Cooperative Governance Strategic Planning Workshop: National Urban Development Framework; Municipal Demarcation Board; Local Government SETA; Commission for Promotion & Protection of Rights of Cultural, Religious & Linguistic Co
This premium content has been made freely available
Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs
05 August 2009
Chairperson: Mr L Tsenoli (ANC)
Meeting Summary
At the strategic planning workshop, the Department briefed the Committee on the National Urban Development Framework which aimed to harness a common vision for growth and development for SA’s urban areas. The project’s first phase, research, had been completed which would be followed by consultation and drafting, then publication and implementation. The research had shown that there was a rapidly growing urban population with major service delivery demands and pressures placed on large cities and metropolitan areas. There needed to be better forward planning and management of urban growth at national, provincial and local level. There was a need for a more integrated approach to economic and settlement planning at multi-jurisdictional regional level to improve linkages and synergies. There was a national need to prioritise institutional service delivery and economic development support. Research also showed that there was a need for concerted national action within urban areas to manage environmental risk. A complementary Rural Development Framework had been developed and both would be aligned within new national planning.The Municipal Demarcation Board explained its demarcation process: In terms of the Municipal Structures Act, the Minister had to publish a formula for the determination of the number of councillors. This would be followed by the actual determination of the number of councillors by the Local Government MECs, and the determination of the number of wards and the delimitation of ward boundaries by the MDB. As a result of a delay by the Minister, the MDB process was behind schedule by four months.
The MDB commented on the need to enhance the stability of municipalities for improved service delivery. It suggested the following stability-enhancing measures:
▪ fixing the number of councillors in line with national and provincial legislatures,
▪ asymmetrical ward and proportional representative councillors: find optimal balance between democracy and development
▪ reviewing the static, mechanical criteria for ward delimitation in order to contribute to development of local areas
▪ sychronisation of ward and municipal boundary changes
▪ reconsider the voting district as the only “building blocks” for wards.
Members wondered why the MDB thought Matatiele was going to be placed with Kwazulu-Natal as the Minister had stated that this issue would be considered through public participation. The Board replied that they did not know what the outcome was. The Committee agreed this was a political decision. The Committee wondered how the Board would handle the influx of people to urban areas. The Board stated that they did not work with the population number directly; they worked with the number of registered voters. Members also wondered what pressure was being put on MECs to comply with the request to determine the number of councillors needed using the Minister’s formula. The Board was sure that the rest of the MECs would comply with the request.
The Committee was concerned that urban influx meant that equitable share would increase in cities and rural areas would be neglected. They noted the four months delay and wondered if this would force the MDB into a rushed job with many problems.
The Local Government Sector Education Training Authority identified the key challenges faced by municipalities included absence of norms and standards in service delivery, staffing and competency requirements, lack of planning capacity and developmental planning. It also included issues regarding compliance with legislation. This was costly and became an impediment to service delivery in municipalities. The Local Government SETA engaged in a series of discretionary grant funded projects to attempt to assist the sector in addressing skills gaps. They identified strategic priority areas such as infrastructure and service delivery, financial viability, community based participation and planning, management and leadership, Adult Basic Education and Training and workplace training systems.
The Committee addressed the redirection of grant funds to subsidise other expenditure. They wondered if this was legal. The SETA stated that 60% of the grants were spent on training. About 40% of the grants were spent on other expenditures and not training. This was not legal. The Committee stated that this was gross violation of the law. The SETA was asked for a list of all municipalities that applied for the discretionary grants. Members also wanted more clarity on the Workplace Skills Plan
The Commission for the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities briefed the Committee. The Commission explained that it focused on conflict resolution, research and policy development, community/public education and advocacy, and community engagement. The strategic objectives looked at peace and tolerance, mutual respect, development of diminished heritage and community councils. In terms of investigation and conflict resolution, the Commission looked at the nature of complaints from people. The highest number of complaints were about religion, the second highest was about culture and the least number of complaints involved language. Dialogues were held to encourage public education and advocacy. Budgetary constraints impacted on visibility, programmes and National Consultative Conference resolution implementation.
The Committee discussed the Commission’s problems with visibility in communities, budget negotiations with the National Treasury, the Commission’s role during xenophobic attacks and its role in the protection of languages other than the official languages. They also looked at the Chief Executive Officer’s suspension and the appointment of the new board.
Meeting report
Briefing by the Department: National Urban Development FrameworkMr Yusuf Patel, Deputy Director-General for the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (DCGTA), stated that the National Urban Development Framework (NUDF) was an action item on the Five Year Local Government Strategic Agenda. The three phases to the project were research, consultation and drafting, and publication and implementation. The first phase was already completed and a complementary Rural Development Framework had been developed.
Research showed that there was a rapidly growing urban population, yet large numbers of people continued to live in densely settled former homelands despite the lack of economic activity because the out-migration trend was offset by strong natural growth. The concentration of economic activity in city regions was accompanied by high levels of poverty. Research also indicated that there were major service delivery demands and pressures placed on large cities and metropolitan areas. There were critical sustainability pressures on the natural resource base and ecosystems supporting urban areas, especially regarding water availability, biodiversity and land capability.
Research showed that there were large numbers of informal settlements in the metros and most water catchment areas faced severe shortage. This put cities under threat.
City-regions were defined as large multi-nodal urban complexes with more than one million people. Examples were the Gauteng city region area and the coastal city region areas of Cape Town. Cities were defined as multi-nodal areas with more than 400 000 people, such as Polokwane, Bloemfontein and Nelspruit. Regional Services Centres were seen as medium and higher order towns such as Rustenberg and Upington. Service towns fulfilled service functions for communities within the vicinity such as iGiyani. Local/niche towns were towns that were smaller in terms of population and economic activity such as Prince Albert.
The research indicated that there needed to be better forward planning and management of urban growth at national, provincial and local level. There was a need for a more integrated approach to economic and settlement planning at multi-jurisdictional regional level to improve linkages and synergies. A differentiated approach was needed given the wide diversity of settlement types with very different needs and capacities. There was a national need to prioritise institutional service delivery and economic development support. Research also showed that there was a need for concerted national action within urban areas to manage environmental risk.
Briefing by the Municipal Demarcation Board: Strategic Priorities
Mr Rapulana Monare, Chief Executive Officer, stated that the strategic plan for the period 2009/10-2012/13 was approved by the Board. The strategic plan identified six strategic themes to focus and guide the organisation over the next four financial years [see document].
The first theme was to facilitate accountable local government, contribute to free and fair elections and to promote democracy. By delimitation of municipal wards, the Municipal Demarcation Board (MDB) created a spatial environment within which citizens/voters can exercise their basic rights, express themselves regarding councillors to be elected and raise local matters such as service delivery. In terms of the Structures Act, 1998, the Minister had to publish a formula for the determination of the number of councillors. This would be followed by the actual determination of the number of councillors by the Members of Executive Council (MECs) responsible for local government, the determination of the number of wards and the delimitation of ward boundaries by the MDB. As a result of a delay by the Minister, the process is behind schedule by four months. MDB has released a circular to provide information on the new ward delimitation programme, and information and guidelines for participation in the ward delimitation process. In view of time lost, the MDB revised its programme. The MDB would now hand final ward boundaries to the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC) by the end of September or beginning of October 2010. In an attempt to make up for lost time, the Board would adopt a staggered approach to the delimitation process.
The second strategic theme was the determination and redetermination of municipal boundaries and the categorisation and recategorisation of municipalities. This involved the continuous interactive process of reconfiguration and alignment of municipal boundaries. Re-determination of municipal boundaries was suspended in August 2008 to create stability in order for preparations for the next local government elections in 2011. It was the Boards priority to work closely with other organs of state dealing with boundary issues, specifically on creating a credible set of boundaries for traditional areas.
The third strategic priority was the assessment of the capacity of district and local municipalities. This was to prevent adhoc assessments, to empower MECs to adjust functions between district and local municipalities and to provide quality annual assessments of municipal capacity and recommendations to MECs responsible for local government regarding adjustment of powers and functions. There were a number of issues regarding the annual assessment of municipal capacity. There were a number of developments that required the MDB to consider other options to the current arrangement of assessments. The MDB noted that MECs did not implement the MDB recommendations on an annual basis, ongoing annual adjustments had a negative impact on the stability of municipalities and service delivery, and there was poor implementation of annual adjustments.
The fourth strategic theme was that the Board should be supported by an effective and efficient organisational structure. The MDB’s priority was to build the capacity of the Board’s internal machinery, streamline internal systems and processes, to have skilled staff and to develop stronger relationships with government and other state agencies. There were a number of internal challenges that the Board faced in its quest to fulfill its mandate.
The fifth strategic priority was ensuring good governance. This would be done through compliance with legal frameworks, efficient and effective administrative process and systems, improvement of the quality of management information, effective management of risks, affective leadership and formulating and reviewing policies and procedures.
The sixth strategic theme was ensuring sound financial management. This involved the effective management of working capital, preparation and management of short and long term budgets, and the consistent control of costs.
The total budget expenditure for 2009/10 was R35 865 000. The 2008 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) allocation was R34 801 000. This would result in the Board experiencing a deficit for 2009/10.
The MDB stated that there was a need to enhance the stability of municipalities for development and improved service delivery. It suggested the following measures to enhance the stability of municipalities:
▪ fixing the number of councillors in line with national and provincial legislatures,
▪ asymmetrical ward and proportional representative councillors: find optimal balance between democracy and development
▪ reviewing the static, mechanical criteria for ward delimitation in order to contribute to development of local areas
▪ sychronisation of ward and municipal boundary changes
▪ reconsider the voting district as the only “building blocks” for wards.
The MDB stated that there was a need to enhance its independence and effectiveness and made suggestions on how this could be done. One of these was that the Constitution should be amended to list the MDB as a constitutional institution to be consistent with the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) thus enhancing its independence.
Discussion
Mr M Nonkanyane (ANC) stated that, according to the DMB, Matatiele was going to be placed with Kwazulu-Natal (KZN). The Minister stated that this issue would be considered through public participation. The Eastern Cape would not leave this issue alone. They would oppose this decision. He wanted to know how the Board came to the conclusion that Matatiele would be placed with KZN.
Mr L Mahlangu, Chairperson: MDB, stated that they were not pre-empting any decision. They did not know what the outcome was. This was an issue outside of the MDB’s responsibility.
The Chairperson stated that it was not the Board’s business to decide where Matatiele fell in. It was a political process.
Ms D Nlhengethwa (ANC) did not understand how the demarcation process worked. She wondered if the Board checked the population of the area before they started the demarcation process. There was an influx of people to the area that she was coordinating as the election coordinator. She wondered how the Board would handle the influx of people to urban areas. She also wanted to know if the MDB had a working relationship with the IEC and if they were discussing how they would manage the urban influx.
Mr Mahlangu stated that ward delimitations were based on the number of registered voters. The number of voters was driven by immigration and the natural cause of population growth. The MDB did not work with the population number directly; they worked with the number of registered voters. An ideal situation would be where each ward or council had the same amount of registered voters.
Mr Monare stated that MDB worked quite closely with the IEC. In fact, the timelines for determining the number of councillors was decided with the IEC. The Board also had a technical team that involved both the Department as well as the IEC. They met on a regular basis to discuss issues.
Mr P Smith (IFP) wanted clarity on the relationship between the Minister’s formula to determine the number of councillors and the determination of the MECs. He noted that the process was four months behind schedule and the deadline for completion by the MECs, for the determination of the number of councillors was the 31st July 2009. Only four MECs have adhered to this request. He wondered what pressure was being put on MECs to comply with the request.
Mr Mahlangu stated that the Minister issues a formula that needs to be applied by the MECs to determine the number of councillors. The MECs have space to differ from the formula by 15%. He was sure that the rest of the MECs would comply with the request.
Mr Smith supported the notion of suspending Section 85 of the Structures Act. It caused havoc to have the re-determination in the middle of the financial year. Section 85 was the adjustment of division of functions and powers between district and local municipalities.
The Chairperson asked what happened to the Local Government Amendment Bill. He thought the Bill dealt with this issue. The Bill amended certain pieces of legislation including the Municipal Demarcation Board. The adjustment had to fall in line with the financial year.
Mr Monare stated that the Bill said that there was a need for the adjustment to become effective at the beginning of the financial year. The Bill spoke to boundary re-determination and changes, not the adjustment of powers and functions.
The Chairperson noted that the Bill did not speak to the current issue of adjustments to powers and functions. He stated that the Committee would flag this issue and come back to it another time.
Ms S Tsebe (ANC) asked at what stage the MDB engaged with key role players regarding demarcation.
Mr Monare stated that there were a lot of input opportunities to help the MDB take in what was happening at ground level. Once all stakeholders engaged, a memo is drawn up.
Councilor Zoleka Capa, SALGA: National Executive Council member, wanted to know if the municipalities’ views were considered during demarcation processes. She also wanted to know if SALGA’s view was taken in to consideration during demarcation processes.
Councilor Clarence Johnson, SALGA: National Executive Council member, noted that MDB was four months behind schedule. It would have to be seen if the Board finished the process on time or if it would be a rushed job with many problems. He also addressed the disestablishment of District Management Areas (DMA’s). There were so many cross-cutting issues pertaining to the topic. Urban influxes meant that equitable share would increase in cities and rural areas would be neglected. SALGA did not know how Stats SA arrived at their numbers regarding population increases in certain areas. Stats SA did not consult municipalities regarding the population growth. The Board had to look at the consequences of the particular acts of demarcation and the adjustment of powers and functions.
Mr W Doman (DA) stated that the Board did excellent work year after year. There were excellent reports and recommendations that were not acted on timeously. When the Committee met again, they had to discuss these issues.
Briefing by Local Government SETA: Key Initiatives
Mr Sidwell Mofokeng, Chief Executive Officer, gave the history of the Local Government Sector Education Training Authority (LGSETA) and explained its role in the skills development labyrinth. He explained that SETA played an important role in making sure the National Skills Development Strategy (NSDS) was fulfilled. SETAs received collected levies from the Department of Labour (DoL). 70% of levies were disbursed as grants.
Mr Mofokeng read out the core mandate of the LGSETA and its strategic orientation. The LGSETA identified needs at sector level, regional level and workplace level. The LGSETA identified that the key challenges faced by municipalities included absence of norms and standards in service delivery, staffing and competency requirements, lack of planning capacity and developmental planning. It also included issues regarding compliance with legislation. This was costly and became an impediment to service delivery in municipalities. Non-compliance was not only a local government issue, but a government-wide problem.
The LGSETA engaged in a series of discretionary grant funded projects to attempt to assist the sector in addressing skills gaps. LGSETA identified strategic priority areas such as infrastructure and service delivery, financial viability, community based participation and planning, management and leadership, Adult Basic Education and Training (ABET) and workplace training systems. The role of LGSETA is to respond to government strategic initiatives and priority programmes. This was done in collaboration with key role players such as DCGTA, South African Local Government Association (SALGA) and the Development Bank of SA (DBSA).
The LGSETA’s focus for the next five years would be to focus on responding to DCGTA and SALGA identified priorities by ensuring development of standards and qualifications, funding priority areas of training, utilising discretionary grants in priority areas and improving the knowledge base of workplace employment profiles.
Discussion
Mr Smith asked why there was not training for councillors who were illiterate. He asked if the redirection of grant funds to subsidise other expenditure was legal and what the Auditor-General (AG) had to say about it. He wanted to know how much of the funds were used for training and how much was redirected. He also wanted more clarity on the Workplace Skills Plan.
Mr Mofokeng answered that the funding model was such that 1% was taken from the payroll for funds. This was quite short of what they should be receiving. 20% of the funds went to the National Skills Fund and the National Revenue Fund. LGSETA was able to access this when there were strategic projects they wanted to be involved in.
Councillors were not excluded from the ABET programme; however, very few municipalities applied for discretionary grants for the Councilor-ABET programme. There was a steady increase in the number of municipalities that submitted their Workplace Skills Plan. There was a 96% submission rate for Plans submitted by the 30th June. There were very few municipalities that were not complying. Another evaluation of the Workplace Skills Plan was that a number of municipalities seemed to be using their mandatory grants to train unemployed people in the municipal areas. It was primarily supposed to be used for training employees within the municipality. This did not translate in to improving the municipalities’ service delivery capacity.
In terms of the amounts of the grants that are spent on training, evaluations were still being completed; however, based on previous year’s knowledge, 60% of the grants were spent on training. About 40% of the grants were spent on other expenditures and not training. This was not legal. The A-G has not done much about this.
The Chairperson stated that this was gross violation of the law. He asked the LGSETA to send the Committee a list of all municipalities that applied for the discretionary grants.
Mr Mofokeng stated that discretionary grants were made available to municipalities under specific conditions. If the SETA gave municipalities the discretionary grant to train the unemployed, the municipalities had to intend to employ them in the scarce and critical skills areas. He found that municipalities did not apply for these grants; they would rather use their mandatory grants.
Cllr Johnson stated that there were some sweeping statements that were being made that were not being validated with proof. For instance, saying that mandatory funds that were being used did not result in any improvement in service delivery capacity. He wondered where this research could be validated.
Mr Mofokeng stated that LGSETA would make the research available to the Councilor. LGSETA wanted to assist municipalities to fulfill their developmental role.
The Chairperson stated that the discussion had been useful. The Committee would return to this area of discussion at another date, as it was of great importance.
Briefing by the Commission for the Promotion and Protection of the Rights of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities
Rev Wesley Mabuza, Chairperson for the Cultural, Religious and Linguistic (CRL) Rights Commission, stated that the Commission focused on conflict resolution, research and policy development, community/public education and advocacy, and community engagement. Rev Mabuza also discussed the Commissions vision, mission and functions.
The strategic objectives focused on peace and tolerance, mutual respect, development of diminished heritage and community councils. In terms of investigation and conflict resolution, the Commission looked at the nature of complaints from people. The highest number of complaints were about religion, the second highest was about culture and the least number of complaints involved language. In rural communities, people complained about cultures and religions. In urban areas, people complained about languages used in education.
Research and policy development looked at language in education policy implementation, promotion and protection of sacred spaces and religious inequality. There was an increased consciousness about Rites of Passage and the right of and to Rites. The Commission also looked at male initiation public hearings. Factors affecting the Rite were botched operations, amputations and death. The Commission stated that a holistic approach be used to address challenges, they had to focus on community leadership, traditional and government institutions had to be involved and people had to understand the rationale behind certain Rites.
Dialogues were held to encourage public education and advocacy. Community consultation focused on community dialogues on strategy for the recognition of community councils. Consultation also promoted mini conferences and Khoi-San dialogue.
The CRL Rights Commission held a National Consultative Conference (NCC) on the 12-14 July 2008. This was the foundation for having a second NCC. Mini conferences were held in nine provinces to intensify the foundation. Regulations were set out for the registration of Community Councils (CC’s). The purpose of the NCC was to create a progress report on the Commission. Recommendations from the NCC were that there should be a future agenda for the promotion and protection of the cultural, religious and linguistic rights of communities. The NCC informed the programme review and the Commissions programme was in alignment with NCC resolutions. This allowed for maximized communication between communities and the commission. The Minister signed the recognition criteria of CC’s in early 2009.
Budgetary constraints impacted on visibility, program and NCC resolution implementation. There was no direct engagement with National Treasury (NT) on budgetary matters.
Discussion
Ms Nhlengethwa stated that the Commission was not visible enough to communities because of budgetary constraints. She wondered who they presented their budget matters to and who was negotiating with the National Treasury on the Commissions behalf.
Mr Mabuza stated that the engagement took place between the Treasury and the DCGTA.
Mr Smith asked to what extent the Commission protected sign language. There was a court case taking place about the promotion of sign languages in schools. This issue was brought to Parliament last term to make sign language a constitutional or protected language. He wondered what the Commissions role was in the protection of languages other than the official languages. He also asked the extent to which the Commission was involved in helping to resolve issues around xenophobic attacks. Mr Smith stated that there were other kinds of visibility that did not rely on the budget such as the Commission profiling itself in the public media. He asked the Commission to what extent they participated in radio and television talk shows where they could promote what they do.
Ms Julia Mabale, Deputy Chairperson of the Commission, addressed the Commissions role during xenophobic attacks. She stated that the Commission held consultations and dialogues with communities. They also had discussions with the youth to make them understand cultural differences.
Mr Mabuza stated that the Commission was involved in various language initiatives. The Commission was talking about non-financial visibility such as proactively launching initiatives relevant to the mandate of the Commission. They wanted to take it beyond advertisements.
Mr Mabuza stated that the Commission protected all kinds of languages. However, they have not yet come across any complaints that sign language was being marginalised.
Mr Doman asked what the process was that was followed in the appointment of the Commissions new board and how many board members were re-appointed. He wondered if the CEO’s suspension was based only on performance or if there were financial irregularities that needed further clarity.
Ms Mabale stated that the CEO’s contract lapsed on the 31st July 2009. She was given leave to stay at home while issues were resolved. There was some litigation that was pending. That was all she could say about the case.
She stated that an advert came out for communities to nominate names for the new board. Short listing was completed and candidates were interviewed. Three members from the previous board were retained for purposes of continuity.
The Chairperson noted that the Commission was doing very important work.
The meeting was adjourned.
Follow this committee and get free email alerts whenever we get new information about it.
Audio
- Strategic Planning Workshop: Department's National Urban Development Framework; Municipal Demarcation Board Strategic Priorities
- Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs: Strategic Planning Workshop
- Cooperative Governance Strategic Planning Workshop: National Urban Development Framework; Municipal Demarcation Board; Local Gov
- Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs: Strategic Planning Workshop
Documents
Present
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.