 Mr. Speak, what kind of people are we dealing with here? What kind of human beings are we dealing with here? The very decent thing is to own up and say, Ta kangi wa, we are felt because that is the truth. And there's no shame in admitting failure. When you start blaming God in English is called blasphemy. And this is where I started my debate from, that I found this presidential speech extremely blasphemous. Sacreligious, having no respect for sacred human being. Sacreligious, whoever did this for the president is diminishing his chances of entering the kingdom of heaven. Because blasphemy is blasphemy, is one of the greatest sins. You cannot blame God for your own inefficiencies. Explain to me, the president talked about water. He talked about water sources. Mr. Speaker, I would like all the ministers who are here, all the MPs who are here, all the judicial officers who are here, all the eminent people who have benefited from forest number 27 to own up and give it back because that's what the president said. In Kenya, some people were adventurous. They went and built on a water aquifer. President Uhuru Kenyata showed leadership who those are when they dropped them. Let me tell you now. Everything that you're doing is an exercise in futility. On the first day of Mr. Hichilema being sworn in, we are coming to demolish those houses down there in 21. That's what's going to happen. You can sit. Order. Order. Order. I mentioned yesterday. For outsiders, let's not bring them in. Continue. When we come into power in 2021, we are coming with bulldozers to drop all the houses that you are building there at the aquifer. It is not enough. This place here, where there is East Park, was one of the water aquifers which is destroyed. You can go and see there. You brought shop rights in order to create jobs for South Africans. The South Africans are the same ones who are now doing genophobic attacks on your own citizens. Greetings, ladies and gentlemen, fellow environmentalists. One of the hottest environmental stories we've had this year, 2019, is the story surrounding Forest 27. Forest 27 is a forest found in Yosaka, East. Portions of Forest 27 have been partially degazeted. When we talk about partially degazeting a forest, that implies portions of it are subdivided and the use of those portions is changed from the original use, which in this case is used as a forest, to use as either a residential area or a commercial plot. I need to clarify one point. If you check a lot of stories online, you will notice that a lot of stories mention that the entire forest has been degazeted. The truth of the matter is the majority of the forest is still a protected area. The only difference is that portions of it have been partially degazeted, subdivided for other uses. There is one other point we need to talk about that I think is important for all of us as Zambians and residents of Lusaka. You will notice that the very first subdivision or partial degazation took place in the year 2017. The second one took place in the year 2018. The third one, which is the latest one, took place in the year 2019. These three are covered by statutory instruments 62, 59 and 13 respectively. You will notice that when the partial degazation was done in the year 2017 and 2018, only a few people spoke about it, a few NGOs and a few individuals. But suddenly when the third allocation of residential plots took place in the year 2019, everyone talked about it. And why did everyone talk about it? Because of the people that were rumored to be connected to those plots. Now I cannot confirm whether those individuals actually received those plots or not. But the question I have to ask everyone is, are we concerned about the people receiving the plots or we are concerned about damage being done to the forest? Is the implication therefore that we won't say anything if we ourselves are beneficiaries of those plots? There is a problem if we only criticize something that's happening of personalities or politics. Our main concern is supposed to be the environmental aspect. When these portions of the forest are changed in terms of land use, what will the impact be to the environment and to all of us as residents of Lusaka and to all of us as Zambians? So in continuing with this particular topic, I would like now to go ahead and look at Forest 27. What we have here is a sketch of Lusaka. So you have the surface of Lusaka and you have this aquifa zone down here and you have a bedrock. Forest 27 is located there, protecting what's referred to as a recharge zone. Forest 26, which is a forest that was completely degazated. Part of it was turned into the Lusaka South multi-facility economic zone and another portion was turned into the Lusaka National Park. So you will notice that when Lusaka was originally being planned, when these forests were being established before independence, the reason why the forests were established was so that they protect what are referred to as recharge zones. What are recharge zones? Recharge zones are portions of the aquifa layer which is made up of permeable rock, limestone. When we talk about permeable rock, we talk about a rock that water can actually pekolet through, water can actually pass through. So this permeable rock, this limestone, it surfaces in certain areas in Lusaka and these areas where it surfaces are the ones that are referred to as recharge zones. So forests were established where these recharge zones are so that those recharge zones are protected. Why are they protected? Because the recharge zones are sensitive to degradation and sensitive to pollution. So when we give the example of forest 26 which is completely degazeted, you will notice that the quantity of water that recharges through the aquifa layer has been reducing because of the damage done to a portion of the forest. The area where we have the Mephres project is now mostly a concrete ecosystem. That means rain water cannot pekolet going downwards into the aquifa zone and collecting as part of the underground water the way it used to. The majority of Lusaka is on top of a bedrock. This bedrock is an impameable rock. That means water cannot penetrate through. This impameable rock comes up to the surface in certain parts of Lusaka. The areas such as Makeni, Kanyama, Chiwolia, Misisi, John Lenn, Jack, John Howard to mention just a few. The other areas have got soil on top but if you dig through the soil you will still come across this particular bedrock. The bedrock is the reason why during the rainy season when you just have one hour of heavy rainfall majority of Lusaka will be waterlogged because the water will collect right on the surface just after it saturates this soil layer. So it's impossible for the water to get to the aquifa layer and recharge the underground water system because of this particular bedrock. The only points through which the water can recharge the underground water system is through the recharge zones. You will notice that when we talk about the water table the water table is actually found in this same aquifa layer. That means when anyone in Lusaka is drilling a boho their aim is to get to this aquifa layer and hit the water table. That's when that particular boho will be able to have water. But because of the disturbances we've had to Forest 26 and partial disturbances we've had to Forest 27 because of the subdivisions and also because of Chaco Baining which is taking place there the quantity of water that goes underground has been reducing. So you will notice if you visit any people in Chalala area Woodlands extension or Maken the farming area of Maken you will notice that the bohos don't have water throughout the year those that have water throughout the year will have very little water as you head towards the hot dry season. Reduction in water is because of the water table that is continuously rescinding because of the disturbances to the forests. So the question we need to ask ourselves is if Forest 27 was established to protect a recharge zone for the underground water for Lusaka is it a good idea for us to now allocate portions of that forest to individuals for residential plots? The answer to that is yes and no Yes it is a good idea to empower Zambians with land Every Zambian is entitled to land and they have the right to acquire land and develop structures on that particular piece of land The problem comes in when the development of that land compromises the benefit for the majority of Lusaka residents and the majority of Zambians Is it a good idea for a few people to gain plots but the rest of Lusaka loses out on the ecosystem services that can be drawn from the forest? I do not think so Why should the forest be preserved like we've mentioned already it protects a recharge zone There are many recharge zones in Lusaka but amongst the two biggest we have are the ones that are found where Forest 27 is and where Forest 26 used to be allocated I must mention that a portion of Forest 26 was turned into the Lusaka National Park That was an excellent idea because by turning it into an international park you notice that it continues to protect the vegetation and the vegetation continues to protect the recharge zone The only challenge we have the only challenge we have is with the rest of the forest that was turned into the Mefez project The second benefit we get from Forest 27 is the fact that this forest protects the source of the Chalimbana River The Chalimbana River has its source in Forest 27 Apart from having the source the forest itself acts as a water catchment area for the river It's some kind of water or river basin When we talk about a river basin we're talking about an area where rainfall falls and that area collects the water and lets it pour into streams and the river itself This river, Chalimbana River pulls its waters into the Chongwe River and the Chongwe River pulls its waters into the Zambezi River and just before it pulls its waters into the Zambezi River it interacts with the Lower Zambezi National Park So it has an important role to play in terms of supporting biodiversity in the national parks and supporting local farmers and commercial farmers right along the Chalimbana itself Chongwe and eventually the Zambezi River So at the end of the day the question we need to ask ourselves ladies and gentlemen is they were being established for a specific reason and that is to give us certain environmental services There are people that will ask the question why should we care whether Forest 27 is erased We can always plant two trees for every tree that we cut down Yes, that point is valid if you are talking about the function of trees in terms of absorbing carbon dioxide and also giving oxygen to the rest of us But when you talk about the role of this forest in protecting recharge zones the recharge zones are only found in specific areas So if you damage the trees that protect those recharge zones it doesn't matter how many trees you plant anywhere else the damage done to the recharge zones is permanent So you and I ladies and gentlemen have a responsibility to protect these natural resources We have a responsibility to talk to our local authorities to talk to our MPs and to talk to all major stakeholders all politicians to request the president to do everything in his power to protect these forests that we have One last point I would like to mention is a point connected to climate change Right now you will notice that we have a lot of Lord Shedding and the reason why we are having Lord Shedding is because of the water levels in the Zambezi that are very low by implication the water levels in the Karibadama also low and the majority of the explanations talk about climate change being the cause Climate change is a very broad term there are so many examples of climate change when we talk about climate change in connection to low water levels in rivers what we are really talking about is reduced quantities of rainfall Rainfall is a component of weather and also a component of climate when that component of weather and climate changes then what you end up having is climate change why is the rainfall pattern affected because we are harvesting too many trees in sensitive areas if we look at the Zambezi River itself if we look at the source in northwestern province there is a lot of damage taking place to the trees that make up part of the water catchment area for the Zambezi River when you disturb the trees you disturb the hydrological cycle or what's known as the rainfall cycle so we should give a face to the problem it's not just climate change the problem is actually deforestation when we harvest these trees at rates that are not sustainable we cause damage to the river basin to the water catchment area and once that damage is done the amount of water that can be collected and brought into the Zambezi River drastically reduces you and I have a responsibility to protect these natural resources not just for ourselves but for future generations as well when future generations have their chance to enjoy these resources they want to thank us for protecting those resources but if we damage these resources those same future generations will ask us questions and they will be very brutal with us they will ask us the question why didn't you protect these resources for us it would be a shame if we cannot defend our position and defend these forests for the sake of ourselves now and for the sake of future generations