Films & Publications Board Appointments; International Migration White Paper Process; Lindela & Lebombo Visit

Meeting report

HOME AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
12 September 2000
FILMS AND PUBLICATIONS BOARD APPOINTMENTS; INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION WHITE PAPER PROCESS; LINDELA AND LEBOMBO VISIT

Chairperson: Mr A Mokoena

Relevant document
Interim Report on Public Hearings on White Paper on International Migration (See Appendix 1)

SUMMARY
The problems of the Lindela Holding Facility and Lebombo boundary were outlined prior to the Portfolio Committee’s visits there on 18 and 19 September.

The Chairperson of the Interviewing Panel for candidates for appointment to Films and Publications Board asked for nominations for six members for the Interviewing Panel urgently.

The Minister’s role in the drafting of the Immigration Bill was discussed with respect to its undemocratic procedure.

The Chairperson requested the opinion of committee members with regard to a complaint filed with the Public Protector about inadequate replies to questions put to the Anti-corruption Unit head in October last year.

MINUTES
Lindela and Lebombo visits
The committee plans to visit the Lindela Holding Facility on 18 September to investigate alleged appalling conditions there and on 19 September to visit the Lebombo border post (the community is split in two by the impractical shifting of the border fence and ordinary people are being arrested while trying to cross to border to visit the other part of their community). Mr Mokoena described the development of the crises at Lindela and Lebombo in preparation for the committee’s visit to the regions.

Films and Publications Board
Ms K Molema, Chairperson of the Interviewing Panel for candidates for appointment to the Films and Publications Board outlined the structure of the Board and its Appeal Board. She stated that there was a need for representivity on the Publications Board and this meant a recruitment of members from all over South Africa. This in turn required a representative Interviewing Panel. She stressed the workload of the Interviewing Panel and requested a team of no fewer than six people be appointed to the Interviewing Panel.

The Chairperson asked the committee members to submit names and CVs or relevant nominations to the committee secretary before the end of the month.

In answer to a query about the salaries of the examiners on the Interviewing Panel, Ms Molema replied that they were paid R74 per hour.

and there were no full-time workers on the Interviewing Panel. The only full-time workers on the Panel were the CEO and the two senior officers. The salary of the CEO would be about R191 000 pa.

Mr Waters (DP) asked if there was sufficient budget for an increase in the number of examiners on the Board. He noted that the Board’s budget had been presented at a previous meeting and it was indicated that there was insufficient funds for an expansion of examiners.

Ms Molema replied that an expansion of examiners could not be decided on arbitrarily and that it was stipulated in the Act. Only through an amendment to the Act, could this number be increased.

The Chairperson stated that Ms Molema’s presentation be treated as a preliminary hearing.

White Paper on International Migration Hearings: Committee report
The Committee made no recommendations on this interim report and will complete their Lindela and Lebombo visits first.

The Chairperson gave a review of the events leading up to the public hearings. He emphasized the Minister’s oversight of pushing through a White Paper in March 1999 without parliamentary input. He stated that this would have undermined the democratic process in South Africa. He stated that there existed a complication in the proposed Immigration Bill since it served to blanket two previous pieces of legislation, namely the Alien Control Act and the Refugee Act. Bringing out this draft Bill prematurely was putting the "horse before the cart" and therefore was a technically challenging process. Any extra-ordinary route followed in the drafting of this bill would be unconstitutional. The Public Hearing and the deliberation process would serve to rectify the mess made by the Minister.

Mr Prince Zulu (IFP) stated that the process needed to be as fast as possible but also expressed concern over the harmonization between the Department and the Portfolio Committee but he had no proposals on the table. He also inquired as to the stage at which the state law advisors would step in to shed light on the technical issues. The Chairperson replied that the state law advisors would provide input at the fourth stage – between the draft bill and the bill.

The Chairperson referred to Section 2 of the White Paper where the Department gives acknowledgement to the Portfolio Committee for their contribution to the White Paper. He believed there had been no involvement and urged the members to provide him with their contribution during the time of his predecessor. He emphasized that the role of the Portfolio Committee was not to gloss over the White Paper but to made a valid contribution to it.

Voting in Municipal Elections by the Blind
Mr Waters (DP) referred to s48 (1)(a) of the Municipal Electoral Bill and stated that certain people who were blind did not consider themselves disabled. He wondered whether these people would be assisted during the elections without a specific clause stipulating this. The Chairperson stated that there was a clause that provided for the assistance of people generally and this would include blind persons. The Chairperson believed that this was not the forum for this and stated that the IEC had fine-combed all the relevant issues with regard to the elections and any such issues could be brought to the attention of the judiciary.

Complaint about Deputy Director General
The Chairperson presented a letter from the Office of the Public Protector that referred to an MPs complaint regarding an inadequate response to questions put to the Director of the Anti-corruption Unit: Department of Home Affairs at a 20 September 1999 Portfolio Committee meeting. The complaint that the Anti-corruption Unit was not doing its job was under investigation. The Office of the Public Protector wished to know if the Committee was undertaking its own investigation. The Chairperson asked the Portfolio Committee Members for guidance as to how this situation should be dealt with.

Mr Chikane (ANC) felt that this request by the Office of the Public Protector may encroach on the privileges of Parliament and the protection given to what is said by anyone before a parliamentary committee.

It was recommended that the complainant present his matter to the Committee so that it could be dealt with by the Committee.

The Chairperson thanked the committee members for lively discussion and adjourned the meeting.

Appendix 1
DRAFT INTERIM COMMITTEE REPORT ON WHITE PAPER ON INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION

National Assembly:

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, dated August 2000:

The Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs, having held public hearings on the White Paper on International Migration (WP), reports as follows:

A. Introduction
It should be understood that the Interim Report does not attempt to analyse any of the information that was presented to the Committee. It merely serves as a vehicle to make the gathered information available to the Ministry, Government, Parliament and all parties who have shown an interest in the WP process, other stakeholders and interested parties. It should further be kept in mind that, at this stage, the Committee offers no recommendations, conclusions or any other views that it might have. Having said that, it must be indicated that the weight of the evidence is against the WP as it stands.

After Parliament resumes on 11 September 2000, the Committee will further deliberate on the public hearings on the WP and will then bring out a final report.

B. Background
On 17 November 1999 the Committee agreed that public hearings should be held on the WP. A memorandum containing such a request was sent to the Chief Whip, Mr T Yengeni, and he subsequently approved the Committee's request. Due to various reasons, the Committee could not hold the public hearings at the end of 1999. The Committee's "in principle" agreement to hold public hearings on the WP was carried over to this year.

On 7 April 2000 a memorandum was sent to the Chief Whip requesting approval to hold public hearings on the WP at Parliament as well as in six provinces. The Committee's request was approved.

On account of the fact the the WP expects communities to participate in the new immigration system, the Committee considered it only fair to consult as broadly as possible, especially rural communities that are far removed from Parliament.

In the Committee's quest to maximise public participation, the public hearings followed a two-part format:

1. Traditional route - public hearings at Parliament (16, 17 and 19 May 2000).

2. Public hearings in communities that are affected by immigration. To this end the Committee has identified Gauteng, North-West, Northern Province, Mpumalanga, KwaZulu-Natal and the Free State (31 July until 7 August 2000).

The public hearings in the provinces were originally scheduled to take place from 5 to 9 June 2000, but had to be postponed due to the Committee having to finalise the Local Government Municipal Electoral Bill [B 35 - 2000] and the Identification Amendment Bill [B 33 - 2000]. After finalising the mentioned legislation, a delegation of the Committee held public hearings in the above mentioned six provinces, from 31 July until 7 August.

The delegation under the leadership of Mr A D Mokoena (ANC) included Mr M M Chikane (ANC), Mr M U Kalako (ANC), Ms M M Maunye (ANC), Mr K W Morwamoche (ANC), Mr M R Sikakane (ANC), Mr W M Skhosana (ANC) and Bishop L J Tolo (ANC). Mr I J Pretorius (New NP) was in attendance on Monday, 31 July. Mr I S Mfundisi (UCDP) was in attendance on Monday, 31 July and Tuesday, 1 August. Ms I Mars (IFP) was in attendance on Friday, 4 August.

Ms L Jacobus (ANC), Chairperson: Select Committee on Social Services, was in attendance on Monday, 31 July. Mr J O Tlhagale (ANC) and Rev P Moatshe (ANC), Select Committee on Social Services were in attendance on Tuesday, 1 August. Mr B J Mkhalipi (ANC), Select Committee on Social Services, was in attendance on Thursday, 3 August. Mrs J N Vilakazi (IFP), Select Committee on Social Services, was in attendance on Friday, 4 August. Dr F Nel (New NP) and Ms S Ntlabati (ANC), Select Committee on Social Services, were in attendance on Monday, 7 August.

Persons who cross South Africa's borders can be divided into three categories, as follows:

(1) Immigrants, legal or illegal, persons with the intention of settling permanently in South Africa (SA).

(2) Migrants, persons with no intention of settling permanently in South Africa, but who enter the country with the intention of working here.

(3) Refugees, persons who flee persecution in their respective countries of origin and seek asylum in South Africa. (This report does not deal with this category of person as South Africa has a Refugee Act that took effect on 1 April 2000).

The majority of South Africans generally refer to the above mentioned categories of persons as immigrants. The issue of illegal immigration and unauthorised or undocumented migration has emerged as a major challenge for SA.

Our country's policies, laws and actions towards immigration has always been reactive, with the main focus on control and expulsion. The WP proposes a shift of emphasis to a community-based approach to immigration control.

The Committee plays a vital role in developing a new immigration policy for South Africa. In order to meet our country's challenges in immigration, the Committee held the public hearings to investigate and learn from the opinions, knowledge, expertise and experiences of South Africans.

C. Proceedings

1. Parliament, Cape Town: Tuesday, 16 May 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Mr W Chapman, Chairperson: Foreign Marriage and Family Protection Association; Prof L Schlemmer, Centre for Development and Enterprise (CDE); Ms A Bernstein, Executive Director: CDE.

(1) Mr W Chapman, Chairperson: Foreign Marriage and Family Protection Association
The Foreign Marriage and Family Protection Association is a civil society organisation, or more aptly defined as an action group, that strives to help foreign spouses. The main focus of the submission centres around the current prohibition on foreign spouses that are married to SA citizens, to either work or study before they have been granted with a permanent residence (PR) permit. The foreign spouse can wait up to three years before receiving the PR permit and while waiting, that person is prohibited from working. This questions the functionality of the family and violates the Constitutional rights of the family. The WP makes no mention of a more lenient policy for foreign spouses.

According to Home Affairs the Immigrants Selection Board is dealing with an 18-month backlog. SA law is very restrictive as there is currently no spousal work permit category.

The State should protect the rights of SA citizens in the case of marriage.

(a) Fraudulent marriages
Both SA and foreign nationals should be charged if they enter into a fraudulent marriage. (Wrongful administrative functions can lead to costly civil/legal action. Criminal charges lead to an investigation, the results thereof is determined by a State prosecutor who decides to charge or not ie. criminal charges do not necessarily lead to a clogging up of the courts). When marrying, persons should sign a contract accepting the consequences of a fraudulent marriage.

Only people who abuse SA citizenship should be penalised, but presently all foreign spouses are being penalised because some individuals enter into fraudulent marriages.
Spousal application for PR in 1999 was not that much and could not be considered a threat to 38 million SA citizens. Deterrent action through Courts could set a precedent to deter SA citizens from fraudulent marriages. The system should be toughened up on frauds in order to protect legal marriages.

(b) Recommendations
(i) The granting of PR status should be delayed for a period of three years provided that such policy does not pose an intolerable financial burden on the newly established family. As both spouses are responsible for the maintenance of the family unit, a special temporary permit that allows such spouse to enter into employment, should be granted, provided that application has been made for a PR permit.

Alternatively,

(ii) That such special working permit can be applied for if PR application has been submitted and has not yet been sanctioned by the relevant authority within three months of such submission.

(iii) That such special working permit is granted within SA.

(c) Current ramifications of delaying permanent residence status
The administrative breakdown within the Department of Home Affairs (Department) led to the termination of PR applications for several months. The Department has stated that the minimum waiting period has increased from 12 weeks to 72 weeks. While the Department has geared itself to deal with the backlog of applications, it appears that only couples that are married in excess of 24 months will have their PR aplication expedited if submitted in full prior to 31 January 2000. A PR applicant married for less than 24 months will have their application delayed to establish whether a legitimate marriage exists. The result of this action means that the non-national spouse is prohibited from entering into employment, study or activity that may enhance future prospects. The spouse is not even allowed to assist the South African in a non-remunerative function.

The constitutional legitimacy of a three-year delay to grant permanent residence status to the non-national spouse of a SA citizen or permanent resident which affects the normal function of the family can be challenged on the following basis:

A window period of 24 - 36 months does not verify the legitimacy of a marriage.

Such administrative action is unlawful in that it transgresses international law.

Such administrative action is procedurally unfair in that all legitimate applicants are suspected of criminal behavior by having entered into a fraudulent marriage.

The beneficial consequences of the administrative action by ineffectually deterring "marriages of convenience" and the adverse effect on a legitimate family are highly disproportionate.

The rights, interests and legitimate expectations of the family is materially and adversely affected or threatened.

All families in SA require financial means to survive. As the SA spouse is the only breadwinner, many factors such as death, sickness, injury or loss of employment can affect the financial position of the family.

No family in SA should be threatened with an existence unworthy of human dignity.

The current policy of prohibiting the non-national spouse from contributing to the current or future pecuniary position of the family may affect the economic security of the entire family, their access to basic necessities, including food, health care, education, housing, etc.

In terms of Section 28(1)(b)(c) of the Constitution, the right of the child to "family care" and "to basic nutrition and shelter "must be protected.

Restricting the access of opportunities to the non-national spouse violates the right to family life, which is included within the ambit of the right of human dignity. Under section 12(2)(a) of the Constitution, the right to make decisions concerning reproduction would protect the married couple in their decision to start a family. States, in terms of international human rights law, have a duty to protect the rights of persons who choose to raise a family. Restrictions on the financial capacity of a family imposed by government by prohibiting access to opportunities can directly affect the financial viability of such a couple to start a family, or threaten the welfare of the child.

Limiting the rights of the SA spouse, SA children and the non-national spouse by delaying the ability of the latter party to work is not reasonable and justifiable in an open and democratic society based on human dignity, equality and freedom. The argument has been raised that many foreign citizens have created employment opportunities for South Africans. Furthermore, it is incongruous that delaying the PR application will have any impact on protecting the SA against competition. The foreign citizen will be burdened with a natural handicap within the local job market. By limiting the non-national spouse in engaging in entrepreneurial activity takes employment opportunities away from South Africans.

If the livable wages is calculated at R1000 per month, the family unit will suffer a potential minimum loss of R36000 over a three year PR waiting period.

Section 22 of the Constitution limits "the right to choose their trade, occupation or profession freely" to SA citizens. Current Departmental policy recognizes that such limitation is not applicable to a non-national with PR status, provided that such person is the spouse of a South African citizen.

(d) Exemption of prescribed contribution
SA enterprises should be exempted from paying the proposed "prescribed contribution towards the special national training fund" when employing a non-national, provided that such person is married to a SA citizen.

(e) Exemption of visa extension fees
Delays caused by the failure of public administration to be efficient result in unnecessary visa extension fees to be born by the family.

(f) Exemption of study limitations
Members of families who have applied for PR should be allowed to study without requiring special study permits.

(2) Ms A Bernstein, Executive Director: CDE
The parameters of the WP is too narrow and it does not provide unambiguous policy prescriptions. The WP has been described as schizophrenic as it assumes that immigrants are a threat to formerly disadvantaged citizens.

The CDE focuses on the importance of skilled migration.

(a) Facts
SA is not producing enough skilled people, while a high level of skilled people are needed to stimulate economic growth. The entry of skills is necessary to produce growth and increase the expansion of the economy in SA. 4000 people emmigrate per annum from SA.

In future, HIV and Aids will have a major impact on skilled people in SA. Every week, 3 to 4 teachers die of AIDS in Swaziland.

(b) Skilled foreigners
SA has scarce skills in many areas.
To import skills creates wealth and some other country has to bear the costs of educating the skilled person. SA is in need of skilled people and the WP is not good enough in addressing this issue.

(3) Prof L Schlemmer, CDE
SA's skilled people compete overseas by emigrating. There are not enough skilled people in government to provide services. 21% of SA Chartered Accountants live outside the country. The SA brain drain is a serious problem and SA is losing skilled labour. There is a brain drain because there are opportunities overseas. People who emigrate are usually ones with much more modern fibre and are not racist.

Although there is a need to train more people in
SA this will take time. SA needs as much skilled people as possible for the next five to 10 years from abroad. CDE is not in favour of a point system as foreigners will be more expensive to employ.

Disadvantaged communities will not lose out because of skilled immigrants. The SA economy should not be seen as a fixed cake. A growing cake (economy) with bigger slices for everyone is needed. The only way to achieve this is through the importation of skills. Skilled immigrants should be regarded as fixed capital of investments.

Internal training must improve but entrepeneurs are urgently needed. It is also very problematic that there is a falling number of matriculants that have mathematics and science on higher grade.

(b) Economic confidence
Good government is characterised by competence and capacity. The visions and principles of the WP are sound and there are winning principles struggling to swim. Presently these principles are entangled in bureaucratic red tape. Flexibility is vital as it is imperative to establish the movement of people. Work permit bottlenecks is a cause for concern.

The new global era demands porous boundaries. The CDE is committed to Gear. The WP should be realistic about capacity and constraints in bureaucracy.

(c) CDE recommendations
(i) The Government should acknowledge the skills crisis and its negative consequences for all SA's. The crisis has three consequences for migration policy:

(aa) The doors of the country must be opened to as many professionals and entrepreneurs as can be attracted to come to SA.

(bb) This is not a threat to blacks, but an expansion of opportunity.

(cc) The government should consider whether it is doing enough to keep skills in SA.

(ii) There should be clear rules of administrative decision.

(iii) The proposed additional training levy will be a tax on efficiency and economic recovery and should be eliminated since it counteracts the beneficial effects of recent reductions in company tax.

(iv) The WP should not invest NEDLAC, a negotiating body intended to resolve conflicts of interest, with executive or advisory authority in respect of the determination of immigration targets and quotas.

(v) Affirmative action should be pursued within other domains of policy and not imposed as a criterion likely to distort the optional flow of valuable skills to an economy with unpredictable and changing skills needs.

(vi) The Immigration Review Board should be strengthened to give it wider powers to determine general quotas, guidelines and criteria in respect of the issuing of work permits to foreigners.

(vii) The reputation of the Department of Home Affairs has suffered badly because of difficulties encountered by important investors in SA, in securing necessary production, managerial and professional skills. If Cabinet is serious about economic recovery and sustained growth, it will ensure that the Minister has the full backing in turning immigration policy into an instrument of economic progress.

(2) Wednesday, 17 May 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Mr V Williams, Manager: Southern African Migration Project, Idasa; Mr M Khaye, individual; Mr F Jenkins, Legislation Researcher, Human Rights Committee; Mr V Esselaar, Chairperson of Task Group on Migration, Business South Africa (BSA); Mr H Makapula, BSA; Mr J Loubser, BSA; Mr J Liebenberg, BSA.

(1) Mr V Williams, Manager: Southern African Migration Project, Idasa
SA should deal with push factors of immigration in the countries of origin and should accept that there is a relation between migration and development.

The WP primarily focusses on illegal immigration and a broader immigration policy should be developed. Enforcement should come after policy formulation.

More neutral terminology should be used.

The WP is silent on issues of gender, eg. cross border traders (mostly female). What about the family back home?

The WP is also silent on training and service delivery.

There is a need for administrative reform.

The roles of the Ministry, the NIA, the SAPS and the SANDF should be specified.

An open-border arrangement with Lesotho should be considered.

Maybe a new team should re-draft the WP.

Idasa endorses the system of internal enforcement of immigration control but does not support the WP strategy to do so, as it will increase xenophobia. The pre-occupation with enforcement and control is also not desirable.

SA should discuss immigration problems with neighbouring countries and enter into bilateral agreements.

We accept that people are driven by economic reasons and it is therefore in SA interest to assist with the economic push factors in source countries.

Idasa is concerned about the additional security service as proposed in the WP, as it seems like a Home Affairs army. Ideally, immigration and customs officials should be very friendly.

The definition of a skilled person should also be defined otherwise who will decide who is skilled or not?

(2) Mr M Khaye (presented as a business person and an individual)
Very little is said of the consequences that immigration holds for the poor people of the country. SA has a high unemployment rate and many people are unskilled. The present government was voted in by the poor and now traders and hawkers from all over are seen in the streets. The SA security industry, hotel and catering industries are full of immigrants.

Many people see no change in their living conditions. The perception from the ground is that foreigners are taking jobs from SA citizens. The competition for jobs will intensify and the number of jobs will not increase. Xenophobia will also increase.

How can it be known that in the long run skilled immigrants will not leave for greener pastures? Is the message that SA citizens are no good and therefore foreigners are used? In reality less and less people are required because of computers. High unemployment causes political and social instability.

Solutions
(a) The government should listen to the concerns of the people and should create a mechanism to cater for the people.

(b) The development of people should take place alongside the reconstruction of the country.

(c) The police should receive more power to deal with criminals and border control should be more effective.

(d) People should be educated as to how to create their own jobs.

(e) Government should give more support to small businesses.

(3) Mr F Jenkins, Legislation Researcher: Human Rights Committee
The Human Rights Committee's submission concentrates on Chapter 11 of the WP and whether the policy of enforcement is valid for SA.

The WP does not propose a workable solution to immigration control in SA.

The responsibility imposed by the WP on SA citizens to report illegals is not good. How will people know, who is illegal and who has false documents. One can only distinguish documents with training.

To send those who employ illegals to jail is no good as this will not add to the economy. Fines should be imposed on those who employ illegals.

The role of Chapter 9 institutions of the Constitution needs to be acknowledged and incorporated in the WP.

An assessment of the financial implications of the WP needs to be done. How can SA fund a new immigration policy if the old policy is already in the red.

(4) Mr V Esselaar, Chairperson of Task Group on Migration: BSA
BSA is the most representative of the business community in SA and is a confederation of 19 organisations.

There are some controversial recommendations in the WP. BSA disagrees with the proposed legal immigration as put forward in the WP as SA needs the skills from the outside world.

Opening of borders to skills
The mining industry need assurance that the present legal migration will continue. The market grows as you introduce skills. BSA does not advocate the total free movement of skills but it must be remembered that SA is not a very desirable place for foreign skilled labour.

America would bave been backward if no foreign skills were introduced. Skilled immigrants create jobs.

In SA, within 10 years, 50% of jobs as we know them would have disappeared. This is true especially for the service sector.

SA is presently in urgent need to import skills and it is not possible to train the needed skills internally in order to satisfy the need. SA must use the built up skills of other countries to drive the economy.

If Ford or whoever want to start up a plant in Port Elizabeth, they need to import skills from overseas to do so. They cannot train people internally if there are no jobs for them. Skills create jobs and then people can be trained to fill those jobs. It is imperative to train people but need critical mass to get going as you cannot train people in a vacuum. SA does not have a large maritime industry and the Koega project, for example, can only be kick-started with skills from abroad. Another example is the Victoria and Alfred Waterfront that has been duplicated from abroad.

The skills levy as proposed in the WP will chase investors away. SA must make investors welcome and too many taxes and levies will chase away potential investors. In order to create jobs, labour costs must be reduced. Only Singapore has a levy similar to that proposed by the WP.

Capital gains tax, skills levies and other taxes creates a barrier for potential investors. SA is far from Europe and such taxes literally doubles the distance.

(5) Mr H Makupula, BSA
A needs assessment of the needed skills based on the SA hitorical position should be done. To introduce a quota for the importation of skills, presumes that SA has more skills than required.

In the era of globalisation workers are highly skilled and are very mobile. Many countries are now re-thinking their stance on legal immigrantion. Ireland is an example of a country that is good at attracting investment, by giving businesses grants.

A work permit must be issued if an employer can give good reasons why a foreigner should be employed. All relevant information must be provided but if the IS denies the work permit application, an appeal should lie with the immigration court.

Despite the need to introduce skills in SA, BSA places a strong emphasis on internal training needs.

(6) Mr J Liebenberg, BSA
The ideal situation would be an absolute free movement of skilled people but government will not support such a policy. BSA proposes that when an employer can give a reasonable reason why a skilled immigrant is needed, then a work permit should be issued.

(3) Friday, 19 May 2000
The following persons were in attendace:

Mr N Coleman, Head: Parliamentary Office, Cosatu; Mr O Modibe, Deputy Head: Parliamentary Office, Cosatu; Ms L More, Regional Educator: Cosatu; Commissioner Z Majodina, Human Rights Commission; Mr V Southwell, Legislature Monitor/Parliamentary Officer: Human Rights Commission; Ms V Rajah, Study and Work Abroad Advisor: International Affairs Office, University of Pretoria; Ms M Mashlell, University of Pretoria; Ms C Thomas, Manager: International Academic Programmes Office, University of Cape Town.

(1) Mr N Coleman, Head: Parliamentary Office, Cosatu; Mr O Modibe, Deputy Head: Parliamentary Office, Cosatu; Ms L More, Regional Educator: Cosatu
After the public hearings the WP should be adjusted where necessary.

The WP should be tabled at Nedlac and the Committee should deliberate the NEDLAC report.

(a) Cosatu concerns
Where the WP differs from the greenpaper, reasons should be given.

The following six principles of Cosatu should be considered:

(i) WP policy must not compromise the position of labour in SA.
(ii) Government must consult broadly before finalising immigration policy.
(iii) Immigration policy must not lead to the erosion of SA work standards.
(iv) Control of people entering and leaving the country should not be compromised.
(v) Thos who employ illegals should be penalised.
(vi) The attraction of foreign skills should not compromise internal training programmes.

Migration is a cross sectoral issue that must be well co-ordinated.

The WP must have a section on general principles.

The WP is over fixated with the issue of illegal migration and the issue of illegal migration must be further investigated in order to defuse the highly charged discussion.

The WP mainly addresses the issue of illegal immigrants and does not focus on how to address socio-economic push factors. The WP must therefore be linked to a broader strategy of development in the region that includes a strategy of regional development.

The unsubstantiated claims of the State's capacity in the WP is a problem. The emphasis should be to first build capacity as the WP assumes that where the State lacks, the private sector will provide.

Each statement in the WP must have a vision and there are omissions, eg. Gender migration policy and other gender issues.

The WP only focuses on GEAR and it must also consider the major vision of the RDP.

The WP must further consider international law and policies, be a systematic reviewer of sectoral policy, entrench the right to fair hearings and appeals.

(b) Migration and the labour market
Harmonisation between labour market policy and migration policy is needed.

Employers should not employ illegals.

Provision must be made to regulate labour standards.

Where casual labour is used there must be compliance with labour legislation.

The WP view of the economy is problematic as it is unclear what the economic fundementals are according to it.

The sections in the WP that allows for the variation of labour standards must be removed.

Cosatu cannot support the sections of the WP that delegates certain regulatory functions to business, eg. visa applications for corporate permits. It is also unclear whether the IS will have the capacity to monitor this delegated power.

If the IS does not have the necessary capacity, it is doubtful that it will be able to monitor the WP proposals.

(c) The WP in general
The strategy is not detailed enough to deal with the brain drain.

The WP assumption that only skilled workers add value to the economy is problematic. The
distinction between skilled and unskilled labour is superficial. Cosatu does not support the opening of gates for skilled workers but does recognise the need to attract skilled people, but this should be combined with internal development and training.

The WP proposal that employers who employ illegals must pay fines to the National Skills Fund, must be realigned with already existing legislation.

It is very disconcerting that the WP does not address the system of compulsory deferred pay. This system says that a portion of the income of a foreign migrant must be transferred to his/her country of origin. In Mozambique found corruption - stealing of this deferred pay. Compulsory deferred pay is very complex and it is not always easy to intervene when an agreement has been made between workers and their countries of origin. Negotiation and discussion on this issue should be referred to Nedlac.

The WP is not clear what status will be given to migrant workers. Their status must be clarified.

By evading any direction regarding regional development the WP misses the opportunity to contribute to this protocol.

(d) Enforcement
The proposed IS as contained in the WP is based on the American system and no explanation is given as to why the current Directorate on Immigration in the Department of Home Affairs can not fulfill the role of the proposed IS.

The SAPS and and the SANDF presently forms part of immigration control and enforcement. COSATU does not agree with the establishment of the IS and the privatisation of certain functions, eg. detention centres. The focus should be to build capacity for the Directorate of Immigration. As the current Directorate of Immigration does not have enough capacity it can not be assumed that the IS will have the necessary capacity. One can also not assume that the private sector will help where the IS lacks capacity.

A chapter on rights should be incorporated in the WP. When apprehended, people should know their rights, access to information, etc.

(e) Addressing xenophobia
Objective and neutral terminology should be used in the WP as words such as "alien" only serves to contribute towards xenophobia.

The notion that immigrants have flooded the country has to be redressed.

The WP proposal that members of the public should act as informers will lead to a
witch-hunt.

(2) Commissioner Z Majodina, Human Rights Commission; Mr V Southwell, Legislature Monitor/Parliamentary Officer: Human Rights Commission (HRC)
The main thrust of the submission is the proposal of a regional developmental approach to immigration. SA must negotiate with SADC countries and enter into bi-lateral agreements. The WP policy proposals are unenforceable as our systems are not adequate to monitor illegals in SA. The policing of SA borders is also not a viable option.

Four areas of concern:
(a) SA obligation to the region.
(b) Xenophobia.
(c) Human rights violations.
(d) Potential for corruption.

(a) SA obligation to the region
The WP fails to outline a policy of regional development as it only seeks to let in those who add value to the SA economy and to keep out those who do not. This approach is ineffective and inhumane and will only contribute to illegal migration.

It costs SA R22 million per annum to deport illegal immigrants. We must adopt a management approach that incorporates regional issues and regional development. We must take bilateral agreements into account.

Migrant labourers must be subject to the same conditions as the internal labourers.

We must remember that informal traders generally do not want to permanently reside in SA. They consume and return to their countries of origin.

Deportation is a very ineffective immigration strategy as illegals continuously return to SA. Illegal immigration must be managed from the side of the source country as well. The assertion in the WP that it is not possible to deal with the push factors of the source countries of illegal immigrants is short-sighted. SA should open its borders to SADC countries in a responsible manner.

(b) Xenophobia
There is an irrational dislike of foreigners in SA and the poor and homeless are shifting the blame of the economy to foreigners. The figures on illegals in SA are over inflated.
The Department of Home Affairs needs a strong research body.

Xenophobia is a little understood concept that is not dealt with in the WP at all.

The historical legacy must be taken into account and border control has proved to be very ineffective. The proposed community based policy will however increase xenophobia. This proposed policy is also open to abuse and reminds one of the pass law system.

The proposal that proof of citizenship should be produced is also a cause for concern.

(c) Human rights violations
The WP limits the rights of illegal immigrants and this is in contradiction with the Constitution.

The WP proposes Immigration Courts but most immigrants will not be able to afford the costs of appeal.

Concerned about proposed privatisation of detention facilities. The State should build the needed capacity in this regard. Corruption is also prevalent at detention centres. 10% of those detained at Lyndela are wrongfully detained. This figure is way to high and currently there are no measures to rectify this situation. There is too much secrecy at Lyndela and it is a good idea for the Committee to go and visit the facility.
There are many unaccompanied children at Lyndela.

(d) Potential for corruption
The WP only pays lip service to the issue of corruption, and immigration policy should not be undermined by a lack of enforceability.

(3) Ms V Rajah, Study and Work Abroad Advisor: International Affairs Office, University of Pretoria
Despite the University of Pretoria's submissions and other higher education submissions, higher education proposals were mostly ignored in the WP.

The WP does not combat problems with xenophobia and offers no substance as to how to deal with such problems.

A separate education/higher education section should be included in the WP. The WP only briefly touches on the importance of international students and staff.

There is a lack of government coherence at policy level. We cannot give institutions power to issue study permits as this leaves the gate wide open for corruption.

Well pleased though that refugees have been dealt with in separate legislation.

(4) Ms M Mashlell, University of Pretoria
Sometimes find out from Home Affairs that the permit requirements for foreign students have changed - all stakeholders should be informed of changes in advance.

The study permits for some Masters students are also impractical as some need to do practical work that they are not allowed to be paid for.

2. Gauteng: Johannesburg, Monday, 31 July 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Professor J Klaaren, Ms J Tlou and Reverend W Jabuka: National Consortium on Refugee Affairs (NCRA) (Rev Jabuka also represented the South African Council of Churches (SACC)); Ms A Daly, Academic Personnel Manager: University of the Witwatersrand; Dr S Pepperdy, Post-doctoral Fellow: Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand; Ms C Murugan, Mr J Smith, Mr P Mbecke: Jesuit Refugee Service; Adv C Waters and Adv C Minnaar, Law Society of Gauteng; Mr B Maseko, Airports Company of South Africa; Mr A Yusuf, Co-ordinating Body for Refugee Community; Mr P Makhubu, Ms P Sithole and Ms F Ramosana: African National Congress; Mr A Selepe and Ms L More, Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU); Mr A Muhade, National Union of Mine Workers (NUM)

Presentations were made as follows:

(1) Professor J Klaaren, Ms J Tlou and Reverend W Jabuka, NCRA (Rev Jabuka also represented the SACC)
(a) The community services control approach is the incorrect approach and is unlikely to be effective as it will-

(i) increase xenophobia;

(ii) increase violence against non-South Africans, including asylum seekers and refugees; and

(iii) serve as a link between racism and xenophobia.

This approach is unlikely to be as effective as a more targeted approach to enforcement of immigration control that strengthens the criminal justice system and the labour market sectors.

The WP's insistence on the presentation of formal identification requirements may lead to serious inefficiencies in the provision of basic socio-economic services to both non-SA's (including refugees) and to SA citizens as well as violate the right to privacy.

(b) The NCRA is concerned that there is no explicit recognition in the WP that immigration legislation should not take precedence over the Refugees Act of 1998.

(c) The WP should take a stance on the provision of permanent residence to refugees and the whole question of permanent residence for refugees and asylum seekers need a greater legislative framework. Although asylum is temporary in nature, there will be cases where refugees have developed strong family, social and economic links with South Africa to the point of regarding it their new home country. In these cases the government should give favourable consideration to applications for permanent residence and naturalisation. Procedural requirements such as police clearance certificates may need to be waived.

(d) The administrative independence of a number of structures set up by the Refugees Act of 1998 will need to be safeguarded in terms of any new immigration legislation. The structures of the Refugees Act relating to refugee status determination will need to have greater independence from immigration decision-makers. In particular the independence of the Refugee Affairs Appeal Board must be respected in order to maintain credibility, legitimacy and expertise within the refugee determination system.

(e) The political accountability of the Immigration Service (IS) suggested by the WP needs careful consideration. The WP mixes the lines of accountability between the Minister, Immigration Board and the IS and the managerial lines of accountability become difficult to discern. Accountability such as that being provided by Parliament and its Committees should not be lessened.

(f) The place of rights-regarding enforcement cannot be stressed too highly. Operation crackdown illustrated how the rights of refugees and asylum seekers are perpetrated by the police as 247 people that were arrested and were being held at Lyndela were refugees and asylum seekers. Most of these people said that they did have papers at the time of their arrest but it seems that the police do not understand the technicalities of papers and which papers are needed. If a proper legal system was in place, as opposed to an administrative system, such a bungle would not have taken place.

The WP move to internal control rather than border control is good, but the WP misses the point whilst determining how to do this.

The NCRA supports refugee protection but it should not be used as a back-door to permanent residence.

There needs to be legislative policy on how refugee determination takes place and refugee determination should not be an administrative decision.

Formal identification requirements will block delivery of services.

Those who cannot afford the deposit to appeal against the decision of the Refugee Board might be marginalised.

(2) Ms A Daly, Academic Personnel Manager: University of the Witwatersrand
The submission aims to specifically outline the peculiar needs of tertiary institutions, and particularly universities.

There are two primary reasons why universities need to be able to employ foreigners.

(a) The first is the lack of suitably-qualified black South Africans. The pool of black academics generally is small and the demands for their services immense. The demand is so high on black academically qualified people that they sometimes command salaries three times greater than universities can offer. Few students, black or white pursue an academic career, and the secondary education system, as yet, has failed to produce the critical mass of black students required. While Wits is making every effort to enlarge the pool of black academics through targeted undergraduate programmes and increased postgraduate intake, it will take some years before reaching a degree of self-efficiency. In the meantime the only way to provide role models for black students is by recruiting black non-South Africans.

(b) The second reason why universities need to employ non-South Africans is the basic need for intellectual renewal. To participate fully in international debate it is necessary to bring foreign academics to South Africa, as well as enabling South Africans to gain experience overseas.

The other sector of the university affected by migration legislation is the student body. South African students need to widen their perspective by being exposed to their peers from other parts of the world.

Foreign students are also a valuable source of income for universities.

The WP makes no particular provision for foreign academics. The emphasis throughout is on employers in the private sector.

Universities are in a very different and highly specialised category and the Department of Education would perhaps be a more appropriate and relevant overseeing body than the Department of Labour. (cf sections 8.2 & 8.5 of the WP, pp 30 & 31.)

In particular the WP makes no provision for visiting academics who are employed to teach or carry out research for a short period of up to three months. The process described in section 4.2 of the WP (p 25) expressly prohibits a person from working during such a visit. He/she would, presumably, need to go through the lengthy process of acquiring a work permit which is likely to discourage many people who could make a significant contribution to learning in South Africa.

The needs of universities should be taken into account and accommodated in the proposed migration processes - either as a discrete category of foreign workers, or through amendments to the measures proposed in the WP. If universities are to provide SA students with the best possible tuition and research opportunities it is essential that recognition is given to the special contribution made by foreign academics. The WP presents a unique opportunity to make particular and appropriate provision for this uniquely skilled group of people.

The proposed community services control approach is likely to increase the level of xenophobia and is unlikely to be as effective as a more targeted approach to enforcement of immigration control.

Universities are a very special case and the WP makes no particular mention of them.

(3) Mr A Selepe, Mr A Muhade and Ms L More, Cosatu
Foreign migrants should not be treated differently than SA workers. In many instances foreign migrants receive lower wages than SA workers. All labour law should be applied equally.

The WP should not be biased to skilled workers or to business.

The system of compulsory deferred pay should be scrapped. It takes time for workers to receive their money when they return to their country of origin.

The structure of the WP is not very appropriate.

The Employment Bureau of Africa Limited (TEBA) is riddled with problems.

(4) Dr S Pepperdy, Postdoctoral Fellow: Department of Geography and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand
This submission draws on research funded by the Canadian International Development Agency through the Southern African Migration Project and the Canadian International Development Research Centre. Between 1996 and 2000 some 404 African cross border traders have been interviewed from all SADC countries including SA.

The submission concerns the issuing of visas to persons from SADC countries who are involved in cross border trade activity between SA and their home or other countries in the SADC.

The introduction of a renewable three-month multiple entry visa for traders as proposed in the WP is a good idea. This recommendation should be included in any future legislation (it iss not included in the draft Migration Bill) as it will facilitate the migration of people who will benefit SA (p 9 of the WP).

A separate category of visa is necessary because SADC small entrepreneurs do not usually qualify for business permits. They are presently issued with visitors visas (apparently with officials knowing that they are entering South Africa to do business) which are inappropriate for their activities. Reciprocal arrangements should be sought with other SADC countries to facilitate the participation of South African small entrepreneurs involved in cross border trade.

Cross border trade by small entrepreneurs should be encouraged through the introduction of a multiple entry visa for SADC citizens involved in cross border trade as:

(a) It falls within the remit and objectives of a range of SA government policies and economic development initiatives for South Africa and the region.

(b) It falls with formal sector regional trade objectives.

(c) It would facilitate the activities of these small and medium entrepreneurs and will help the development of the SMME sector in SA and SADC countries.

(d) It would promote the export of goods targeted by SA's export and manufacturing strategy.

(e) It provides employment opportunities in SA and in SADC countries through developing entrepreneurial options and because these entrepreneurs employ people in their businesses.

(f) It would prevent inappropriate use of the visitors visa.

(g) Formally recognising the activities of these traders would help to prevent illegal entry and corruption at the border and when in SA.

(h) It would assist in controlling the entry and exit of illegal goods.

(i) It would make a relatively significant contribution to the SA economy.

These small and medium entrepreneurs largely fall into three categories:

(a) People who come to SA for short periods (1-4 days) to buy goods to take back to their home country to sell. These goods are sold in markets, on the street and, to formal sector retail outlets. This category appears to be the most numerous.

(b) People who come to SA for longer periods (1 week to 2 months) who bring goods to sell on South Africa's streets and to certain formal sector outlets. The profits are then invested in buying goods in SA which are then taken back to their home countries for sale.

(c) There is a small category of people who only bring goods from neighbouring countries to sell in SA without taking goods out for export.

This trade should be seen as a part of SA's policies which encourage regional trade and economic growth. It should also be noted that "informal sector" cross border trade between SA and other SADC countries is only one aspect of regional trade relationships. This trade also occurs between other SADC states, excluding SA.

(i) Policy Environment
A range of SA economic policy and development initiatives emphasise the importance of developing regional trade, regional export markets and SMMEs. The advantages of these policies should not be confined to large formal sector companies. The business of small entrepreneurs involved in cross border trade should be facilitated as a means to encouraging the entrepreneurial sectors in SA and in SADC states as well as regional trade.

These initiatives include:

(aa) The Growth, Employment and Redistribution Strategy - which stresses the need for growth in the export sector to realise goals for GDP growth and job creation and which encourages expansion in private sector capital formation.

(bb) Spatial Development Initiatives (SDI's) - particularly the Maputo and Lubombo Corridors, which stress their importance for achieving higher rates of economic growth and job creation and promoting areas of export manufacturing. Increasingly emphasis is laid on using SDIs to develop and support the growth of a Southern African regional economy.

(cc) Strategy for the Development and Promotion of Small Business in South Africa - published in 1995, the Strategy which was followed by enabling legislation, commits the government to uplifting the role of SMMEs. Fundamental to the process are: fostering an enabling environment, stimulating sector-focused economic growth, facilitating income earning opportunities and addressing the legacy of apartheid through promoting the development of black owned business.

(dd) SADC Free Trade Protocol - the protocol emphasises tariff reduction as a means to encourage regional economic growth and to develop inter-regional trade.

(ee) Manufacturing and export promotion policies - these emphasise developing certain sectors of South Africa's manufacturing industry including: textiles, electronics, machinery and food products, all of which are important goods to small entrepreneurs involved in informal sector trade.

(ii) Cross Border Traders
These traders largely fall into three categories from a range of SADC countries, primarily: Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique, Swaziland and Zimbabwe. SA small entrepreneurs are also involved in taking goods to neighbouring states and importing goods from them.

The business involves both men and women. Research suggests that cross border trade involves a greater number of female than male entrepreneurs, thus, promoting the economic empowerment of women in the region. Most are aged between 25 and 35 years.

Their businesses enable these entrepreneurs to meet the education, housing and other basic needs of a significant number of dependents. Research shows that each trader supported on averages 3.2 children and 3.1 dependents who were not children or spouses.

(iii) What they trade and where it is sold
Goods taken out of SA by these entrepreneurs to other SADC countriesinclude: clothes and shoes; electronics (TVs, hi-fi's, videos, radios); appliances (stoves, fridges); household goods (pots, plates, cutlery); bedding (blankets, duvets); furniture (particularly plastic tables and chairs and mattresses); cosmetics; car parts; bicycles; machinery; processed foods (rice, oil, sugar); meat and chicken; vegetables and fruit. The export of vegetables, fruit, meat and chicken are particularly important to Mozambique where traders (South African and non-South African) supply wholesale and retail markets. Thus they support South Africa's manufacturing and export policies.

Goods are usually bought in SA formal sector retail and wholesale outlets where VAT is paid on goods bought.

Goods taken out of SA are sold in markets, on the street, to formal sector retail shops and restaurants, and to individuals. Goods brought into South Africa are sold on the street, to individuals, and sometimes to formal sector retail outlets and restaurants. Some traders own small retail outlets in their home country (South Africa or SADC).

Goods brought into SA often target particular markets and include goods not available in SA: curios and handicrafts; wire to make wire goods; baskets; crocheted goods; traditional dresses; capulanas; fish and shelfish; cashews; and vegetables.

(iv) Value of Trade
The value of goods carried by these entrepreneurs varies widely as the trade encompasses people whose business is transporting lorry loads of vegetables and fruit across the border worth from R10,000 to R20,000 to people carrying bags of chips and cold drinks to sell at the border valued from R200-R300. The value of goods carried by individual interviewees in the studies forming the basis of this submission fell within the range of R1,000 to R5,000 each journey. Average profit on each journey ranges from 15-40%.

(v) Employment of Others
These small entrepreneurs employ people in their businesses. The employees are employed in SA and in the SADC countries. Numbers of employees range from one to eight per entrepreneur. Over 60% of Mozambican respondents employed people in their businesses in Mozambique.

Research shows that an average of 1.2 people per SADC trader are employed in the home country. SA cross border traders employ an average of 1.3 each in South Africa in the businesses. Over 50% were non-family members.

Research shows that at least 20% of SADC cross border traders involved in the handicraft/curio sector of street trade in SA employ people (usually SA's) in their business.

(vi) Ambitions, Desire to Stay Permanently in SA
Less than 5% of cross border traders in the studies examined for this submission said that they were interested in living permanently in South Africa.

Most traders see themselves as entrepreneurs and show a strong commitment to their businesses. Less than 50% said they were interested in finding formal sector employment and only 5% of those who said they wanted to work in formal sector jobs were actually looking for work.

Significant numbers of the people interviewed for these studies were actively involved in developing small businesses in their home countries by investing the profits from their cross border trade. These businesses included: retail shops, and ice-cream making business; a construction company; beauty and hair salons; a chicken farm; a bottle store and guest house; and a restaurant.

(vii) How Often Do Traders Cross the Border?
Research suggests that patterns of movement across the border vary widely. The majority of cross border traders who come to South Africa only to buy goods cross the border at least once a week, many travel as often as two or three times a week. A significant proportion of traders who only shop in South Africa travel two to three times a month. Traders who come to South Africa with goods to sell have more erratic patterns of movement as it is dependent on the length of permit issued at the border and how long it takes them to sell their goods. The majority cross the border at least once a month, others every two to three months.

Length of stay in SA varies. Traders who only buy in South Africa stay for 1-4 days. Traders who sell in SA as well as buy stay for periods of one week to two months.

(viii) Visa Status
Research suggests that the overwhelming majority of these traders hold visitors visas. This suggests that they wish to enter SA legally. Most have to provide paperwork, and in the case of Mozambicans, pay relatively costly visa fees of R180.

Interviewees found the increasing restrictions and demands for documents difficult and a hindrance to their business. They also said that single-entry visas restricted their ability to trade. They did, however, show a strong commitment to wanting to enter legally with proper papers.

Because a visitors visa does not technically allow cross border traders to participate in street trade, but these visas are issued to people who are known to be entering SA to sell goods (and to buy them), this leaves them vulnerable to arrest by the SAPS and Home Affairs officials. More often it seems it leaves them vulnerable to corrupt SAPS and Home Affairs officials who take bribes rather than arrest them. Thus regularising their activities would be to the advantage of the State and the traders.

The ambiguous use of visitors visas makes it difficult for the Department of Home Affairs to monitor and regulate patterns of migration as there is no way of distinguishing between traders, visitors, and people using visitors visas to find employment.

These entrepreneurs travel frequently across the border. Issuing multiple entry visas would reduce administrative pressure and costs to government and traders.

The system creates uncertainty for traders as they are unsure if, when and for how long they will be allowed to enter SA, hampering their ability to trade and plan.

(viv) Issues of Legality
Issues of illegality and corruption obviously arise when discussing informal sector cross border trade. Illegal goods, drugs, guns, and stolen goods form part of the volume of goods which cross the border. However, research suggests that there is a separation between criminals involved in the trafficking of illegal goods, and cross border traders and entrepreneurs who carry legal goods.

As noted above, most traders appear to have visas to allow them to cross the border but not to sell goods in SA. Thus they enter legally but their activities may flout the letter of the law. This appears to encourage venality amongst SA officials, and for some traders, is a significant cost to their businesses.

The main areas of illegal activity that cross border traders are involved in is in the smuggling of goods which, if full duties were paid on them, could legally cross the border. This is largely a reflection of high customs duties imposed by neighbouring states. Most traders appear to pay customs duties on part of the goods they carry across the border and then pay bribes to customs officials to let the rest of the load through. Others pay people to carry the goods across the border illegally (often at night). It also appears that there is some abuse of informal border crossing points. This however, is an issue for Customs and Excise and may, at least in part, reduce following the passing of the SADC Free Trade Protocol. Certainly facilitating the legal entry and exit for SADC traders is likely to encourage traders to pass through formal border crossing points and to have the proper documents. Then proper customs control can be exercised.

(x) Contributions to the SA Economy
These entrepreneurs make a significant contribution to the SA economy:

(aa) They promote the formal wholesale and retail sectors through the purchase of goods and thus indirectly promote employment.

(bb) They export goods which are targeted by SA's manufacturing strategy and thus indirectly promote employment.

(cc) They pay VAT on goods bought as most are bought in the retail and wholesale sectors.

(dd) They pay for food and accommodation in SA.

(ee) They travel on South African transporters, buses, taxis and Spoornet.

(ff) When visa fees are imposed (eg. Mozambique) they make an important contribution to the coffers of the Department of Home Affairs.

(gg) By providing income earning opportunities, employment and support to dependents they may indirectly reduce migration to SA of people looking for jobs.

(xi) Recommendations
(aa) A new temporary permit category should be introduced for individual small, medium and micro entrepreneurs involved in cross border trade - as recommended in the WP (p. 3).

(bb) The permit should be a renewable multiple entry visa/permit valid for a minimum period of three months. If a trader shows good faith, permits could be extended to six months.

(cc) The permit could be limited to citizens of SADC countries - and then if necessary extended to citizens of other (African) countries. Reciprocal arrangements (bi-lateral or multi-lateral) should be sought with other SADC states to facilitate the access of SA entrepreneurs to regional markets.

(dd) Such a permit would:

1 Reduce administrative costs to the Department.

2 Release officials to deal with more pressing migration concerns.

3 Recognise another of the reasons people enter South Africa on a temporary basis.

4 Remove the ambiguous visa status of small cross border traders.

5 Remove opportunities for corruption.

6 Improve the regulation and management of the system.

3. North-West: Mafikeng, Tuesday, 1 August 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Mr A Nebe, Chairperson: Cosatu North West; Mr S Mokoena, Secretary: Cosatu North West; Mr N Tikita, Ms J Mosola, Ms D Raphepe: Cosatu North West; Ms M A Khunwana, Standing Committee on Social Services, Arts, Culture and Sport; Mrs M Matladi, Standing Committee on Social Services, Arts, Culture and Sport; Mrs M M Bopolamo, Chairperson: Standing Committee on Education; Mr L C Sebogo, Deputy Director: Home Affairs, North West; Mr T Mockwaledi, Mr B E Madikwe, Ms P A Tlhone, Ms S M Bereng, Ms G F Mophulane, Mr T E Zondo, Mrs D R Maseng; Mr L K Malla, Ms M B Moraloge: Home Affairs, North West.

Presentations were made as follows:

(1) Mr S Mokoena, Secretary: Cosatu North West
Not all stakeholders attend public hearings and therefore the WP should follow the Nedlac route.

Farm workers in the North-West are being replaced by foreigners for lower wages.

Government has no control over the informal sector of street sellers.

The country's tax laws are not respected by migrants.

They do not fill in tax returns and there is no control over those who sell their goods in the street and they are evading the by-laws of the municipality.

Asylum seekers with section 41 permits are also tax evaders.

(2) Mr Mr A Nebe, Chairperson: Cosatu North West
There is no proper screening of persons with academic qualifications who enter SA.

Many people with false CV's enter SA.

Truckloads of unlawful goods come in through border posts and are sold illegally.

The selling of illegal goods is killing the SA industry.

The whole issue of border posts and proper control must be addressed.

Migration can not be stopped but there needs to be a mechanism by which to scan the qualifications of those who enter SA.

Skills that are needed should also be brought into our country in order to develop and create jobs.

The people who emigrate from SA are very well skilled and well qualified but those received by SA are not skilled.

An example of well skilled people that left SA are the nurses that leave for the United Kingdom.

A screening process must be done to let in skilled people and the screening should also be done to stop those with false qualifications.

(3) Mr Mr L C Sebogo, Deputy Director: Home Affairs, North West
Customs money and Value Added Tax (Vat) to be paid on incoming goods at border posts do not fall under Home Affairs but under Inland Revenue.

Inland Revenue, the SAPS and departmental officials are represented at border posts.

People from SADC countries enter SA borders and buy goods here. When they return to the SADC country that they come from they reclaim the Vat that they paid on the goods and then two days later they return to SA to sell the goods. When they return they do not have to pay customs in terms of SADC agreements.

(4) Mr Malla, Home Affairs: North West
Border patrol must be intensified as most illegal goods enter SA through this avenue.

Fraudulent marriages is also a big problem and is widely used to get residence.

The community control approach advocated by the WP could open the flood gates of corruption. SA's could black mail illegal foreigners in order not to report them to the IS.

4. Northern Province, Pietersburg: Wednesday, 2 August 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Professor M Nkondo, Vice Chancelor and Dean of Science and Technology: University of Venda; Professor A Musyoki, Faculty of Geography: University of Venda; Professor P Omara-Ojungu, Dean of Environmental Sciences and Professor of Geography: University of Venda; Mr P Mutandanyi, Lothava Legal Advice Office; Ms F Mautlana, Mohado Community Radio Station; Mr G Kganyago, SACP; Mr J Chiloane, COSATU Northern Province; Mr M G Holford, Democratic Party: Member of Provincial Legislature, Northern Province; Mr M Pataki, SACC: Northern Province; Mr E Mahbapala, Northern Province Legislature; Ms S Jane, Northern Province Legislature; Ms B Shingwenyane, NEHAWU; Ms W Manthata, Dentron TLC; Mr D Mashudu, SABC; Mr M Mogodi, ANC; Mr P Komane, ANC; Mr M A Maila, ANC

Presentations were made as follows:
(1) Professor M Nkondo, Vice Chancelor and Dean of Science and Technology: University of Venda

Professor Nkondo stated that the university was in broad agreement with the WP and that they also supported of the submission made by the Centre For Development and Enterprise (CDE) on the WP.

In the era of globalisation, it is good that the WP provides an opportunity of movement especially for highly skilled people.

The movement of highly skilled people is very prevalent especially in Africa. They only slightly disagree with CDE on this issue and is of the opinion that SA should not indiscriminately open the door for highly skilled people.

Support the idea of an IS as proposed in the WP.

Support the scrapping of counter productive administrative procedures as set out in the WP.

The policy as set out in the WP is also in broad agreement with the WP on Higher Education. Certain areas of the WP does however contradict the WP on Higher Education especially regarding human resource policy.

The WP does however not fully appreciate the exodus of skills from SA and this problem is extremely big.

The WP does not properly appreciate the impact that HIV and Aids will have on the human resources of SA.

Some restrictions imposed on foreign students may be discriminatory.

The WP must promote the impact of economic growth and unfortunately the WP makes no mention of the role of higher education in the development of human resources.

The University of Venda is restricted by some aspects of the WP. The current policy is discriminatory in the sense that it is impossible for the University to keep its foreign scholars for long periods of time. Scholars are given only 12 month permits that are renewable annually.

The University of Venda has shifted their curriculum in order to be more scientific. The curriculum is orientated towards agriculture, sciences, mining, mining-engineering and tourism etc.

The homeland education did not produce many highly skilled people and the few that there were have preferred to move away due to lucrative job offers and other reasons. The result is that the university has to attract skills from other countries. 51% of the Board of the Senate of the University of Venda is foreigners, mostly from Africa.

Recommend: if a university can prove that it could not find a suitably qualified person in SA, it should be allowed to appoint a person from another country.

The policy on permanent residency must be much more relaxed.

Higher education is crucial for Gear.

The more advantaged universities still boycott black universities.

To develop human resources, Gear and the economy the way should be opened for universities to recruit top scholars from other countries.

(2) Professor P Omara-Ojungu, Dean of Environmental Sciences and Professor of Geography: University of Venda
Concerned on a daily basis about being able to retain staff.

A Malawian that the university intended to appoint in the Environmental Assesment Unit waited nine months for his permits and eventually took another job.

The issue of delays in the issuing of permits and the high cost of work permits must be addressed.

At the moment it costs R1500 for a yearly renewable work permit, and additional costs have to be paid depending on the number of children one has. Work permits are granted on a yearly basis even if people get 3 to 5 years work contracts. Even the children's study permits must be renewed annually. Children are also charged foreign student fees at universities.

Foreigners are also not allowed to take certain courses at universities eg medicine.

In the America if you have permanent residence, then your children pay normal fees at universities.

In certain other countries, if you work there, you are almost treated as a citizen and only foreign students whose parents do not reside in that country pay higher fees.

Foreigners in SA are very frustrated.

(3) Professor M Nkondo, Vice Chancelor and Dean of Science and Technology: University of Venda
At advantaged universities some foreigners are appointed permanently.

Immigration have staff have to much discretion to apply.

Immigration staff say that they can only grant permanent residence once a person is permanently employed but the policy also says that a person can only be permanently employed once the person has permanent residency.

The challenge of the African Renaissance is to mobilise and network all resources in Africa for the betterment of life for all in Africa.

The work of universities can not be done if they have to put up with delays in the issuing and high fees of permits.

Work and study permits should be granted for the duration of the stay of the person and not just for a twelve month period.

Some Home Affairs offices should be opened to specialise in universities and other higher education institutions.

The current problems experienced are mostly not due to the policy framework but due to the implementation thereof.

(4) Professor A Musyoki, Faculty of Geography: University of Venda
Every year must re-apply for permits.

Permanent residency gives a degree of permanency especially regarding timeframes involved in research commitment.

Some areas of research takes years and a foreign academic needs to have the assurance of some permanency before being able to undertake and commit to research.

There are still many restrictions imposed by the WP and it needs to be refined a little more especially regarding foreigner policy in SA.

(5) Mr P Mutandanyi, Lothava Legal Advise Office
Lothava NGO advises on human rights issues and also deal with immigration issues. Lothava welcomes the community based approach to immigration as proposed in the WP and appreciates community involvement in immigration issues.

(6) Mr G Kganyago, SACP: Northern Province
Broadly in support of the WP.

Perception of most is that illegals are black.

Europeans are not often reported to be illegal.

Those who will enjoy the benefits of migration are mainly the skilled and the rich and it will not benefit the poor.

The use of the word "aliens" in the WP is very negative and reinforces certain existing stereotypes.

"Aliens" should be referred to as foreign nationals.

The administrative bodies to deal with immigration issues should be streamlined.

There is much corruption regarding passport scams etc.

The shift of emphasis to community control as proposed in the WP is welcome as a concept, but it should be qualified. A lot of training and capacitating would be needed for this approach to work.

The concept of community control generally concerns blacks and it will be difficult to identify white illegal foreigners as whites are not as social as blacks.

Can use the pigmentation and other physical attributes of a person to find out where he or she comes from but such application must be restricted.

Legislation should prevent the trade in people of which the recent British experience is a harsh example.

The administration competency should remain with the proper bodies and the community should just be the eyes and ears of those bodies.

Border control remains important and needs to be enhanced.

Cross border traders do not take SA's jobs as they do the jobs that SA's do not want to do.

There is a need to investigate those who sell illegal and sub-standard goods.

(7) Mr J Chiloane, COSATU: North-West
Employers prefer migrants as they work for lower wages.

The white police take no action as they are sympathetic to the farmers.

In some cases migrants are assaulted and murdered as they can not go to the police for protection as they are in the country illegaly.

Labour law should be equally applied to SA's and foreigners.

Cosatu will support the WP proposals if communities receive training.

5. Mpumalanga, Nelspruit: Thursday 3 August 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Ms A Mnisi, Deputy Mayor; T E Monareng, Home Affairs; P C Badenhorst, Home Affairs; Mr J Schreiber, Home Affairs; C Steinmann, Home Affairs; Mr P Matshiane, Mdutjana TLC; Mr D Mathebula, Top Star Taxi Association; P Nkosi, Top Star Taxi Association; S A Mthetwa, Top Star Taxi Association; R M Karasevich, Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature; Mr J Maseko, Immigrants Control Board; Mr S Ndaba; Mr M Nkosi, Driefontein Taxi Association; Mr M Mabasa, Driefontein Taxi Association; Mr A P Madonsela, Driefontein Taxi Association; S M Mtsweni, Mdutjana TLC; M S Huba, Badplaas TLC; F D Nkosi, Elukwatini TLC; F R Ndlovu, Badplaas TLC, G S Siwela, PAC Mpumalanga; T W Ngoma, Home Affairs; J Maseko, Home Affairs; A Mofokeng, Home Affairs; P B Sibanyoni, Home Affairs; C Tomlinson, Business; S Dlamini, Social Services; M Manzizni, Social Services; R J van Wyk, Home Affairs; M du Messir, Home Affairs; H Nelson, Home Affairs; A H B Bothma, Home Affairs; H J Le Roux, Home Affairs; N N Mvubelo, Mayoress: Ogies TLC; G Van Rensburg; C J Du Preez, SAPS: Border Police; P Mlangeni, Graskop TLC; G Mtombela; E P Nkosi, Badplaas TLC; S Radebe, Elukwatini TLC; M Chembeni, Komatipoort TLC; K Mzizi, Federation For Economic Entrepreneurs; C A Smit, Wakkerstroom TLC; F B Louw, Wakkerstroom TLC; S Sifunda, PAC; E Mhlangu, Immigration Selection Board; A Wright, Wits Refugee Research Programme; J P Uthuli; J Mbongane, International Relations; A Malefo, Mdutjana TLC; G Mthimunye, Mdutjana TLC; R S S Zitha, Home Affairs; N R Mahlakoane, SANDF

Presentations were made as follows:

(1) Mr C Tomlinson, Organised Business: Mpumalanga
The more jobs that are created the more people flock to the area and the WP does not indicate how this problem should be addressed.

The WP states that illegals should not be employed, but big businesses and some farmers are the biggest culprits.

Mpumalanga at the receiving end of illegals - big problem.

(2) Mr G S Siwela, PAC: Mpumalanga
Some form of affirmative action should be introduced in immigration.

(3) Mr J Mbungane
Understand the IS and how it will function but are concerned about budgetary problems as the civil service is already bloated.

(4) Ms M Chembeni, Komatipoort TLC
Appreciate the shift to communities as proposed in the WP.

Influx of illegals should be minimised and therefore need an immediate facility for municipality to facilitate cross-border trade.

We can go to Maamba without documents but traders from Maamba have difficulties to come to SA without documents.

Want the free flow of people within a 60 kilometre radius and in urgent need of an arrangement to get free flow across borders.

Intend to create economic opportunities across borders in order to limit push and pull factors of immigration.

The WP (p 35 paragraph 14.3) is discriminatory as the poor can not give financial proof in order to get a relative to come and visit.

(5) Mr J Vilakazi, Commissioner: Public Service Commission
Speaks as one from the area.

Saw in past how whites from other countries were advantaged.

Regarding the WP shift of emphasis to a community based approach, can not say either or, need border control and community involvement.

Need to build capacity in communities.

A law that will transfer enforcement to communities without education will increase xenophobia.

Farmers employ Mozambicans at lower rates and exploit them.

The farming community must be accountable.

Should welcome economic development in SADC and continent.

Need initiatives that is governed by a legislative framework.

Need interdepartmental co-operation that will recognise interdependence of SADC countries.

(6) Mr P Matshiane, Mdutjana TLC
Illegals kill our people.

The IS must be implemented at local level and will provide employment opportunity for people.

Communities should be educated in looking for illegals and what immigrants papers and documents should look like.

Should not abolish the existing Immigration Review Board and should rather review the functions thereof.

(7) Ms D Phiri, Traditional Healers Organisation
Some people, especially the elderly from Swaziland, have two passports (one for Swaziland and one for SA) and come to SA to collect pensions and then return to Swaziland. The IS should also monitor such people.

(8) Mr R Zita, Acting Regional Director: Home Affairs
The Swaziland border came to be after people were already settled in the area and the border has now divided the people. Many of those who now fall on the Swazi side of the border, had SA identity documents, and also recently changed their identity documents to the new ones. That is why they can now claim SA pensions.

These communities are now divided by the border and you find a situation where the community on the SA side of the border pay allegiance to a chief who resides on the Swazi side of the border.

The situation along the Mozambican and Swazi borders are difficult as Home Affairs officials are stationed only at border posts and not along the fences.

Even the issue of late registration of births leaves the door open for abuse.

(9) Captain N Mahlakoane, Military Intelligence: SANDF
Communities were divided when the Mozambican fence was shifted. People from the Mozambican side of the fence will approach a Chief on the SA side and he will agree to give them settlement.

Many Swazi children cross the border daily to come to school in SA and the Swazi fence is not even electrified.

Mbazini area is a problem area. In that area the Chief is on the SA side of the fence but many of his subjects live on the Swazi side of the fence.

The Mozambican border has shifted and this creates problems for communities.

(10) Mr J Schreiber, Home Affairs Officer in charge at a border post
Must enforce departmental policy and can not use discretion when to enforce and when not to.

Personally wonder if SA is really ready for free movement across borders.

9000 Mozambicans are deported per month.

The WP does not address the problem of people who come and take work from SA residents.

The WP should look at means of putting intergovernmental structures in place.

Most illegals enter SA through fences. 300 to 400 school children cross the border daily to get education in SA. At Mbuzini there was even a taxi rank to transport these children to school.

Clothes are also brought in and sold in SA.

The visa and permit function should remain with the department and should not become a function of local governments.

6. KwaZulu-Natal, Durban: Friday 4 August 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Dr R Kishun, Director: International Office, University of Natal; Mr J Khoza, COSATU: KwaZulu-Natal; Ms L More, Regional Educator: COSATU; Mr S Magurdie, Durban Refugee Forum; Advocate F S Lockhat, Immigration Consultant: Lockhat & Associates; Mr P Ndlovu, Administration Officer: Home Affairs; Mr C Seretse, National Consortium on Refugee Affairs (NCRA); Ms L Jacobs, NCRA and Durban Refugee Forum; Ms G Kunene, IFP; Mrs S I Khuzwayo: IFP

Presentations were made as follows:

(1) Dr R Kishun, Director: International Office, University of Natal
Per annum there are 15 000 to 20 000 foreign students from more tnat 70 countries that study at SA universities and technicons.

Such international interaction should be encouraged. Foreign students are desirable as they provide a good source of income for tertiary institutions and they also provide SA students with the opportunity to interact with people from abroad.

In 1997 Australia made 9 billion dollars from foreign students. It is estimated that in 1998 SA made R200 million from the parents of foreign students who came to visit. This situation contributes to job creation.

Strongly propose a separate section to the WP that will exclusively deal with tertiary institutions and how the flow of foreign students and academics will be regulated.

Short term students should get multiple entry visas. A three year permit should also be granted to students as opposed to the current one year permit.

In many instances SA universities lack skills, and need the services of foreign academics for short periods of time (up to three months). Such academics also need multiple entry visas, but current policy states that a person can not work when granted with a short term visiting permit.

SA higher education institutions need to appoint foreign academics in many research areas as the necessary skills are lacking in SA. The problem is that it takes very long for the needed permits to be granted.

The academic sector in SA strongly rejects the WP proposal to shift to community participation in immigration control. This will advocate xenophobia. Universities do have registration mechanisms in place to see if SA or foreigner. When a illegal foreigner is encountered the university can not run to the IS as this can become a very dangerous practice.

The whole issue of HIV and Aids should also be taken into account in dealing with a new migration policy.

(2) Mr J Khoza, COSATU: KwaZulu-Natal
All workers, including foreigners, enjoy similar rights according to the law.

Migration policy must be cautious of a drop in labour standards.

The IS and the Department of Labour should ensure that migrants are on the same level as SA's.

Cosatu is not against seasonal workers.

There is a high employment rate of illegals in KwaZulu-Natal, especially in the sugar plantations. Such illegals are also exploited by employers as some are not given wages but work only for food. Many illegals are also employed in the security industry.

The WP favours only skilled foreign workers. The capacity and resources to implement the WP proposals is questionable.

Government should investigate the many illegal goods that cross the country's borders.

Immigrants should be treated with respect and Cosatu is against the exploitation of immigrants. The presence of illegal foreigners should not be a door-way for SA farmers to break the law.

(3) Mr S Magurdie, Durban Refugee Forum
Fundamentally opposed to the WP proposal that communities should help to trace illegal immigrants. There is no reason to place such a duty on the public, especially such a legal duty. The WP provides a licence to xenophobia.

One should however make a distinction between a witch-hunt and a school or a hospital insisting on proper documents before allowing people access to the service being rendered.

Fraudulent marriages are on the increase but the problem is that the relevant Act should be properly administered in dealing with this problem. The departmental officials do not apply the law. Departmental officials are ignorant of the law and the Constitution. Officials must receive training on how to properly administer the law and the Constitution.

(4) Advocate F S Lockhat, Immigration Consultant: Lockhat & Associates
Against the WP proposal to shift to community based immigration control. Presently there is a major flaw in immigration policy and a lot of abuse and most immigration officers have no culture of human rights.

The Department of Home Affairs has no respect for judicial decisions and flagrant violations of human rights occur on a regular basis. The department also has too much discretion.

In favour of immigration courts as proposed in the WP.

(5) Mr P Ndlovu, Administration Officer: Home Affairs
To deal with immigration issues can be very frustrating.

If an illegal is deported today he or she will return tomorrow.

More control is needed over illegal immigrants.

When people are deported they should not be dropped at the borders.

Fraudulent marriages are widely used by foreigners to get residence and a mechanism to regulate such marriages is needed.

(6) Mrs J N Vilakazi, IFP: Select Commitee on Social Services
The proposed shift in the WP to a community based approach to immigration control will create a flood of corruption. A proper mechanism must be in place to stop illegal immigrants at SA borders.

7. Free State, Bloemfontein: Monday, 7 August 2000
The following persons were in attendance:

Ms S Mamashio, Free State Legislature; Ms L Ntsoele, Free State Legislature; Ms T van der Berg, NCOP Liaison Officer: Free State; Mr K Smit, NNP; Mr N Venter, Internantional Administration Office: University of the Orange Free State (UOFS), International Education Association of South Africa; Dr M Wolvaardt, Director: Office of International Affairs, Technicon of the Orange Free State; Mr S Mashinini, COSATU: Northern Cape and Free State

Presentations were made as follows:

(1) Mr N Venter, Internantional Administration Office: University of the Orange Free State, International Education Association of South Africa
Higher education should be dealt with under a separate heading in the WP.

Academics and students who enter from abroad rarely comply with WP proposals. Such visitors can sometimes not be catered for under work or study permits or under normal visas.

Sometimes foreign students need to enroll at more than one campus, but study permits are only valid for one institution. To change institution the foreign student has to go back to his/her country of origin.

A further problem is that students receive study permits in their country of origin and when they arrive in SA, it is very difficult for them to correct the permit if it does not comply with all legislative prescriptions.

SADC students have limited funds, but foreign students are not allowed to work, they may not even do waiting like their SA counterparts. This should be addressed. In America foreign students are allowed to work a limited number of hours per week. Such an arrangement should seriously be considered in SA especially for SADC students who have limited funds.

The UOFS has 545 foreign students.

The situation is also complicated for students who want to come to SA for less than three months. The departments of Home Affairs, Education, Labour, Foreign Affairs and Finance need to communicate and work together.

Foreign Affairs will issue a study permit to a student from Lesotho but when the student arrives here there might be problems with his/her medical insurance and how much is needed.

The SADC protocol was signed by the Department of Education. Home Affairs and Foreign Affairs should take note of this and many problems will be solved.

Do not object to assisting the IS but this will be very difficult in practice.

(2) Mr S Mashinini, Cosatu: Northern Cape and Free State
Much confusion exists around the WP process and after the public hearings the WP should be adjusted where necessary.

The development of a non-racial immigration policy is very important and should be guided by a set of principles, as follows:

(a) Governments of Southern African states must agree to enforce labour standards that do not hinder the interests of workers. Migrant workers should have a right to join trade unions; be allowed to transfer their wages to their home countries; be guaranteed insurance, provident and pension payments even after the worker has returned to its country of origin.

(b) A summit of Southern African governments and trade unions should be held in order to develop a migration policy as part of a broader regional economic development strategy.

(c) Through effective legal guarantees of equal wages and working conditions for South African migrant labour, migrant policy must avoid a situation where employment of foreign workers leads to the erosion of labour standards and a deterioration of the conditions of all workers in South Africa.

(d) There should be a fair and proper control of entry of migrant workers into South Africa and clear distinctions made between traders, migrant workers, tourists, students, etc. Migrant policy should ensure humane treatment and promote the formalisation of workers coming to South Africa.

(e) An agreed number of migrants from neighbouring SADC countries should be allowed to access to the South African labour market and heavy penalties should be imposed on employers who employ illegal workers. In the long term, freedom of movement, residence and employment can be achieved in South Africa.

(f) Immigration policies aimed at attracting skilled workers must not jeopardise the priority of developing skills in the SA work force and the Department of Labour's programme for improved skills training should not be compromised on the basis that attempts are being made to attract skilled labour from foreign countries.

The WP should have a section on general principles which could serve as a yardstick to measure its policy recommendations.

(i) Philosophical Orientation of the WP
The WP does not provide a coherent immigration policy. For example, it does not clearly indicate how it advances the RDP or growth and development. The WP also assumes that where the State lacks the capacity, it can be readily solicited from the private sector, without first ascertaining whether the capacity exists in the private sector.

The WP should be re-organised and more structured and should include a discussion on gender and migration issues.

(ii) Policy and Legislative Context
The WP should address the vision outlined in the RDP and must take into account sectoral policies and their interaction with immigration/migration issues. In addition, the section on Constitutional review must be revisited to address the gaps in the WP, especially the issue of second socio-economic rights in relation to the Promotion of Equality Act. The WP must also look at international and regional treaties and the obligations imposed on SA, in order to give direction on issues such as labour migration.

(iii) Migration and the Labour Market
Paragraph 4.4.5 should be deleted from the WP as it creates confusion as to whether immigration policy would reinforce labour standards or attempt to satisfy the demands of market forces for a two-tier labour market. In addition, all formulations suggesting the waiving of minimum labour standards for migrant workers must be deleted.

The issuing of visas and permits should be retained by the IS and not be delegated to business as suggested in the WP. The WP also outlines that in order to obtain a corporate work permit, an employer has to apply to the Department of Labour for a certificate ensuring that the employer will comply with labour legislation. This should be reassessed as it creates unnecessary red tape.

The WP laments the continuous brain drain of skilled workers from SA, but does not suggest a framework to address the problem. The Cabinet Human Resource development cluster should be tasked with drawing up a comprehensive and integrated human resource development strategy in order to develop strategies to retain and develop skills in areas of shortage. Co-ordination between the Immigration Review Board, the Department of Labour and the National Skills Authority is imperative as they are tasked with skills priorities for South Africa.

As opposed to paragraph 8.6.2 of the WP, all employers must pay the Skills Development Levy, as in line with the Skills Development Act. The National Skills Fund is entitled to 20% of the levy, which in turn is aimed at funding nationally determined priorities. The issue of payment to the National Skills Fund to ensure that employment of foreigners is marginally expensive and contribute towards skills development, should be placed before the National Skills Authority for discussion.

The system of compulsory deferred pay must be ended.

The WP must clarify temporary status of foreign workers and how the system will operate. While the WP does not address the issue, Cosatu strongly feels that foreign workers should not be required to periodically renew permits as this would be a disincentive to invest in SA.

(iv) Regional Development
The WP should set out a framework that will guide SA's contribution on the evolving SADC migration protocol. The protocol as well as issues of quotas should be tabled at Nedlac for discussion.

Departments such as Home Affairs should contribute to the SADC development strategy by setting out a clear regional migration strategy.

(v) Enforcement
The IS should act as co-ordinator in pulling together the various government departments that are dealing with migration issues. A Charter of Rights should be drawn up to highlight the rights of immigrants and also reconcile the difference in orientation between the Departments of Labour and Home Affairs. Rather than advocate for privatisation, the WP should focus on mechanisms to build the capacity of the IS. In addition, representatives on the Immigration Review Board should be appointed on the basis of their expertise rather than the constituency they belong to.

Apartheid terminology, such as "aliens" should be removed from the WP. Well-trained officials of the IS should be made responsible for the enforcement of immigration policy and legislation.

(3) Dr M Wolvaardt, Director: Office of International Affairs, Technicon of the Orange Free State
Some exchange students come to SA for less than three months and their fees are paid at their home institution. Part of the curriculum is to get practical experience for about six weeks. The bulk of their time as a student is spent at the work site of the employer where do practical work. The student is evaluated by the employer and these marks are used by the home institution. The student does not work for a salary but receivs a nominal fee to cover his/her accomodation. The question is whether that student should have a student permit, study permit or work permit. The WP is unclear about the sort of permit such a person would require.

8. Conference titled - Migration Control in the 21st Century: the "South African perspective, held by the Ministry on 6 and 7 July 2000
As far as the conference is concerned, the Committee would like to mention that-

(1) the conference was hosted by the Ministry;
(2) the Committee resolved to participate in the conference in the capacity as observers as we were in the middle of Public Hearings on the WP; and
(3) during the deliberations it was mentioned that a draft Immigration Bill was already formulated. Some speakers stated that confusion arose, as the Committee was dealing with the WP but the Department was simultaneously dealing with the draft Bill on Immigration. It was thus suggested that to clear the confusion that was created by the parallel process, a new WP should be drafted.

D. Preliminary Conclusion
The Committee found the exercise of conducting Public Hearings to be very empowering. The Committee also approached this exercise with a great degree of openness. We were pleasantly surprised by the high degree of participation, interest, enthusiasm, concern and the high level of sophistication shown by the SA electorate. The overriding lesson to us as politicians is that we should never take the electorate for granted! The Committee is humbled by the input from the public and is of the opinion that this exercise was justified and will go a long way in giving the Ministry, Cabinet and Parliament direction so that the legislation that results from this process should, as far as possible, take on board what was reflected by the public.

As indicated earlier, the final Report will follow after Parliament resumes on 11 September. This will contain, inter alia, the views of the Committee and the source documents of the submissions.