi.  I believe that we are not looking at a global clause that encompasses everything.  I think there are other pieces of legislation that define political matters.  So I think we can rely on other areas of the law starting from our Constitution and other Acts. Those ones I think may clarify what political matters that are being referred to are.

I do not think every time we first say a word like woman or man in a clause, we say let us define a woman, let us define a man in that clause, so that is clear.  I do not think that is progressive.  So I think the position taken by the Minister that for this clause, this particular clause is not dealing with those political issues.  Let us stick to what the Minister has outlined. Thank you.

*HON. NYAKUEDZWA:  Thank you Chairman.  I would like to support what the Hon. Minister said.  He clearly explained that community radio stations must not broadcast political issues.  According to the Constitution, in Section 281, subsection 1(a), it clearly states that a chief or kraal head is not supposed to be political in delivering their duties.  So, these issues of political radios are the same.

There is a lot of work that needs to be broadcast in local areas or communities which are not political.  So, the Hon. Minister clearly explained and I support what the Hon. Minister said.

HON. MADZIVANYIKA:  I would like to highlight a point.  Is it true Hon. Minister, that if a community radio station discusses politics, it becomes an offence?  That is a very important question, Hon. Minister.  If it is true that if a community radio station talks about politics, it becomes an offence, then we need to define what is politics to remove all unnecessary ambiguity because we do not want a situation whereby at the end of the day, someone willy-nilly defines that this is political and this is not political, yet the Parliament is here, the lawmakers are here.  We are lawmakers to ensure that there is no ambiguity in this matter.  

I think Hon. Chairperson, I really still need, if the Minister can suffer any prejudice in defining for all and sundry to know that if I do this, I have overstepped my mandate as a broadcasting community radio station.  So, Hon. Minister, is there any prejudice for you to just allow? We want your definition, not our definition.  Can you highlight to us your own definition?  What do you mean by political matters so that we protect these people as lawmakers?  Thank you.

         HON. MUGWADI: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I want to ride on Hon. Mushoriwa’s earlier submissions that this stage is an important interactive stage. I am sure it will be good to proceed in that interactive manner. Otherwise hauling is not good because we are the majority and the consequences are obvious. I am saying in the spirit of what Hon. Mushoriwa has said, it will also be good for us to engage with them about the phrase ‘partisan politics’, for example.

We are well aware and I am sure the Minister too; and that is why he chose the phrase ‘political matter over partisan’, that there are other mortals who do not necessarily belong to political parties because the word partisan arises from the word belonging, associating with a political party or being membership thereto. There are situations where there are other mortals who do not belong to political parties but can discuss politics.

If we remove the phrase ‘political matter’, you are saying those other mortals who have a penchant of wanting to hide behind the finger to smuggle political issues into a discussion without necessarily belonging to a political party, will then be allowed to turn radio stations into theatres of political struggles hiding behind the finger that they do not belong to a political party. Therefore, they are non-partisan. That will be a very dangerous approach Mr. Chair.

In our society, we know them. We have Civil Society Organisations that have made political pronouncements and history has told us very clearly that even when we are going for elections, when we expect political parties, named political parties to be squaring, we have runner dogs or auxiliary organisations that will be playing the ground for certain political organisations hiding under the finger of Civil Society Organisation. If we say partisan, these organisations or NGOs, they are not political parties and therefore, they cannot be defined in the context of partisan. They would have escaped the hook and this one under the pretext of the substitution of the word political matter by partisan.

Secondly, we have independent political thinkers who do not belong to partisan groups. They do not belong to political parties but they are independent. Some of those people have been in this Parliament and it does not mean that they were prophets when they were here. They were politicians but they did not associate or belong to any political parties. Those ones will escape the narrow definition of partisan matters.

So, for the record, I rose to reiterate that the word political matter must stand as is, unless those who are suggesting its substitution by partisan politics must provide us a fresh definition of what is partisan politics beyond what I have said. Thank you.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Mr. Chairman. As I have already indicated that in the interpretation section of the Act, there is no reference to political matter. In this particular case, the debate is misplaced in the context of Clause 2 and perhaps it could be raised later when we look at the 5^th Schedule.

         HON. MAMBIPIRI: Thank you Mr. Chairman. To the extent that the Minister agrees that the issue of political definition may be raised when we look at schedule 5, I think that also means it is a definition issue that needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, the definitions are only addressed in Clause 2. So, I would rather we finish with the definitions under Clause 2, so that we proceed all at once.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: Mr. Chairman, I have already highlighted the position. We are not here to debate on what politics means, what a political matter and so forth but I will refer them specifically to the issues that they are interested in. Statutory Instrument 39 of 2020, which is very clear in terms of the establishment of community and compass radio broadcasting station. Compass radio broadcasting services regulations that in terms of interpretation, community broadcasting service means a free to air radio television broadcasting service, not operated for profit or as part of a profit making enterprise which provides that; are for community purposes, are capable of being received by commonly available equipment and do not broadcast programme or advertisements on behalf of any political party.

         Governing body means a group people constituted as the decision-making body of the community radio licence such as the board of directors, council, Commission or any others as may be appropriate to the licence concerned. These regulations shall apply to all community and compass radio broadcasting services licences issued under the Act. Requirements for community radio stations:

• To empower the community through sharing of knowledge and information relevant to that community;
• Present programmes which promote law and order;
• Provide sufficient coverage of community, regional and national news and events and languages spoken within that community and;
• Ensure that its programming is reflective of all key interest within that particular community.

Mr. Chairman, I have highlighted many times. It is an issue of semantics of what do you term partisan politics or what is not partisan politics. We want to deal with the particular clause, not issues around interpretation throughout. We will spend the whole day around this particular matter. As I have already indicated that in the interpretation section of the Act, there is no reference to political matter. In this particular case, the debate is misplaced in the context of the Clause 2. Thank you.

     Amendment to Clause 2 put and agreed to.

     Clause 2, as amended, put and agreed to.

     Clauses 3 put and agreed to.

     On Clause 4:

     HON. MAVHUNGA: Mr. Chairman, as you are seated on the Chair, tarisai kuno, pane vane mapoint of order. Muri kungoramba muchimhanya. Unless if you are saying you just want to rubberstamp this Bill. Allow us to debate.

         THE HON. CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE): Your point has been noted.

         HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Point of order Mr. Chairman.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: What is your point of order?

         HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: We have further debate on Clause 2 but you rushed without giving us an opportunity.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: We have gone past that.

• [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: We were raising points of order from this side.  Go back, we cannot have this and we cannot rubber stamp.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Hlatywayo, we are now debating Clause 4. Hon. Mushoriwa. -  [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

HON. NYATHI: On a point of order Mr. Chairperson?

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: What is your point of order?

+HON. NYATHI: Hon. Chair, my request is when you are seated in that Chair, you are a Chairperson.  You are not participating in the debate.  You are not supposed to be biased.  This is something that we are doing for the country.  Everyone wants this Bill to come out in a proper way because these are the laws that we are creating for the country and not for an individual. Give us an opportunity to debate.  Please give us an opportunity to debate.

When you are seated in that Chair, you are a Chairperson do the task that is supposed to be done by a Chairperson and not be biased. I thank you.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Nyati may you please take your seat, if you stand up properly we recognise. Most of you are just making noise and you talk before I even recognise you.  Stand up properly follow the procedure and I will recognise you.

         HON. NYATHI: Thank you Mr. Chair, my request is let us follow procedure, we are here to build our nation.  We are here to represent the people from our constituencies.  Let us follow the procedure and agree that we are moving on to the next Clause.  Why are we jumping other Clauses?  We are not following the procedure.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Member I hear your point, what you are supposed to do is respect the Chair as well.  Stand up, I recognise you and I will give you an opportunity to contribute to the floor. I thank you.

         On Clause 4:

         HON. MUSHORIWA: Chairperson, the proposal by the Hon. Minister to take power away from Parliament through this Clause cannot be allowed. When this Parliament came up with the Broadcasting Services Act it said that candidates that want to serve on the board have to be advertised.  They have to come to Parliament for public interviews and thereafter the President and the Minister responsible will then choose amongst the shortlisted candidates by Parliament.

 The Hon. Minister’s suggestion to now want to remove Parliament and make sure that the appointments are done by him and the President alone is not proper.  It defeats the purpose of this Bill and even the African Charter on Broadcasting.  Chairperson, I believe so strongly that as Parliament, we should allow the current system to continue.  The only thing that we could be agreeable with the minister is to reduce the number of members on board from twelve to seven but not to take our power as Parliament is to ensure that there is a public platform to make sure that this is given. Those who want to serve on that board are interviewed by Parliament and with the generality of people that want to follow, are following to see what has been happening.

The Hon. Minister even when he responded yesterday, he did not even tell us what is the mischief that he wants to correct. What has he seen wrong for the Parliament performing this task that he now believe that himself and the President alone should be allowed to a free for all and have this thing alone. Parliament does not dictate to say Hon. Minister these are the people that we have interviewed can you please take our number one, two, three or four. No, Parliament will give you the list of those and the numbers who have succeeded and the Executive is then given the leeway to then choose among them. I think it is a fair position of the law rather than what the Hon. Minister wants to propose in this Bill.

         HON. HAMAUSWA: Thank you Mr. Chairperson, I want to propose that whilst we agree on the reduction of the number of members of the board from twelve, I suggest that the Minister can reduce the number to eight.  Increase from seven to eight; the reason being that we want to be in line with the Constitution where we move towards 50-50 in terms of representation.  If it is eight, we are going to have four women and four men.

I also want to agree with Hon. Mushoriwa that as Parliament, we should not sign a law that takes away the powers of Parliament.  Parliament should be allowed to interview prospective candidates. Previously we all remember that when members were interviewed, the public were also aware to see, if there was transparency and some who were not even able to answer the question who were redefining the questions that they were being asked.  They did not see the light of the day because it was for everyone to see how they were performing. There was a reason why those interviews were made public.  I humbly request the Minister to reconsider, we are not really against - I understand the Minister still has some powers but taking the powers from Parliament, I do not think any member here would agree to give away power.  We cannot give away the power of Parliament to interview as is given by the Constitution.

         HON. S. SIBANDA: Thank you Hon. Chairperson.  I was just following the report by the Portfolio Committee and I noted that it came clear from the public hearing that the public was very much concerned about the excessive powers that are usually given to the Executive.  I still want to concur with Hon. Mushoriwa that maybe we might need to consider reduction in terms of power levels to the Minister.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: I want to remind Hon. Members, let us try to avoid repetition because the past two Hon. Members were just repeating the same thing.

         HON. TOGAREPI: Thank you Hon. Chairperson. I think in my view, the Minister is right to say BAZ where Parliament is an interested party it is defined in the Constitution [Chapter 12]. When we are talking about Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe (BAZ), it is an organisation of our national interest but are we not giving ourselves too much work for something that can be dealt with by the Executive. So, it was there but was it necessary? Is it backed by the Constitution? Let us just not argue for the purpose of just doing that. Mr. Chair, there is a Hon. Member who is saying some funny words. Let me request the Hon. Member to respect me and I respect that Hon. Member.

        THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE): Hon. Hlatywayo, please can he be heard in silence?

        HON. TOGAREPI:  I think that decency is very important…

        HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Sorry, are you saying that I was the one who was speaking Chairperson?

        HON. TOGAREPI:  It is not Hon. Hlatywayo, I know who was saying it…

        HON. G. HLATYWAYO: Thank you so much.

         HON. TOGAREPI:  And I am only telling that Hon. Member to behave and not to behave like a drunkard in an honourable House.-[HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]- So, Hon. Members, the issue …

          HON. CHIGUMBU: Point of order! I kindly ask the Chief Whip to reverse the word he said. He cannot refer other Members here as drunkards.

          HON. TOGAREPI:  Honourable, if I say behave like, you are not but you are like.

          HON.  CHIGUMBU: I am speaking to the Chair. Are you the one?

          HON. TOGAREPI:  In fact, the Hon. Member should have told the Hon. Member who talked about whatever that nonsense, he is to do that.

          HON. MUSHORIWA: On a point of order. When someone raises a point of order, they are supposed to make a ruling. This is because if you allow the Hon. Member to remain standing whilst a point of order has been raised, you are defeating the whole purpose.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Your point of order is overruled. - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]-

         HON. TOGAREPI:  Hon. Members, my view is that, yes we all agree that BAZ has everyone’s interest but for us to then try to take that to our stable to then want to do interviews and so forth for BAZ, it was there but was it necessary? Was it backed by any legislation? I think let us leave that one and we concentrate with Zimbabwe Media Commission and not this one. I think the Executive can deal with it. I thank you.

         HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Thank you very much Chairperson. I wish to add my voice on the need for us to make sure that this Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe is independent and the board members are a product of processes that are coming from Parliament. I know that the Minister yesterday already suggested that he wants to make sure that at least two of the board members are coming from Parliament. I am still not yet satisfied and still think that the entire seven members have to come from Parliament through Parliament conducting interviews and giving the Executive a list of the twelve that can then be reduced to seven.

          Why do I say that, I want to make reference to the African Charter on Broadcasting and in particular Article 2 of Part 1, which says that all formal powers in the areas of broadcast and telecommunication regulations should be exercised by public authorities which are protected against interference, particularly of a political or economic nature by among other things, an appointment process for members which is honest, transparent, involves the participation of civil society and is not controlled by any particular political party.

         Clearly, if you look at the appointment forces that are being proposed by the Minister, it is not transparent, it does not include civil society, the citizens and it is controlled by a particular political party. So, in the interest of protecting and promoting the values that are in the African Charter on Broadcasting, we should be able to give all the powers to Parliament to conduct a very transparent process where everyone is included. I so submit.

        THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): I want to thank all the Hon. Members for their contributions and also appeal to their conscience in terms of practical implementation of what we term organisational efficiency. The size of the organisation matters. The current number of employees employed by BAZ, permanent employees are 26 and we want a board with 12 people to superintend over these people.

       HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Point of order!

       THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Point of order overruled, can you let the Minister be heard please? -[HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible Interjections.]-

      HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: There is something that the Minister is not understanding and we need to clarify it to him.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Can you let the Minister be, please! - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible Interjections.]-

         HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Mr. Chairman, I want to highlight a few issues please as a former corporate executive. The scope, efficiency and span of control, the unity of command is very clear. These are simple matrixes in terms of the organisational management and efficiency. What we propose Hon. Members is a reduction from a number of 12 to a size of seven and all of you including Hon. Hlatywayo, she was her and we discussed this matter yesterday.

      We said we can have two parliamentarians coming from Parliament and we have the rest coming in terms of the public entities in terms of the Corporate Governance Act. So, the Public Entities and Corporate Governance Act is very clear in terms of the processes. I want to deal with transparent issues Hon. Hlatywayo, that it is very clear that each and every Zimbabweans who is interested to be part of a board of directors shall submit a CV and qualifications through the Corporate Governance Unit. From that list, then the particular Ministry will request for the list of Members.

       So, we have already dealt with that particular matter yesterday and we have said we can have two of the seven coming from Parliament. We cannot over burden an institution with 26 employees having a whole board and what purpose does it serve any way having as many people on a board? The board of directors has got a fiduciary responsibility to be in charge of an organisation.

      Yes, we are a member to many agreements. I do respect that. Parliament still has a role and you still have two of the seven members. I will refer you to the Broadcasting Services Act so that you can get an appreciation of what the Act says. Establishment and functions of BAZ, I will also refer you to Section 4. The majority of these members, two shall be persons chosen for their experience or professional qualifications in the field of broadcasting technology and broadcasting content respectively. One shall be a chief as defined in the Traditional Leaders Act and nominated by the council of chiefs referred to in the Act. One shall be legal practitioner and one shall be a public accountant while one shall be a representative of churches.  The current status in terms of Section 4(b), members shall be appointed by the President from a list of six nominees submitted by the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders.  We have reduced the number from 12 and still retained 2.  The current scenario where we have 12 members, only 3, I think it is a fair decision to have 2 coming from Parliament.  I thank you.

         HON. MAMBIPIRI:  The whole essence of coming with a Bill here and then sending people out to do public enquiries and then gathering Members here is for the Executive to get feedback.  When that feedback comes, I think it is proper for the Executive members to appreciate the sentiments that are coming from outside.  The first one is the report from the Portfolio Committee saying people were worried about the Minister’s excessive powers.  I think the Minister must appreciate that.  Secondly, Members here are saying in terms of the appointment of this BAZ, the Minister must not have excessive powers but would rather defer the selection of these Members to Parliament as was the practice before.  This is feedback that is coming from the public and from the legislators and it would be appreciated if you consider and adopt this.  I thank you.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE):  I think it will be proper to say some Members because it is not all.

         *HON. TSITSI ZHOU: Thank you Hon. Chair.  I believe that the Hon. Minister explained clearly and the most important thing is that the people elected to the board are not chosen by the Hon. Minister.  Some of them come from the Council of Chiefs.  You cannot continue to repeat what has already been said.  Like what the Government Chief Whip said, most of Parliament time should be for conducting Parliament business. This business of conducting interviews is a burden yet there is someone who took an oath of office to do that work.  The Hon. Minister took oath of office to do that and so far, he has not been accused of any wrong doing.  So, he is doing his work diligently.  The oath was not partisan and it is work for the country just as the President took oath of office to serve this country.  So, I agree with the Hon. Minister to let it be according to the draft before us.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Members on my left, when others are debating, please keep quiet and do not make noise.

         HON. MATEWU:  Thank you Mr. Chairman.  I want the Minister to clarify when he said two will still come from Parliament.  What we are amending here is the Principal Act.  In this Act in Section 4, it talks about the members of the BAZ.  If you read the first sentence, it says Section 4 of the Principal Act is repealed and substituted with the following, which means we are repealing entirely the Principal Act of the year 2000.  I do not see anywhere on the amendments where it says two shall emanate from the Parliament of Zimbabwe or from the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders.  Perhaps the Minister needs to clarify that because in the interest of protecting himself and the work of the broadcasting authority, although the thought itself has fewer employees, it plays an integral part on who governs and who manages our frequency spectrum which we are given by ICU.  So, I want the Minister to clarify when he says two of these shall be from Parliament and if not there, that needs to be added in the Bill before we proceed.  I thank you. 

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  I want to buttress this point.  Once an amendment says we are going to repeal a clause, it means removal and substituting with the following but the following does not include what the Hon. Minister was saying.  Fundamentally however, if you check this Bill, the Hon. Minister says that the objective is also to make sure that it aligns with the Public Entity’s Corporate Governance Act.  If you see the proposed amendments in Clause 4, it does not even talk about the standard that you find within the various pieces of legislation.  It does not talk about the Chairperson of the Board or Deputy Chairperson of the Board.  All those things are missing.  I also think it is appropriate that the Hon. Minister gets assistance from the technocrats to ensure that this clause is really sorted out. 

I think the Hon Minister is missing the fact that we debate on the Second Reading and we are now in the Committee Stage.  This is the stage where we write down what is being said.  If we leave this room today without having agreed on the text of this Bill, then whatever we said yesterday, if not included in the text of the Bill, does not become part of the law.  What becomes part of the law is what we are doing as text to the Bill.   This is the reason why we are saying your referral saying there is a provision in the current Act, which you are actually saying you are repealing will not hold water.  So, I urge the Hon. Minister to hold consultations with his staff to ensure that this clause is looked at again.  I want to insist that in liaison with his staff, the question of saying two should come from Parliament out of seven does not make sense because as Minister, you still have the power.  Even if Parliament gives you the list, you still have the power to look at the list from Parliament because Parliament does not impose who to chose from the list.  You chose from the list yourself.  I thank you.

*HON. MUROMBEDZI:  Thank you very much Hon. Chair.  On the amendment with regards to gender, when the Minister said he had reduced the members to seven to include gender, I think the number allotted to women should be four.  If you leave it as it is, women will be very few.  We want to fight for gender equality and hereby request this through you Chair.  I thank you.

HON. KAPOIKILU:  Thank you Chair.  The Minister said two shall come from Parliament.  What is the selection criteria?  We need clarity on that.  I thank you.

         HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Thank you Hon. Chairperson. I want to associate with the comments that have been made as it relates to the issue of gender. I think during the general debate, I also referred to that particular point. Every time that we have an uneven number, it is expected that the fewer members have to be women. I think we need to change that narrative. So, I support the idea that we have at least four women being appointed.

 I also wanted to go back to the issue of the selection process. I think the minister needs to understand where we are coming from. We have a problem with the excessive powers of the minister or excessive powers of the Executive. So, for him to suggest that he is only going to take two from Parliament out of a total of seven, I think it does not make sense at all. Maybe a middle ground might be four out of seven coming from Parliament. We need the majority of these members to be coming from Parliament if we are going to cure the problem of excessive powers of the minister and excessive powers of the executive.  I so submit.

HON. MUKOMBERI: My input is to maybe beg to differ on the issue to do with a quota which is maybe set aside for women. I think for seven members to say, let us have at least two being female, it creates an opportunity for them already. The five should be now based on merit – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]-

HON. TSITSI ZHOU: On a point of order. We have competent women. We have qualified women, as indicated, there is a need for a lawyer and we have women lawyers. We have women accountants, we are qualified. We have the capacity. We need to be recognised. I thank you.

HON. MUKOMBERI: Hon. Chair, I was still debating. May I be given room to express myself? Chair, may I continue with my debate? -[HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE): Order, order. Can the Hon. Member be heard in silence, please? Order on my left.  Let us give him a chance.

HON. MUKOMBERI: My point is not to say we are only having two females in the board. My point is to say already having two as a mandatory number does not limit them from even being seven. But I mean to say if they are competent, they are going to also...

HON. KARIMATSENGA-NYAMUPINGA: Point of order, Madam Speaker. Point of order. My point of order is that the Hon. Member must withdraw his words. As women, he cannot tell us about qualifying.  When we had children, we were not measured on qualifications. We just produced. So, I think it is not fair for him to judge us that way. He must withdraw. Thank you, Chair.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Member, withdraw please?

HON. MUKOMBERI: Hon. Chair, let me withdraw – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] – I withdraw. I was referring to the applicants, not women per se. I thank you.

+HON. P. MOYO:  It is sad to hear what the Hon. Member has said about women.  We are being told that women are not educated to match the level of men. I want to say, if the Hon.Minister is listening, women are capable of competing on any post, including in the broadcasting services.

 In addition, with regards to women, the number must be increased to four, like what women said because women are a majority in this country. So that must be considered. We want this issue to be looked at objectively. Thank you.

HON. DR. KHUPE: Thank you very much, Hon. Chairperson. The Minister is speaking. I want the attention of the Minister. Hon. Chairperson, looking at the Minister, who is sitting directly opposite me, I see a very gender-sensitive Minister.  Because you are a very gender-sensitive Minister, on this clause, there must not be any debates or any compromise. I think at least four of these people must be women, without any change. I hope and trust that as the gender-sensitive minister, you are going to concede to this one, at least for once. We want to know you as a gender-sensitive minister. I thank you.

         HON. TOGAREPI: I am happy to see that all women are on one side.  What I want to bring to this House is when we are advocating for sensitivity to the disadvantaged, we give a minimum so that there will not – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] - In this case what we have seen as the best way would be at least two shall be men and we have allowed women to be five – [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.] -  What I am trying to bring to your attention Hon. Chairman is when we are saying at least four or at least three, let us look at what we want to achieve, not the number. The first thing that we are trying to achieve when we are talking of gender sensitivity, we are not talking about women, we are talking about the two genders.

Secondly, we have now observed that many of these posts, I know women are competent. We have an example here in the House of women MPs who are doing good.  We also have disadvantages that occur on women when it comes to public positions.  That is why we are saying if we can then say three and we guarantee the three, then the four men can compete.  Women can also compete so that women get two and men 2.  We compete for the four but for the three we do not compete.  We cannot appreciate that we do not compete for the three, they are given, then the four we can compete men and women.  We are not saying four are guaranteed for men. We are competing for the four but we cannot compete for the three. Is that not empowerment enough? I think we need to observe that and be rational. When you have given three, that you have not competed for, then we say the four, you compete again with men. Is the Government not being sensitive to the gender issues?

HON. C. HLATYWAYO: Thank you Mr. Chairman. This is a very sensitive subject. As a country, we must take it seriously. I think there is a proposal that was given in this House earlier on, on achieving 50-50. Our law must be explicit. We do not want to say that we have a minimum of three. Let us be explicit. If you want to achieve 50-50, we must practice it. This House must set an example.

I want to support the proposal that was given by Hon. Hamauswa earlier on. Let us just have plus one. From that number seven, we just add one to have four-four. We address all the concerns from both genders, the men and the women. The BAZ Commission must be an example of our endeavour to achieve a 50-50 balance in our deployments as a country.  I propose that the Minister adds just one person to have four-four. It must be explicit in the writing of that law - four women, four men.

*HON. TSVANGIRAI:  Since we are talking about the quota system, as youths we have doctors, lawyers and we have doctors like Hon. Shacky. It is also our wish that on the board, at least five must be youths, bearing in mind that 60% of the population are the youths.

*HON. P. ZHOU: I would like to support what the Chief Whip said.  He said three women can participate and submit their CVs. Amongst the women, we expect also the youths to be included. Mostly, that is what happens. Amongst the four, they said clearly that it is a pool where anyone can participate or compete, be it women, men or youths. With regards to the number of Committees, usually it is an odd number to ensure voting.  If it is an even number, it is difficult when it comes to voting. Seven, I think is a good number according to what the Hon.  Minister said. The workers are very few and I support that three women, including youths. On four, anyone can compete, be it men, women or youths, so that they can be elected successfully.

         *HON. TSITSI ZHOU:    Thank you very much Hon. Chair. The advantage of Clause 4 varies, it clarifies and speaks about people who are knowledgeable or qualified in broadcasting amongst the two.  So, this means both males and females.

         On the chief, there is no question. When it comes to the legal practitioner and Accountant, I think there is need for it to be either male or female. If it is very clear, it will not be problematic at all.

         So, I think let us stick to seven members like what was alluded to by the earlier speaker. For the youths below 35 years, let it also be clear. So, it means it must be amongst the four, Hon. Zhou said of the three, one must be below 35 years.  So, amongst the four, I proffer that two of them be become below 35 years old.

HON. DR. MUTODI:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I think Hon. Members, we need to know that when we are crafting the law, we do not need to be too strict because we are not aware of the state of nature that will be prevailing during the time of the appointment of the board.

So, like what the Hon. Government Chief Whip said, women have been oppressed for too long, we understand that. The efforts we are currently taking are to ensure that there is gender equality.  So, when you are faced with an odd number of seven, it means to achieve equality, you simply subtract seven minus one, you have got six. So, from six, you say three, three. Then the other person can be any gender, you leave it like that so that at one time, there are four women and three men and at another time, there are four men and three women - that is very fair.

So, those who are advocating for youths, maybe that is when you can then say three men and three women. Then the seventh person can be a youth of any gender or a disabled person. So, that makes it very fair.  Thank you, Hon. Chief.

HON. KARIMATSENGA-NYAMUPINGA:  Oh, thank you very much Chair for recognising me.  I just wanted to say that among the seven, I would want to ask the Hon. Minister if he could also wear disability lenses so that he can also pick one of the seven to be a person with disability.

HON. ENG. MHANGWA:   Thank you so much Mr. Chairman. For once, we have been united as a House with people agreeing across the divide. I agree that there is a need to follow the transcript that has come from Hon. Chair there, Mutodi.   This tells us one thing, Mr. Speaker. It tells us that the dynamics involved in coming up with this board cannot be vested in one or two people. This is the very reason why people were mentioning that this should be a responsibility of the Parliament.

Thank you so much for demonstrating that it is difficult to come up with the list. It is important and incumbent on Parliament to do this. I so submit.

*HON. J. SITHOLE:  Thank you Mr. Speaker. I have noticed that most of the other groups have been represented, like the women and the disabled but for us as war veterans, we are not represented. May we also be included as war veterans? I thank you.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  I want to go back to the issue of four women, because I think it is very important. The reason I think it is important is that experience is the best teacher Chairperson.  We tell you this because we are the women who have been facing prejudice in this country.

From our experiences, every time that we say, at least whilst I understand the submissions that are being made, that we can say three, three, and then the seventh person can be of either gender, we know the people who are making decisions are men.  These men will make decisions to say the seventh person must be a man.  So, we know every time that we say, you know, the person can be of either gender, we know what happens. Which is the reason why we are saying we want it to be explicit to say four women. Why? Women constitute 52% of this population.

So, if we have an uneven number, it follows that the majority have to have the seventh seat. So, we say this from an experienced perspective, you know, people are saying, no, we are just saying at least it might end up being five. It does not happen.  We know it. It does not happen, which is why we need it to be very explicit in the Act to say four out of the seven.

I agree with the submission to say, for the purposes of making decisions, an even number might be difficult, like eight, or it might be difficult.  We need an uneven number for decision-making, which I understand.  Where we are saying, women, you know, women have to be considered and women constitute 52% of this population. So, we want four out of the seven.  Thank you.

HON. TSITSI ZHOU:  Thank you Hon. Chair. I think we need to be progressing.  Much appreciation given to the initial suggestion of at least three.  Now, I want to move on to say we need to be accommodative of the youths.  If we are going to get one chief, we are left with six positions, two men, two women and two youth.  We are all equal - two women, two men and two youth. The youth will consider one female and one male. I thank you.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  I think we have done justice to this issue. Can we ask the Hon. Minister to respond?

HON. DR. KHUPE:  On a point of order.  Yes, inasmuch as I agree with my dear Hon. Sister Zhou when it comes to the chief, we must also understand that these days we have got female chiefs.

So, as far as chiefs are concerned, one can be a woman and one can be a man. Thank you.

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  Thank you Chairperson.  I will respond in at least two or three languages so that everyone can understand.  Others debated in Shona, others in English and Ndau.  I want to thank the Hon. Members.

Chairperson, this debate is very interesting.  It gives me an opportunity to explain concerning this law. Hon. Members, the amendment of Clause 4 of the principal Act by reducing the number of board members from 12 to seven and also providing for gender balance within the board of the Broadcasting Authority is very clear.

Hon. Members, Section 17 of our Constitution is very clear. The State must promote full gender balance in Zimbabwean society and in particular, the State must promote the full participation of women in all spheres of the Zimbabwean society on the basis of equality with men. The State must take all measures, including legislative measures needed to ensure that both genders are equally represented in all institutions and agencies of Government at every level.  Women constitute at least half of the membership of all commissions and other elective and appointed Governmental boards established by or under this Constitution or any Act of Parliament.

         The clause that we are talking about is gender sensitive. There is no way you can appoint five men and two women because the Constitution does not allow.  The second issue, the Public Entities and Corporate Governance Act is very clear.  If A man is Chairman, the woman becomes Deputy Chairperson.  Hon. Members, before I joined Parliament, this was one of my responsibilities.  I can assure you that there is correct gender representation within the boards.

         I want to refer to Hon. Dr. Khupe that I am a very gender sensitive man.  You go to ZimPapers, the Chairperson is a woman.  You go to ZBC, the Chairperson is a woman.  You go to many other institutions where I have served, I have had CEOs and Chairpersons as women.  The Constitution obligates every Ministry to ensure that there is gender balance.  In the Public Entities and the Corporate Governance Act also ensures that there is gender balance.  As you process the paperwork in terms of gender balance, you have the Corporate Governance Unity which acts as an advisor institution established in terms of the Public Entities and Corporate Governance Act. 

         The issue of gender is well taken care of in terms of the Constitution of Zimbabwe.  Hence, we can discuss and even decide to add the text or substitute text but the Constitution which is the Supreme Law of the country already gives us direction.  So, there is no need for us…

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Point of order Minister, stick to one language for the sake of recording.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Chair.  I was highlighting to the Hon. Members of Parliament that the Constitution of Zimbabwe under Section 17, in terms of gender balance, obligates every one of us to ensure that we must promote full gender balance in Zimbabwe.  So, this is the supreme law of the country.

         The second issue is that, the Public Entities and the Corporate Governance Act are very clear in terms of gender balance.  Whenever we appoint a female as a board chairperson, the male should be deputy board chairperson.  So, whether we decide to amend the text but the Constitution already gives us an obligation to ensure that we are bound by the Constitution, otherwise any other legislative process or any composition that does not reflect the Constitutional obligation becomes ultra vires. 

         At the same time, what Hon. Dr. Mutodi has highlighted that we could add the text to say three and the chief also indicated the same, that three should be women.  The Constitution obligates us to ensure that there is gender balance.  The public entities and Corporate Governance Act also obligates us to ensure that there is gender balance.  I do not know if it is necessary to add that text. 

I also want to highlight what Hon. Dr. Khupe has highlighted.  I am a very gender sensitive Minister.  I want to appreciate that she has said it.  There is no way any minister will appoint more men than women like in the case of five men in a board of directors with seven people.  It means the Corporate Governance Unit has got the responsibility to advise the particular minister.  So, we have checks and balances in terms of the Corporate Governance Act, where the advisory unit which is the Corporate Governance Unit.  At the same time….

         HON. HAMAUSWA:  Point of order Chair.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  What is your point of order Honourable?

         HON. HAMAUSWA:  We are having challenges that the Minister wants us to agree that four and three are the same. We are not understanding what the Minister is saying. Is four and three equal? When you raised Section 17, it said 50%, it should be 50% equals. What does he lose if he puts more women in the Board? Does the country lose anything or if he puts more women? Does he lose his ministerial post? I think he should just put four women and three men. If it is so difficult, I think he should just stick to 4 equals. What I can say is that the Minister is not going to lose anything if he puts more women in the Board, it is a plus for him.

HON. DR. MUSWERE: Hon. Hamauswa, I was still elaborating in terms of why we should stick by the proposed amendment. I also want to refer to one of your points that you have raised, I am an expert in this area. What we propose is in terms of operational capacity, the size of the institution and at the same time I have already indicated that there is nothing that we can come up with which is outside the Constitution of Zimbabwe. It is very clear that we should always ….

HON. MUROMBEDZI: Point of order Hon. Chair.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Your point of order is overruled. Can you let the Hon. Minister finish first?

HON. MUROMBEDZI: No, I want to quote the Constitution. I have the Constitution here.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: I said currently it is overruled. Let the Hon. Minister continue.

HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  I want to respond to Hon. Hamauswa’s question. I think you are all in agreement about the size of the organisation which is very small. So, we cannot continue increasing Board members. All the Hon. Members have debated and contributed towards this proposal. I have justified in terms of the magnitude of the organisation that there is no way we can come with Clauses that are ultra vires, it would not make sense. It would be unconstitutional and it would also be dismissed at the Parliamentary Legal Committee.

At the same time, I think we have all dealt with the submissions that the Hon. Members have raised. If we can please proceed and finalise these amendments. Thank you.

HON. DR. KHUPE: The Minister alluded to the fact that yes, he can change the text and we are saying, Hon. Minister, can you please change the text so that at least four are women and three are men?  Just that, please.

HON. DR. MUTODI:  Hon. Chair, if we allow that four out of a board of seven people is strictly women, what have we done? We have made an improper proportion.  The Constitution is saying there should be gender balance.  So, when we meet at the PLC, it will be unconstitutional to have a mandatory four against three.  It will be unconstitutional.  So do not force the Minister to say something that is not going to be approved – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] -  It will be unconstitutional.

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

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Hon.  Murombedzi, can you let him finish first?

HON. DR. MUTODI: So what we can do to achieve gender balance is either to add one person to make it four males and four females or you share the even number, which is six, three males and three females, then one can be either gender.  You see that way, the Constitution, the phrase or the clause will be constitutional.  Thank you – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] - 

*HON. TSITSI ZHOU:  Hon. Chair, I do not see where we are going.  One of these members will be chosen by the chiefs and we are left with three.   My plea is that the youths should be accommodated.  I will stick to my proposal.  One of them is going to come out from the Chief's Council.  So, gender balance will be met on the remaining six.  Two youths, one of them will be female because we want them to be three.  Two of them are men and two of them are women, then we are all equal.  I do not see where we are having problems with gender balance because gender balance is there already.  So, we are going to have three men and three women, which is 50/50.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE):  Hon. Murombedzi are you done?

HON. MUROMBEDZI:  No, Hon.  Chair.  I was waiting for you to recognise me.  Thank you very much, Hon. Chair.  In the same Constitution that has just been read, Section 17, item number B2, says women constitute at least half the membership of all Commissions and other elective and appointed governmental bodies established by or under this Constitution or any Act of Parliament.  So, if we have got seven, Hon. Chair, half of seven is three and a half.  Already we have three, so half, we cannot cut a person, so that means we have to put four women.  That is my submission – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] -   

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Hon.  Members, I think we have spent over an hour on the same topic.  Can we continue on this space?

HON. MUSHORIWA:  No, there is something different from this Chairman, that I need to raise.  Remember when we debated on the appointment processes, the Hon. Minister said to us no, two members and then we raised that, no Minister, your Bill says you are repealing the current provision.  So, I thought the Hon. Minister owes us on how he intends to ensure his suggestion of the two coming from Parliament that he was raising.

So, to that answer, I think we need the Hon. Minister to respond to and also to read the text which will be part of this Bill because so far, the Hon. Minister has not proposed anything in terms of the amendment in respect to what he had said earlier.  

THE TEMPORARY  CHAIRPERSON:  I am not sure whether the Minister has anything to add because I thought he had finished.  He has already responded – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] -   Hon. Members, if you raise your hand, you will be recognised. Why do you like this attitude of just trying to challenge?  – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.] -  I am talking of Hon. Hlatywayo.  We always recognise you.  Why are you not raising your hand?

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  What have I done?  Are you referring to Hon. Clifford Hlatywayo or Hon. Gladys Hlatywayo?

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Honourable, you!

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  What have I done?

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  You were making noise.  You were saying he has not answered.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  No, I did not.  Chairperson, I do not know what is happening.  You seem not to be understanding me.  I did not even say a thing.  If you still remember when Hon. Togarepi was speaking, you also said the same thing.  I was not speaking to anybody.  I was just quietly sitting here –[AN HON MEMBER: Possibly Hon Gladys is closer to your heart].

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Anyway, let us move on.  Hon. Hamauswa it must be a new thing, not the same thing.  We are not going to go back to the same issue.

*HON. HAMAUSWA:  No, I am not going back to the same issues, Hon. Chair.  There are a lot of things that have been proposed.  So, those things cannot just slide down then the minister says continue because if you ask if there is an objection and there is no objection, it means the clause will sail through and there is no text from the Minister, which has been alluded to by Hon. Dr. Khupe.  I think the drafters are here.  Add the text.  We can rest for a few minutes.  We can change the draft so that that amendment is included.

In conclusion, if you listen to what Hon. Mutodi said, he said the other number can be three or four but he is refusing if we want that number to be added to the women.  If it is added to the men, he is agreeing.  He does not have a problem if we have four men and three women but he has a problem if we say four women and three men.  

HON. DR. MUTODI:  Why do you not write notes because when you were talking, I was writing down notes?  You should listen to what is said in this House, which is recorded in the Hansard.  What we are saying is that the Constitution is saying there must be gender balance but we are faced with an odd number of seven.  So, what it means in the wording of a clause in our statute of instruments, we cannot say at least four women or we cannot say at least four men. What it means if we say that we have violated the Constitution.  So, what we can only do in this case is the maximum, we can go is at least three women and three men. That is the maximum we can go. We cannot go beyond that. Thank you.

         *HON. HAMAUSWA: Hon. Chair, that is the bone of contention. My issue is that we should rectify that.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Minister, can you respond…

         HON. HAMAUSWA: The point of order cannot overrule the platform that you have given me.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRMAN: I want the Hon. Minister to respond because you are repeating the same thing.

         *HON. HAMAUSWA: It is not the same, the issue is that the Minister should take the advice which has been given by Hon. Dr. Mutodi. I do not think there is a problem if one person is added so that we have a gender balance.

         Hon. Mutseyami having stood up on a point of Order.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Mutseyami, can you please sit down?

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Hon. Chairman. I am sure I have responded to all the issues that have been raised and I have already indicated that we proceed because we will spend more time debating on the same issue. We have already highlighted that these are constitutional obligations that we should always ensure that we comply with the Constitution of Zimbabwe. Thank you.

         HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO: Thank you Mr. Chairman. There were two issues relating to the composition of the board. The first issue was around the gender question and the second issue was around the selection process. We have not heard from the minister, which is why we were requesting the text that he is putting before the House so that it is very clear on what he is saying. He has proposed two and we had said can we go up to four out of the seven. What is he saying around it? It is a very critical question that needs an answer. Thank you.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: But the Minister responded on the issue of gender.

         HON. G. HLATYWAYO: Chairperson, you are not understanding me. The points that I am raising is that we had two questions that we were dealing with on this clause. The first question was around gender and he has responded. The second question was around the selection process where he was saying he is proposing that out of the 7 board members, two come from Parliament. We had suggested that in light of the question of excessive powers of the Minister, can we up the number to four if he cannot go for all of the seven members coming from Parliament? He needs to answer and then give us the text in terms of what we are approving before we move forward.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Chairman. What generally happens is that some of the Hon. Members, as I will be giving responses, they will be busy objecting and making noise. This is why they do not get the responses. I have already responded to the issues. I also propose that we could divide the House so that we deal with this matter on the floor.

         *HON. TSITSI ZHOU: Hon. Chair, the issue of four Members of Parliament when they are appointed to the board, they should come from the House because the law does not allow appointing them anyhow. It is not being said that Members of Parliament, but it is saying that Parliament should appoint the board members.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Members, if you force me, we will end up dividing the House and it does not help.

         *HON. HAMAUSWA: Why do you want to divide the House? The Hon. Minister has said two Members of Parliament should come through Parliament process. Listen to what we are saying that it should be written down in the text which we are going to approve as Members of Parliament.

         *THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: I said sit down Hon. Member! I have heard you and the Hon. Minister is going to respond. 

         HON. HAMAUSWA: Why do you want me to sit down?

         Some Hon. Members having stood up on a Point of Order

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Be seated Hon. Members. May the Hon. Minister please respond?

         *HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Chairman. Let me respond in Shona. As I have alluded to, when we are discussing these issues, people will not be paying attention. These Hon. Members will not be listening. We have to be attentive as we discuss these matters. These are important matters and I already dealt with that issue yesterday and I have dealt with the issue today. I even proposed in the text to say let us have at least two members coming from Parliament. We have four nominees from Parliament. Of the four nominees, we can only appoint two through the same legal framework. 

         I can rephrase it for you since you have not been listening. Hon. Members, we discussed this matter yesterday and we discussed this matter today. I can give you the text. The text as I responded Hon. Hamauswa…

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Minister, talk through the Chairman, do not answer them directly.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE: I have said that two members of the seven shall be appointed by the President from a list of four nominees submitted by the Committee on Standing Rules and Orders. We dealt with this issue many times but you were just not listening.

HON. DHLIWAYO: I have a suggestion, Chairperson.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE): What is your suggestion? Are you on the same Section?

         HON. DHLIWAYO: No, I am not commenting about the Section in particular, Hon. Chairperson.  My suggestion is, as normal procedure, most of the time when a proposal has been given to the Minister and the Minister has expressly accepted it, it is incorporated in a provision and then read again for the House to adopt the provision as amended or not.  This will allow us to move faster.  I am sure that is the lamentation from the Members Hon. Chairperson.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Member, that is why I had called the Minister here so that we could correct.

         HON. DHLIWAYO: I have a suggestion, Chairperson.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. NGULUVHE): What is your suggestion? Are you on the same Section?

         HON. DHLIWAYO: No, I am not commenting about the Section in particular, Hon. Chairperson.  My suggestion is, as normal procedure, most of the time when a proposal has been given to the Minister and the Minister has expressly accepted it, it is incorporated in a provision and then read again for the House to adopt the provision as amended or not.  This will allow us to move faster.  I am sure that is the lamentation from the Members Hon. Chairperson.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Member, that is why I had called the Minister here so that we could correct. - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]- Order! Can the Hon. Minister be heard in silence please? - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]-

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Thank you Chairman. After consulting the officials, I still maintain that we retain the text as is, that there shall be seven board members. - [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.]- Parliament still has the oversight role in terms of the Constitution. We need to have oversight role. Thank you, Chairman. - [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.]-

Amendment to Clause 4, put and agreed to.

Clause 4 as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 5:

     THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Thank you Chairman. I propose the amendments as reflected on the Order Paper, amendment of Clause 5. The Bill as amended in Clause 5 on page 3, Clause 5 in line 19 by the insertion of: (i) internet broadcasting

(j) Webcasting

      HON. MATEWU: Thank you Mr. Chairman. In sub-section 2(e), you have put subscription management service. Subscription management service is not broadcasting. Broadcasting is defined in sub-section D, a subscription broadcasting service. Subscription management service is well defined in Clause 2 what it is? It is a service which involves the provision of support services to a subscription broadcasting service. So, a subscription management service cannot be classified and licenced as a broadcasting service in itself.

        This is one of the contentions that we mentioned in our report and that we agreed as a Committee that a subscription management service is not broadcasting. It is a support service rather than a broadcasting itself that needs to be licenced. I thank you. - [HON. MEMBERS: Hear, hear.]-

    HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Chair. I did not quite get what the Hon. Member really wants but broadcasting and communication technically in terms of broadcasting, it is about encoding and decoding of information through electrical magnetic signals. So, the major discrepancy is that whether an institution you subscribe to DSTV through MultiChoice in a particular jurisdiction, it is already broadcasting. So, it has to be licenced because you are subscribing in a particular jurisdiction and there is the encoding and decoding of broadcast information. Thank you Mr. Chairperson.

     HON. MATEWU: I disagree with the Minister here. A management service, it will be very difficult for any subscription management service to comply with this Act should it become an Act. So, let us correct it here. A subscription management service is a support service to the broadcasting service. So, you rightly put it in sub-section (d) when you say classes of broadcasting licences and you put a subscription broadcasting service.

   A subscription management service is a different thing and it is not broadcasting. I think that we just need to be clear there. It is not broadcasting. It is a management service not necessarily a broadcasting service. So, it should not be under the classes of broadcasting licences.

  HON. MAMBIPIRI: Mr. Chair, I want to add my voice and support what Hon. Caston Matewu has just said. When we talk of licencing broadcasters, we cannot include subscription management services because these are, by their nature, aiders  or supporters for example Transmedia here in Zimbabwe, it cannot be licenced as a broadcaster because it is just a support service or to put it simply in daily language.

In the transport sector, we have got buses that require permit but anyone who is operating a rank, a bus terminus would not want an operator’s permit for the buses. This subscription management services simply offer broadcasters an opportunity or a platform through which they move their signals. Therefore, there will not be any need for them to be licenced other than asking those who use the service to the licence. I thank you.

         THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Clause 5 amends Section 7(2) of the Principal Act, which provides for the classes of broadcasting services and systems.  I think that is where the Hon. Member is missing it.  It provides for classes of broadcasting services and systems.  I will further elaborate the difference between subscription broadcast service and subscription management service.  A subscription broadcasting service is a service that provides content in exchange for a subscription and the service maybe targeted.  A subscription management service provides support to subscription broadcasting services.  So, it is not only about the class but also the systems.  I want to refer you to that.  I thank you.

         HON. MATEWU:  You have correctly described what a subscription management service is but you have sought to use system.  If I read to you what the amendment is saying, it says that the broadcasting licence shall authorise the licencee to provide any of the following classes of broadcasting services.  So, I think I am still correct when I say the subscription management service is not a class but is a broadcasting service.  A system renders support but it cannot be classified as a broadcasting service.  I thank you.

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  I am going to suggest to the Hon. Minister to just expunge the inclusion of subscription management service.  I believe that you do not lose anything because all broadcasting services are contained in the Bill.  So, the expunging of subsection (e) is a better way to go.

         HON. MATEWU:  I think I have a suggestion Madam Chair, just looking at this, I think we can add a subsection to read; the licencee: then list the subscription management services and add on to the amendment.  I think that would suffice because it would be impossible logically for those who provide management services to apply for a licence.  Then add another line after these services, taking away SMS then bring them in terms of service, then we put that one there.  That is my suggestion.

         HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Madam Chair.  I think it is a typographical error.  We could add any systems which is on the text I had initially prepared.  Perhaps, I overlooked that.  We could say and systems.  I thank you.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. TSITSI ZHOU):  Hon. Minister, I think it is important where you are adding to revert to the clause and indicate exactly where you are adding.

HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Madam Chair.  We had discussions with my chairman and it is an issue about terminology. So, subsection 2, a broadcasting licence shall authorise the licence to provide any of the following classes of broadcasting service and system management service. The rest is the same text. Thank you, Chair.

Amendment to new Clause 5 put and agreed to.

         New Clause 5, as amended, put and agreed to.

         On Clause 5 (Now Clause 6):

         THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): I move the amendment standing in my name that the Bill is amended on pages 3 in lines 20 to 45 and page 4 in lines 1 and 2, by the deletion of Clause 6 and the subsequent clauses shall accordingly be renumbered.

         Amendment to 5, now Clause 6, put and agreed to.

Clause 5, now Clause 6 as amended, put and agreed to.

Clause 7, put and agreed to.

On Clause 8:

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): I propose that the amendment of Clause 8 that the Bill is amended in clause 8 on page 4 in line 43 by insertion of a new paragraph after paragraph (d), (e) in subsection 7 by the insertion of “failing which the licence shall be deemed to be invalid after consented” and the subsequent paragraph shall be accordingly renumbered.

HON. MUSHORIWA: My submission on Clause 8 is what to do with sub-clause (c) which says that except for broadcasting service emanating from outside the country a licencee shall make one hour cumulatively per week, of which broadcasting time available for the purpose of enabling the Government of the day at its request or where necessary, to explain its polices to the nation. I am proposing Hon. Minister, that this clause needs to be relooked so that it reads that for the purpose of enabling the Local Government and Central Government so that we include both the two tiers of Government. The Local Government and the Central Government because if it is a community radio licence truly, whilst the Government has to be given but I also think that the local authority also needs to be accommodated. So I think we just need to make a minor amendment there so that we include the Local and the Central Government of the day at its request or necessary to explain its policy to the nation. I thank you.

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Thank you Madam Chair. I do not think it is an issue of distinguishing whether there should be Central Government and Local Government and all that. I believe that the amendment on its own is correct as it stands.

HON. MUSHORIWA: Madam Chair, if the Hon. Minister believes that it does not change, then truly Hon. Minister including the Local and the Central Government will not kill this Bill. It is imperative because you also do not want to make sure that a clause has got a lot of ambiguity. So, to me this becomes important to make sure that at least the two tiers of Government are included. What will happen is that next time a rural council wants to have a space within that community radio station, then they are denied. So, I think let us just include the two. Most of the community radio stations are in rural areas and you will understand the reason why you need those rural councils to make sure that at least they communicate their council positions. It is beneficial to the nation.

   HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Chair. I do not think we should labour much on first tier, second tier of Government, a Government is a Government. The distribution of content can be done practically but a Government is a Government. We should not try to distinguish as if we have many Governments at the same time. I think we should proceed.

Amendment to Clause 8 put and agreed to.

Clause 8 as amended put and agreed to.

On Clause 9:

HON. MUSHORIWA: I just want the Hon. Minister to explain to us how much are these licences costing before we talk of the duration to say ten years, three years. How much are these licence currently going for?

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): Hon Chair, let me get the numbers from my officer. I think he wants to know how much for each and every licence. The officer is compiling the information then I will explain about that.  I think the debate here on Clause 9, is that Clause 9 amends section 19 to allow for the transfer of a licence, subject to the approval of the authority. The issue is about transfer.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: We are on Clause 9 Hon. Minister.

 THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE): If this is to facilitate corporate risk, the issue is about the transfer of the licence not the pricing in terms of the licence but I can also assist if you want to know the price …

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Hon. Minister, please can you approach the Chair. Hon. Mushoriwa you wanted to say something.

HON. MUSHORIWA: The Minister has actually jumped the clause, we are on Clause 9, the original 9 and what he is now debating is actually on Clause 10.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON. Minister, can you please approach the Chair?

Minister of Information, Publicity and Broadcasting Services approached the Chair.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Madam Chair. The ranges are 23 000 for public and commercial, 40,000 for radio and television. Subscription management, 100 000 and those for three years range from 1000 to 3 000. Thank you – [HON. MUSHORIWA: The 100 000, is it USD or ZiG?] –

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order, order, Hon. Mushoriwa! Hon. Minister, please come again.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  The range is around USD23 000 for public and commercial for radio and USD40 000 for television. Subscription management is USD100 000 and those for three years range from USD1 000 to USD3 000.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Thank you Honorable Minister for responding. If the figures that the Minister has talked about, the USD23 000, the USD100 000, Chair, the timeframes of 10 years, three years, I think are just too short because apart from the licences, one has to invest.  There is capital injection. What it means is that somebody maybe will end up actually pumping in more than half a million dollars or possibly a million US dollars. You are then giving that person ten years and also three years for the licence to expire. I am going to propose that we need to make sure that we increase the timeframe there, if we want investors to actually consider it prudent to invest in broadcasting services.

My proposal is that (a) instead of ten there, we push it to twenty years; and (b), three years, we put it to 10 years. Otherwise, if we just give licences that have got a shorter span, many investors will not even see it as a profitable business. I also want to remind the Honourable Minister, in this digital period that we are in, where people now create content on various platforms like YouTube and other stuff, you do not want people to then shy away from applying for a broadcasting license. Let us try by all means to accommodate investment into this sector because I believe we need investment into this sector. I thank you Madam Chair.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Madam Chair. I am sure that these models and the timeframes, when we did the study, there is a high return on investment and the investor would have recouped his initial capital plus profit. So, I am confident that we still have other institutions that are operating in terms of the same framework and have already recorded success. Madam Chair, if we could proceed after this. Thank you.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Madam Chair, I just think that the Honourable Minister should actually favour us with the figures and facts. We know it for certain that even those that were licenced to broadcast in this country are actually facing huge challenges. It is not true Honourable Minister, that you say you can recoup investment within the timeframe that you have put in there. Unless, Honourable Minister, you are basically coming up with this timeframe to make sure that there are no investors into the broadcasting services.

You cannot come up with prohibitive conditions, which makes it very difficult. What we need Honourable Minister and maybe you need to understand this, where we come from, if people cannot afford DStv, most people with the little data that they have will actually better be serviced through other social media platforms, rather than to use even the broadcasting services that are there. This clause is prohibitive. It is not meant to increase broadcasting services in this country.

HON. HAMAUSWA: I agree with Hon. Mushoriwa.  Firstly, the submission by the Hon. Minister contradicts some of the principles enshrined in the Bill, I think it is Clause 15 where they are coming up with a mandatory licencing which shows that ZBC is actually struggling to cover up for the economic challenge. ZBC is coming up with a mandatory licencing to make sure that they are sustained by profit they are making.  They have to get the money from tax payers, although they can argue that it is a public broadcaster but it must actually be making profit. It is now going to be sustained through a mandatory licencing. 

This means that what Hon. Mushoriwa is saying there is now a lot of competition due to technological advancement like what he said.  Therefore, they must be a movement by the Hon. Minister to say if he cannot go for two years but at least a movement by two or five years, from 3 if he cannot go to 10 but at least 5.  As he has said that the voice of the people is the voice of God and you always say that you are a listening Government.  Can you humbly listen to this just for once to say can you move a bit to five years to 10 but to say you cannot move when we know that even our journalists, there is always this popular statement of brown envelopes?  It is a popular statement amongst journalists, meaning that media houses are failing to pay their journalists properly and this is an indication that this industry is now under threat.  Therefore, it can only be cushioned through a well thought out legislation and this is what is coming from your Hon. Members Hon. Chair.  I humble myself to the Hon. Minister to consider Hon. Mushoriwa’s proposal. I thank you.

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):   I have already indicated that if we could move over to the next area.  Madam Chair, I want to explain something.  The validity period, we carried out studies and I do not think today we are debating about the studies.  Having a commercial radio television licence is a business decision and business idea.  The question about return on investment, business plans, profit margins, we have already dealt with that before we managed to seek these amendments.

Madam Chair, I think discussing about ZBC now, I have already explained many times that these are different classes of licences in terms of the public broadcaster and in terms of a commercial radio or television licence.  I can tell you Madam Chair that Capital Radio is doing well, ZFM is doing well, NRTV is doing well and tomorrow I will be celebrating in terms of the anniversary of 3KTV, tomorrow I am presiding over that function.  I can tell you the sector is doing well under the licencing framework that we have in terms of duration. If we can move to the next item Madam Chair.

HON. CHIGUMBU: I did not hear the submission of the Hon. Minister pertaining the currency that he is using for the licences.  He said that the currency is in USD.  Do we have to use USD as a nation whilst we have our own currency?  Why are they not pegging these licence fees using our own currency? Why are we resorting to US, yet we have our strongest currency that is gold backed?

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Chair in Zimbabwe we have a multi-currency system – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

Hon. Mambipiri having stood up.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. TSITSI ZHOU): Order, Hon. Mambipiri I have not recognised you.  Allow the Hon. Minister to respond.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  I had indicated that we have a multiple currency system, I thank you.

HON. MAMBIPIRI: Madam Chair, I stood up, before you close the debate –

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order Hon. Mambipiri, if I say order, I expect you to take your seat, we need to conclude Clause 10.

HON. MATEWU: Madam Chair, I need the Hon. Minister to explain if any transfer of a licence will be acceptable.  We have to take into cognisance what it takes to get a broadcasting licence and the public scrutiny that comes with those who seek to purchase a broadcasting licence.  Allowing someone to be transferring a licence or to purchase a licence that has gone through a public rigorous process, I think it is unacceptable.  I think this Clause opens up a cane of worms.  So, if I know that I have a public record that is bad, I would never get a licence.  I would allow my friend to apply for a licence then I will then seek to buy that licence that that person has got. I think this is a bad Clause and anyone who wants a licence should apply for it and get it in the same process that the original person who applied got it.

    Allowing the transfer of licence opens up to criminals and people who might have bad intentions.  Everyone who applies for a licence must go through the same process. I think this was a recurring theme during our public consultations and the citizens are very clear that if we are going to get a licence, apply for it and go through the same process. Go through the public scrutiny and wait for someone else to get a licence then you buy that licence. So I think this Clause must be deleted. I thank you.

HON. DR. MUSWERE: I thank you Madam Chair, I think we are all aware in terms of the Companies Act that institutions  have growing concerns and in the case that an institution fails to operate economically, this Clause at the same time, ensures all this is also subject to BAZ approval. So, the issue is about an institution as a going concern.  We have employees, taxes and other stakeholders involved.  If we have legislation that does not ensure that institutions can grow and institutions can continue to operate, then that legislation will be detrimental to macro-economic growth in our country.

We should have a situation where corporate rescue can come in and deal with some of the challenges within a particular institution.

*HON. MAMBIPIRI:  I thank you.  Some of the few things that are good in the Broadcasting Act is that people who want licences are subject to public scrutiny.  The amendment that has been brought by the Minister is that today someone undergoes public scrutiny but behind another person comes to buy the licence using money and they will start to broadcast. I think this is bad because bogus people will end up with licences.  I think what is important is that if a licence is a going concern, those who are using it must account to the people.  The process must be scrutinised free of charge regardless of who is going to use the licence.  People must not sell licences to unauthorised people.  If we do this, this will help us to maintain our licences and our media industry.  Like what you alluded to that media is very strategic and must be safeguarded and kept very well.

HON. MATEWU: I want to agree with both the Minister and my Hon. Member from Kadoma.  The Minister is correct to say if it becomes a going concern, we have employees there.  We also have taxes that could be affected like you said in terms of macro-finance.  However what Hon. Mambipiri is alluding to here is very correct as well, to say I, Matewu may be applying for a licence knowing I am of good character and everything else but I am not the one applying for the licence. There is someone else who has a bad character who is behind me and who is using me to apply for a particular licence.  Once I come in, I then file bankruptcy and say I failed to run this organisation. This clause can actually make me suggest or sell my broadcasting to a particular person, obviously subject to approval from the broadcasting authority. So why can we not then say if there is a going concern, if there is bankruptcy or failing, then that person who has the licence must cede their licence to the broadcasting authority? The broadcasting authority then advertises to say we have got 3KTV that was issued with a broadcasting licence but they failed to run that broadcasting. We are now calling for people who are interested in buying other than letting 3KTV sell to somebody who they like. Cannot it be brought back to the broadcasting authority so that they then manage a process by which anyone else who wants that licence can then go public and say I want to take over this licence? Everyone knows who they are and they get it in a clinical way.

I think that clause should be amended to allow the broadcasting authority to be the one that actually advertises should any broadcasting licence become insolvent.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Madam Chair, he has already said they agree with what I have said.  When a company starts operating, it is expected that it will continue running into a foreseeable future. There are debtors, creditors, bank loans, employees, taxes, there are many other stakeholders, there are advertisers who will have paid to that particular broadcaster. The issue about a going on concern, is an issue about comfort, it is a business decision that institutions are expected to continue running into a foreseeable future. Obviously in terms of the administration, a part of it, is also subject to BAZ at the same time operationally. The point basically is that institutions, we cannot allow broadcasters to be able to be licenced, they take bank loans, the institution collapses, debtors, creditors, bankers, employees and everything grounds to a halt.

We should be able to transfer that same licence to ensure that it is a going on concern. I think they are all in agreement with me that institutions are not created so that they fail. Institutions are created and should be supported by the necessary licencing and legal framework to ensure continuity within the broadcasting sector. This is a very critical and strategic area where we need institutions that can survive.

         HON. SHIRIYEDENGA:  I do appreciate the need for continuity like what the Minister is saying but I think if you could bear with the Hon. Members here. What they are simply asking for is that you should, let us not make this an open-ended clause. Let us put safeguards so that we will not have a situation where we have unqualified or undeserving people taking over licences using the backdoor.

HON. HAMAUSWA: Hon. Chair, because of my political background and how I know these licences are given, I was ordinarily going to really accept this clause but for posterity, I think the Hon. Minister should agree with us that we have laws already in this country that protect business entities and companies.  There is no need, unless there is a sinister move by the Hon.  Minister, why this clause must be inserted. Why would we need this clause when we already have laws that govern and give room for even judicial management? We had companies that have been under judicial management without necessarily need for that clause.  Hon. Minister, I think this clause must be deleted.  There is no need for this unless you are saying we have no laws that protect companies that are actually going through insolvency. But I understand we have enough laws. This clause is not really good for the industry. We do not need this clause

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. TSITSI ZHOU): I hope there is no Hon. Member who is going to repeat what has already been said.

HON. CHIGUMBU:  Thank you Madam Chair. Actually, I think we need to emphasise because the Hon. Minister seems to be very determined to continue with this clause. The worry Madam Chair is that we will end up creating rent-seeking opportunity with this clause.  It is very dangerous. We cannot leave it as it is because at the end of the day, we will have somebody buying that licence, putting it on his or her shelf and then transferring it to the next person. We do not need that…

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Hon. Chigumbu, you are repeating what Hon. Shiriyedenga has said and the Hon. Member who repeated before. – [HON. CHIGUMBU:  I am not repeating!] – Hon. Minister, please can you respond?

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Madam Chair, everyone else is agreeing with me. – [HON. CHIGUMBU:  Madam Chair, I think you are being unfair to me.] - Madam Chair, we cannot, in this instance, legislate based on suspicion, opinion, phobia about what is likely to take place.  What we are legislating for is for continuity in order to ensure that licences are transferable. Just like what Hon. Hamauswa indicated, that we have so many laws which guard on ensuring that there is continuity in terms of businesses.

You know, the media industry is a totally different industry.  It banks on image, it banks on reputation, it banks on so many aspects related to the management of the business.  Madam Chair, I think we should proceed. We cannot continue dealing with what is going to happen in the case that someone is going to buy a licence.  The Broadcasting Services Act provides for the mechanisms to deal with any challenges in terms of people who have been licenced and do not have financial capacity in terms of operations.

So, Madam Chair, this is about business. We should ensure that when a business starts, it continues to run into the foreseeable future.  Into the foreseeable future in that the business will have hired employees, there are many stakeholders and they borrowed. We cannot support a robust media industry if we allow one institution to collapse and the licencing framework does not allow that particular investor to transfer the same licence to the next business person.  I think we will have failed the media industry. What we want is robustness.  We are also aware that there are shortcomings in business.  The whole objective in terms of business management is to ensure that there is viability and that the institution continues to grow.  This is the expectation that we have in terms of business practice.

Madam Chair, I think we should move to the next item. Thank you.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Thank you Hon. Minister.  I am getting an interruption from a phone. Hon. Members, please reduce volumes.  If you have any conversation that you are having, you cannot have it in this august House.  I hope we are not going to get such kind of interruption.

Amendment to new Clause 9, put and agreed to.

New Clause 9, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 10:

• [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] –

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order, order

Hon. Members from my left! According to the Standing Orders, you are not supposed to converse loudly or just shout in the House.  We are in the middle of the business of the day. – [AN HON. MEMBER: Ko avo vari kubuda avo!] - Order, order! An Hon. Member is allowed to go and relieve themselves. – [HON. MEMBERS: Vese vari four!] -

Order, order, order! Nature has called for all of them. It is allowed. – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjections.] -  Order, order! Can you allow the Hon. Minister to be heard in silence?

THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  Thank you Madam Chair. I propose the Bill is amended on page 5 in lines 20 to 26 by deletion of Clause 11 and the subsequent clauses shall accordingly be numbered. Thank you.

Amendment to Clause 10, put and agreed to.

Clause 10, as amended, put and agreed to.

New Clause 11, put and agreed to.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Can the Hon. Minister explain to this august House what he is saying in that clause?

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. TSITSI ZHOU):  You are saying the Hon. Minister should interpret this clause.

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  Yes.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Hon. Minister, the Hon. Member is asking you to explain this clause in simple language.

HON. DR. MUSWERE: Thank you Madam Chair.  Clause 13 amends Section 38B by inserting a new provision which provides that the Zimbabwe National Road Administration Insurance Company shall only issue….

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order Hon. Minister, we are on page five.  Clause 13 now 11 amendment of Section 37 of Chapter 12:06.  Hon. Minister, you can approach the Chair?

Hon. Dr. Muswere having approached the Chair

         HON. DR. MUSWERE:  The licencing of Public Broadcasters of the Principal Act is amended by the repeal of Sub-Section 2 and the Sub-Section of the following; the authority in consultation with the Minister shall issue public broadcasting licencing to the public broadcaster on application received from the public broadcaster or any person acting on its behalf.  The licences shall be a specified term and issued on payment of service fee and renewed for amended in accordance with Section 14 and 15 respectively – [HON. MEMBERS: Inaudible interjection.] -

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Hon. Minister, can you proceed and use one language? 

         HON. DR. MUSWERE:  The authority, in consultation with the minister, shall issue public broadcasting.  Clause 11 amends Section 37 by repealing Sub-Section 2 and replacing it with a new Sub-Section 2, which mandates the authority to issue public broadcasting licences in consultation with the minister.  The Public broadcaster has reserved channels according to the Act and there is no need to go for public enquiries.  Thank you.

         HON. MUSHORIWA:  No, the explanation is good.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON (HON. TSITSI ZHOU):  Order! Order! The Hon. Minister has given the simple language he understands but it looks like you understand it better.  Can you please take your seat? – [HON. MEMBERS:  Inaudible interjections.]  Order! Order! Hon. Mushoriwa when you started to debate you indicated that the Hon. Minister has not given adequate explanation. That went on to tell us you have the explanation for this.  You asked a question you had answers to.  We need to progress.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Madam Chair, I think you are not hearing me. I think it is only fair that we debate this clause.  When we asked the Minister to explain, you should also realise what the Minister did.  We remained quiet when you were saying, no, you want me to talk in Shona and you were actually ridiculing us.  You did not even caution him.  We are simply saying that his explanation...

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  I was supposed to question him if he wants to continue to speak in Shona.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Yes, because he cannot come here and think that this side we do not understand.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Order! Order! Hon. Mushoriwa.  The Hon. Minister had a different clause.  I called him to the Chair so that I can show him the clause.  He went back and read loudly, which is fine to read loudly.  Then he went on to explain the clause.  Which he has done.

Hon. Mushoriwa, if you want to debate without insulting the Minister, it is fine.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Point of order, Madam Chair.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  What is your point of order?

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  Madam Chair, what we are requesting the Minister to do is to explain in as far as giving the rationale for the clause.  What is it that he is proposing and why is he proposing? That is what we are asking.  He cannot just read out...

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  That is what you are asking.  It is different from what Hon. Mushoriwa is requesting.

HON. G. K. HLATYWAYO:  It is the same, actually.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  It is not the same.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Hon. Chair, I have already explained that the public broadcaster, in terms of the Broadcasting Services Act has reserved channels according to the Act and there is no need to go for public enquiries. Thank you.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Madam Chair, if indeed the submission by the Minister to say that the public broadcaster has reserved channels and the public broadcaster, according to this Bill is ZBC and he is saying that it does have reserved channels.  This proposed amendment says that the application can actually come either from ZBC itself for a specified term. 

Hon. Chair, I think what we need, the clarification is very simple.  How much are we talking about and what is the current setup in terms of the specified fee?  You admitted it does not need to go the same route as commercial applications but what is the specified fee in this issue so that at least we understand whether certain channels may end up being given to ZBC of which ZBC may not have the capacity to run them.

The current setup that we have in this country is that ZBC with the channel that it does in the broadcasting, for instance remember we used to have ZTV1, ZTV2 but because of content they failed to sustain the two operations.

My question which the Hon. Minister needs to explain to us is what is the specified fee so that at least we will be able to understand the rationale of actually having this amendment within this Act?

HON. MAMBIPIRI:  Thank you very much Madam Chair. I do not agree with this provision that specifically says that the public broadcaster must just acquire its licence via the Broadcasting Authority of Zimbabwe with the concurrence of the Minister.

I think for all intents and purposes, the public broadcaster must also go through a public enquiry on what it needs the licence for and how it ought to use the new licence differently from the licences that it already holds.  That Act in itself, Hon. Minister, improves on not only accountability on the part of ZBC but also challenges them to perform knowing fully well that they are not just going to get licences on a platter but they have to work for them, produce strategic plans, present to the public and win the confidence of the public before they get a licence. Thank you.

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Madam Chair, I think we keep going round and round.  I have already explained that the Act is very clear in that the public broadcaster has reserved channels according to the Act and there is no need to go for public enquiries.

The current setup, Madam Chair, is that ZBC has got six channels and I indicated yesterday and I indicated today that we are technically almost 50% in terms of fulfilling in terms of these current channels that ZBC currently holds in terms of channels and that work is underway in order to fulfil in terms of these six channels.  There is no issue about whether we should seek to curtail the growth of a public broadcaster.  I have explained many times the role of a public broadcaster.  What we should seek is actually the growth of the public broadcaster because it has a national obligation and national responsibility in terms of information, entertainment and also in terms of education.

Part of the growth, Madam Chair, includes the commissioning in the next two months of two educational channels as I have already indicated that there is growth in terms of the technical architecture that is taking place at Montrose studios currently.  What we should seek actually is more expansion of the public broadcaster because it has got a national obligation.  Thank you, Madam Chair.

HON. MUSHORIWA:  I asked for the specified fee.  The Minister has not responded to that.  What is the specified fee and where is it specified?

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Madam Chair, the fees are managed by way of regulation and are reviewed regularly.  It is not like it is cast in stone that this remains the fixed fee.  Currently we are working together with the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee to review these numbers but the current circumstances, as I have indicated in our last discussion was that it is 40,000. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Amendment to Clause 13 put and agreed to.

Clause 13 as amended put and agreed to.

On Clause 14 now 12:

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Chair, I need to understand from the Honourable Minister why this clause is necessary and I want to understand the definition of a dealer and why is it necessary to include these definitions that you have actually put.

Secondly, can the Hon. Minister explain to us is this list exhaustive in respect to the dealer?  Are these the only dealers that the Hon. Minister could come up with and if not, is there a reason and justification to even have this clause and what does this clause do to enhance this Bill because just coming up with the definition of a few names of dealers without probably expanding and telling us what benefit does it have.  I do not believe that it can be exhaustive in terms of coming up with the names and classes of people that could actually be in the same profession because if we include this, any other person or organisation that is a dealer in the true sense of a dealer in the broadcasting service, if it is not included there, it means that they do not qualify to be dealers.  So, I am asking, is it necessary to have this clause?

HON. DR. MUSWERE:  Thank you Madam Chair.  I think his question is related to what is a dealer.  This is with respect to a person who carries on a business, a trade or industry in which receivers are assembled, manufactured, imported, bought, sold, hired or exchanged or offered or exposed for sale, hire or exchange or a person who deals in motor vehicles in which receivers are installed or an auctioneer of receivers or a person who is a seller of motor vehicle licence and motor vehicle insurance policy or an employee or agent of a person referred to Paragraph A, B, C or D.

Hon. Member, the issue is about compliance within this framework and for now, we believe that through this expansion and redefinition of a dealer we are in a position to ensure that we increase in terms of compliance, in terms of those who receive electromagnetic signals.  The issue is about a receiver.  Thank you Madam Chair.

Amendment to 14 now Clause 12 put and agreed to.

Clause 14 now Clause 12, as amended, put and agreed to.

On Clause 15, now Clause13:

HON. MUSHORIWA:  Hon. Chair, this clause is very dangerous. The Hon. Minister wants to tell this House that before you can be allowed to pay your vehicle licence, you need to tell ZINARA or you need to prove to them that you have actually paid the ZBC licence.  I do not think, Hon. Chair, we could pass such a provision because you need to equate the two, ZBC and ZINARA.  ZINARA is there for the licencing of our vehicles and then the Hon. Minister wants to tell us that no, you need to make sure that you pay ZBC licence first.  I think that is not proper.

Secondly, Hon. Chair, in respect to radio service, right now we have got a challenge and the Minister is aware. ZBC inspectors cannot move around within the suburbs.  I tell you, for instance in my constituents in Dzivarasekwa, knocking and asking for radio licence or TV licence, you cannot come there because they will be chased away because the public broadcaster has not been sufficient to cater for all the citizens.  If the public broadcaster wants to ensure that we continue to have this situation where we have got roadblocks asking for ZBC licences and concentrating on licences for vehicles, it does not make sense.

Our taxation system, Madam Chair, is built on equity.  You wanted to tell me that somebody who is driving a vehicle worth US$300 000 and a pensioner who is driving a 12 year or 20 year old 323 has to pay the same amount of radio licence.  It does not make sense.

Then thirdly, Madam Chair, everybody who has got a phone has got access to radio.  Anybody who has got access to a computer has got access to radio.  What we expected the Hon. Minister to do was to think outside the box and ask us in this august House how best we can actually fund the public broadcaster rather than to create a crisis or a confusion to ZINARA. What will then end up happening, Madam Chair, before I sit down, you need to understand that the cost of paying a ZBC licence, if you compare it to South Africa, you compare it within the region, it is too much.  What you are going to end up doing is you are going to end up having people not only failing to pay ZBC licence but also failing to pay Zinara licences and that is actually bad, Madam Chair.

So, Madam Chair, the Hon. Minister then says unless the vehicle to be insured is not equipped with a radio receiver and what does he do?  He then goes on the back page of the Bill to have a declaration by motorist in terms of section 38B of the Broadcasting Service Act and I am saying that we cannot criminalise our people to that extent. We need to think outside the manner in which we do things.  There are several ways of doing that.  You can actually do a search even on the other revenue streams of Government where we could actually take a certain percentage.  Let us say for instance you could actually say that 0.2%, something that can actually be proper, but to allow ZINARA and say ZINARA you cannot issue a licence, I think that is dangerous, Madam Chair.  I want to say to Hon. Members, we also do not want to burden ZINARA.

One of the major challenges we have is that does ZBC have a memorandum of understanding with ZINARA?  Remember in the previous clause when we were asking about the definition of a dealer, ZINARA is not included in that.  I want to find out how we can sustain such a provision.  If we do that Hon. Members, I think this will be dangerous.  With due respect Madam Chair, I want to ask the Hon. Minister to expunge this clause.  It is not right for the country, it is not good even for ZBC.

THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON:  Considering the time, the time for adjournment is 6.45 p.m. We are supposed to report progress to the Hon. Speaker and our time does not allow that. I am going to allow the Hon.  Minister to respond to Hon. Mshoriwa then we will report progress.

         THE MINISTER OF INFORMATION, PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING SERVICES (HON. DR. MUSWERE):  Thank you Madam Chair.  I will also elaborate further, I will refer the Hon. Member to Section 194 of the Constitution in terms of Subsection 1 (g), which is very clear that institutions and agencies of Government at all levels must cooperate with each other.

         Chair, this is not the first time institutions and Government have cooperated as agencies and as institutions.  We have a carbon tax which is secured through the other ministries and the Ministry of Environment also benefits.  We can discuss about AIDS levy. We can discuss about many other taxes that are related to this.  At the same time, we have a Cabinet Committee and at the Cabinet Committee Level, the Minister of Transport agreed to this at Cabinet Level when we brought these principles.  The Minister of Transport also agreed to this at the same time there is an agreement between ZINARA and the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation. 

         Madam Chair, the issue is not about ZINARA or PTC or whichever organisation.  The issue is about compliance.  For now, through our analysis and in terms of the Constitution and in terms of the agreements between the sister institutions through our survey, we established that there was more compliance in terms of the Vehicle Registration Legislation and less compliance in terms of the licence fees from the Zimbabwe Broadcasting Corporation.

         In the same way, we can continue to argue that before a person pays for a motor vehicle registration licence, they are obliged to have a Third Party Insurance Policy. I think almost all these Members have vehicles, either they have a third-party insurance policy.  The issue here is about compliance and receiving a radio signal.

         The issue about content, we have discussed about it that part of the Zim Digital Phase 2 project also includes the establishment of content hub centres across the country.  The expansion of television and radio I have mentioned many times in compliance with the Constitution that we have all stations broadcasting all the officially recognised languages. With a population of more than 15 million, all that is content.  The issue about the performance of ZBC as an institution that is taking place has been re-capitalisation from Government.  There is restructuring going on. The issue about compliance has got to be supported by Parliament as per the proposal.

         I do not think we should go further into the other issues because they do not concern this particular Bill.  I have already elaborated on why institutions should work together. If the other Hon. Members have ideas, they can bring them.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Order, order Hon. Minister! There is still room for debate Hon. Members, we are going to proceed on Tuesday with this particular Clause.

         HON. MUSHORIWA: On a point of order Madam Chair.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: What is your point of order?

         HON. MUSHORIWA: I wish to raise that reporting progress must be done to Clause 14.  If we can concur with that one, I think it is very important, Madam Chair.

         THE TEMPORARY CHAIRPERSON: Well noted.

 House resumed

         Progress reported.

         Committee to resume: Tuesday, 4 March, 2025.

 On the motion of HON. TOGAREPI, seconded by HON. NYANDORO, the House adjourned at Sixteen minutes to Seven o’clock p.m. until Tuesday, 4^th March, 2025.