27 Feb 2013

Parliament on Friday rejected a motion by Shoshong MP, Mr Phillip Makgalemele to develop a beneficiation law for Botswana.

In his submission, Mr Makgalemele argued that the country had lost revenue in the absence of a well-packaged law on beneficiation.

He said given the importance of beneficiation, it was crucial that there should be a law in place. The legislator said the law would provide a framework to transform the country’s abundant minerals and other resources to a competitive advantage.

Furthermore, he argued that a beneficiation law would also enhance quality and quantity of exports, diversification of the economy and promote creation of employment.

While most MPs agreed in principle with beneficiation as a way of growing the economy and creating jobs, some said a policy would be more appropriate instead of a law.   

At the end of the debate, MPs voted on the issue and 23 legislators voted against the motion, 19 for the motion whilst one MP abstained.     

Some MP’s criticised the motion, saying it was not prudent to develop a law before a policy document which could help to clarify the intended law.

Tati East MP, Mr Samson Guma said it would be disastrous for Botswana to enact a beneficiation law while still trying to grow and diversify the economy.

“This is a recipe for disaster if we are going to pass this law because we are an importing country and a landlocked country,” Mr Guma observed.

He argued that the proposed law should have been targeted at specific sectors of the economy that have shown growth and economic progress.  He opposed the motion, stressing that the proposed beneficiation law was too broad and would negatively affect the economy.

Vice President, Dr Ponatshego Kedikilwe said there was no major difference in respect to the proposed law or policy, but just in the approach.  He said government had been cautious and pragmatic in its approach to the issue, saying the approach should be maintained until the nation was more informed.

Making reference to the minerals investment company, Dr Kedikilwe stressed the need for a clear review to ensure a full package that would grow the economy whether in tourism or on the economic diversification drive.

He said the call for a policy on beneficiation would also help to scrutinise other pieces of legislation that the country already has for purposes of beneficiation and growing the economy for maximum derivable benefit.

Mahalapye West MP, Mr Bernard Bolele also criticised Mr Makgalemele’s motion, stressing the need for a policy first to highlight what would work for the country. He said a policy would help identify and define sectors of the economy that urgently need a beneficiation law. 

Mr Bolele further cautioned MPs that if they persisted in driving citizen economic empowerment, the country would run the risk of restricting itself to jobs which locals do not have expertise in.

“It is not prudent for a law to pass before it is grounded by a policy,” Mr Bolele stressed.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, Mr Phandu Skelemani said Parliament should give itself time to think through the issue of beneficiation with a policy before bringing a law. He said in the past, Parliament passed laws without a pre-requisite of a policy because they clearly knew what they were up against. “When we still confuse citizen economic empowerment with beneficiation then we still have a problem,” Mr Skelemani observed.

In earlier debates, the Minister of Trade and Industry, Ms Dorcas Makgato-Malesu had argued that a beneficiation law would scare away potential investors who would not be interested in beneficiation.

She requested MPs to strike a balance through a strategy which could be negotiated, noting that it was good to have a policy as a first step before developing a law.

The Minister of Finance and Development Planning, Mr Kenneth Matambo had also preferred the passing of a policy with a view to developing a law later. Mr Matambo had argued that there was need to go on a stage by stage approach before passing a law given the country’s level of development. However, Mr Makgalemele maintained that having a law instead of a policy was important.

After Parliament rejected his motion, Mr Makgalemele expressed disappointment, stressing that though there was fear that the proposed law could scare potential investors, none of the MPs gave substantial evidence on countries which had passed the same law and had scared investors. He thanked MPs who supported his motion as initially brought before Parliament. ENDS