AA loan debate strikes racial tone

EMOTIONS ran high and tempers flared in the National Assembly on Tuesday as Monitor Action Group leader Kosie Pretorius claimed that the Affirmative Action Loan Scheme for emerging farmers was unconstitutional.

Pretorius had the House on fire from the beginning, alleging that there was no historic motivation for the introduction of the scheme in the first place and that it was failing in its aim of motivating well-off communal farmers to become productive commercial farmers. “The intention of the AALS in 1991 was to help the already rich black farmer and not the poor,” Pretorius charged.For 45 minutes Pretorius tried the patience of his colleagues, getting one back up after another, as parliamentarians viewed his comments as racially insensitive.Pretorius’ debate become progressively disjointed as MPs interjected continually to counter his arguments.The National Assembly is currently debating a report from the Parliamentary Standing Committee Economics, Natural Resources and Public Administration which proposes several changes to the scheme.”Its findings and recommendations may create new problems that may be… even unconstitutional, unfair and not financially affordable or reachable,” Pretorius said.MAG’s sole representative in parliament irked fellow MPs when he claimed that Article 23 of the Constitution related to the advancement of all people – irrespective of colour – who had been disadvantaged in the past because of discriminatory laws or practices.Finance Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila interjected, charging that “those who were discriminated against were the blacks, period”.Pretorius claimed that past discrimination was based on financial and economic affordability and not colour.To this Deputy Minister of Higher Education Buddy Wentworth exclaimed: “You’re, insensitive.Do you think that what you are doing is in the interest of national reconciliation? But Pretorius persisted in his argument, questioning the legality of the AA scheme.Citing the opinions of lawyers of the Constituent Assembly on affirmative action and the processes that needed to be followed to incorporate it into law, Pretorius maintained that Cabinet had acted out of its legislative power to introduce the scheme without the consent of parliament.Pretorius requested the Attorney General to clarify the legality of the scheme.He said the “issue has become a time bomb in more than one sense and it will increase and become more emotional up to the election in November this year”.There was no stopping Pretorius who maintained that he was being misunderstood by his colleagues.He said he was “surprised and disappointed” that he was viewed as having taken a racial slant to the debate.”I believe that most of the unhappiness today is because people do not understand the financial working of the State machinery.The hard fact is that the State cannot give with the one hand, without taking with other hand,” Pretorius said on a recommendation of the committee that Government regulate the price of farm land.This remark aggravated Information and Broadcasting Minister Nangolo Mbumba who asked Pretorius how it could be expected that people who were excluded from State affairs would understand the processes.”What kind of epitaph are you creating for yourself? Here you stand the last defender of apartheid in the Namibian Government,” he said.Fisheries and Marine Resources Minister Abraham Iyambo was so insulted by Pretorius’ remarks that he asked Speaker Mose Tjitendero to invoke a House rule to have him removed from the House.Tjitendero warned Pretorius that he was “defending the indefensible” and “making the temperatures of the members rise”.Pretorius was allowed one final comment – to disagree with a recommendation for AALS beneficiaries to be exempt from land tax – before Tjitendero ruled him out of time.”The intention of the AALS in 1991 was to help the already rich black farmer and not the poor,” Pretorius charged.For 45 minutes Pretorius tried the patience of his colleagues, getting one back up after another, as parliamentarians viewed his comments as racially insensitive.Pretorius’ debate become progressively disjointed as MPs interjected continually to counter his arguments.The National Assembly is currently debating a report from the Parliamentary Standing Committee Economics, Natural Resources and Public Administration which proposes several changes to the scheme.”Its findings and recommendations may create new problems that may be… even unconstitutional, unfair and not financially affordable or reachable,” Pretorius said.MAG’s sole representative in parliament irked fellow MPs when he claimed that Article 23 of the Constitution related to the advancement of all people – irrespective of colour – who had been disadvantaged in the past because of discriminatory laws or practices.Finance Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila interjected, charging that “those who were discriminated against were the blacks, period”.Pretorius claimed that past discrimination was based on financial and economic affordability and not colour.To this Deputy Minister of Higher Education Buddy Wentworth exclaimed: “You’re, insensitive.Do you think that what you are doing is in the interest of national reconciliation? But Pretorius persisted in his argument, questioning the legality of the AA scheme.Citing the opinions of lawyers of the Constituent Assembly on affirmative action and the processes that needed to be followed to incorporate it into law, Pretorius maintained that Cabinet had acted out of its legislative power to introduce the scheme without the consent of parliament.Pretorius requested the Attorney General to clarify the legality of the scheme.He said the “issue has become a time bomb in more than one sense and it will increase and become more emotional up to the election in November this year”.There was no stopping Pretorius who maintained that he was being misunderstood by his colleagues.He said he was “surprised and disappointed” that he was viewed as having taken a racial slant to the debate.”I believe that most of the unhappiness today is because people do not understand the financial working of the State machinery.The hard fact is that the State cannot give with the one hand, without taking with other hand,” Pretorius said on a recommendation of the committee that Government regulate the price of farm land.This remark aggravated Information and Broadcasting Minister Nangolo Mbumba who asked Pretorius how it could be expected that people who were excluded from State affairs would understand the processes.”What kind of epitaph are you creating for yourself? Here you stand the last defender of apartheid in the Namibian Government,” he said.Fisheries and Marine Resources Minister Abraham Iyambo was so insulted by Pretorius’ remarks that he asked Speaker Mose Tjitendero to invoke a House rule to have him removed from the House.Tjitendero warned Pretorius that he was “defending the indefensible” and “making the temperatures of the members rise”.Pretorius was allowed one final comment – to disagree with a recommendation for AALS beneficiaries to be exempt from land tax – before Tjitendero ruled him out of time.