Rural Household Infrastructure Programme: briefing by Department of Human Settlements

Meeting report

Rural Household Infrastructure Programme: presentation
Ms Tamie Mpotulo, Chief Director: Sanitation, Department of Human Settlements, gave a presentation on the Rural Household Infrastructure programme and its sanitation component. The current government had realised the vital need of provision of basic services to the remote rural areas. Since 2007 the government had identified rural development as one of the country’s major priorities. Rural development had been incorporated in government outcomes which needed to be prioritised by the various Ministries.

Ms Mpotulo explained that in response to this prioritisation, National Treasury had established the Rural Household Infrastructure grant over the 2010 Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF) period. This grant was administered, managed and implemented by the National Department of Human Settlements for the provision of on-site sanitation and water facilities to rural communities. A total of R1.2 billion had been allocated over the 2010 MTEF, which were divided into R100 million for 2010/11, R350 million for 2011/12 and R750 million for 2012/13.

Strategic goals were to facilitate hands-on involvement of the beneficiaries into the implementation of the programme benefiting them, so as to instil a culture of ownership towards sustainable communities. The programme encouraged the use of Community Based Organisations (CBO’s), Non-governmental Organisations (NGO’s) and public entities to ensure that the communities were trained on how to sustain and maintain the infrastructure beyond implementation. Through open tender processes, the department had secured the services of two Service Providers (SP’s), namely the Mvula Trust and the Independent Development Trust (IDT). In the first financial year, 52% of the allocation had been awarded to the IDT and 36% of the allocation was awarded to the Mvula Trust. The remaining 12% was set aside for project management.

Ms Mpotulo presented a graph depicting the progress made per province. Overall, there were a total of 26 municipalities that benefitted. Of a target number of 11,920 toilets, as at 4 April 2011 a total of 6424 pits were under construction and a total of 5496 sanitation facilities were completed. She explained that it did not take long for toilets to be erected once the pit had been constructed. It usually took just a few hours. She noted that rain in some provinces had affected progress, and this was one of the reasons why they would not be able to reach 100% of the target set out.

Ms Mpotulo presented progress made per municipality. In Kwazulu Natal, 1518 sanitation facilities were completed from a target of 3675. Some municipalities were dissatisfied with the manner in which the programme was implemented by the IDT. The IDT wanted to use its own contractors to dig pits and that was challenged by local contractors and labourers. In the Uthungulu district municipality progress was also hampered by hard rock conditions. In the Uthukela district municipality no progress had been made as the programme had not been introduced to benefiting municipalities.

In Limpopo, there were nine benefiting municipalities. In the Lephalale local municipality, the digging of pits had not commenced because of the disagreements on the appointment of local contractors. The municipalities of the greater Giyani, Tzaneen, and Letaba had not started yet because the district municipalities felt that the budget should be transferred to them to implement it. From an overall target of 3600 in the province, only 742 sanitation facilities were completed.

In the North West province, the two benefiting municipalities had progressed well. In the Madibeng local municipality, 263 units from a target of 400 were completed. Heavy rains in December 2010 and January 2011 delayed construction. In the Moses Kotane local municipality 482 units were completed and their target was reached. Final inspection and hand over was to be completed soon. Within the Northern Cape there was only one benefitting municipality, Joe Morolong, and 392 units had been completed as of 4^th April 2011. Ms Mpotulo said that by the time of this meeting, all units should have been completed as it only took a few hours to construct the toilets once the pits had been dug and the pre-cast structure laid. Final inspection and hand-over was to be completed soon.

In some areas of the Eastern Cape, hard rock and heavy rain delayed progress, especially in the Amahlathi and Mnquma local municipalities. In the Mbhashe local municipality, 570 units were completed, the target met and happy letters were received. In the Free State, one benefiting municipality, the Ngwathe local municipality, only 100 units were completed from a target of 400. Heavy rains affected the programme and the number of units may be reduced due to travelling costs; long distances between farm households. In Mpumalanga, 15 units were not completed in the one benefiting municipality due to heavy rains and the delay in the appointment of the contractor.

Ms Mpotulo continued by explaining how many man hours would be created as well as health and hygiene processes in place for the maintenance of pits. Overall challenges were that five benefiting municipalities were rejecting the appointment of certain Service Providers appointed as per government procurement procedures. The municipalities insisted that local contractors and labourers should have been used. The programme commenced very late in October 2010 as opposed to the beginning of April 2010 therefore there was a lack in service delivery. Another challenge was that during the months of December 2010 and January 2011 many projects were severely affected by excessive rainfall and flooding which hampered construction on site in the beneficiary municipalities. Hard rock conditions also impeded penetration as well as the inaccessibility of some household in the rural areas.
 
Interventions included that where benefiting municipalities were resisting the nationally appointed SP’s, the Department would enter into funding agreements with the relevant Water Services Authority to implement the programme with the hands-on support provided by the department. In cases where an appointed SP had declared that it had no experience in the implementation and delivery of rural sanitation, the department would consider reviewing the scope of work in the coming financial years. Where there was hard rock conditions, contractors would be requested to use machinery. There was also a need to increase job creation by making use of local labourers, as set out in the tender request. Although there was significant progress in the last two months, a decision should be taken about the non-performing SP.

Discussion
Mr M Mdakane (ANC) said that it was it was important for the Department to separate delays caused by in-fighting and those caused by incompetence. Hopefully those working on the ground would be able to distinguish the difference between the two. Job creation was a big problem as local people had to be used by contractors.

Ms M Borman (ANC) thanked the Department for the presentation. Thereafter, she asked whether SP’s were informed about what was expected from them in a clear and concise manner, especially when it came to giving jobs to local people.

Mr Thabang Zulu, Director General, Department of Human Settlements, replied that the SP’s were aware of the conditions of the tender, in particular the stipulation that they had to use local labourers. Unfortunately, local labour was not being used in all provinces. After numerous meetings with the IDT concerning this matter, it was decided by the Department that a review of IDT had to be done to find out whether they were suitable for this scope of work.

Ms T Gasebonwe (ANC) said that it was the responsibility of the District Municipalities to assist the Local Municipalities with machinery to dig pits.

Mr Zulu agreed that the use of machinery was the viable option but not all municipalities had the resources to procure machinery therefore this had created another problem with regards to a lack of funding. 

Mr A Steyn (DA) said that he was glad that special care was taken to follow the correct process of giving funds to SP’s. However, such care also had to be taken when awarding tenders to service providers in the first place. When the IDT gave their bid for the tender, a very specific condition had to be that local people were to be used. There were some discrepancies in the targets presented in February and the current targets.

The Chairperson said that Members should not be concerned about figures too much, but rather focus on whether the service providers were performing. If national objectives were not being met, then the SP’s should be reviewed.

Mr Barnie Ntlou, Legal Advisor, Department of Human Settlements, replied that the appointment of SP’s was done with a process of signing Service Level Agreements (SLA’s) between the Department and SP’s. The SLA was used as a form of protection to make sure that the SP was performing according to targets. However, the Department was envisaging the removal of IDT. Another reason for the poor performance of IDT was because they had no funds to do anything at the time that they were awarded the tender, but this should not be used as an excuse why they were not performing.

Mr A Figlan (DA) said that he had the same concern as Mr Steyn about whether or not the Department was reporting accurate figures. He commented that the Department was responsible for delivering basic services to the community, even though they were doing the work themselves.

Mr K Sithole (IFP) referred to slide 9 of the presentation and said it was very disappointing to see that in the UThukela District Municipality, no progress had been made at all because the programme had not been introduced to benefitting communities.

Mr J Matshoba (ANC) commented that the legal department was defending inadequate work which was something that could not be defended at all. IDT was failing the project and they should not have been given the tender at all. The needed and appropriate action against IDT had to be taken.

Ms M Njobe (COPE) said that in areas where work had not commenced yet, local people should be trained beforehand and used to start the work. This would also improve the level of employment in those areas as those people trained with skills could use their knowledge in a sustainable manner.

The Chairperson said that the policy regulations between the Water Services Authority (WSA) and the Department had to be aligned. It was unfair that farms could not be reached. If conditions of the SLA were not reached, decisive action needed to be taken. The Department was the superior implementing agent and had to make these needed decisions. 

Mr Matshoba suggested that the Department should only give payment to SP’s once happy letters were signed off by municipalities after all work had been completed.

Mr Mdakane proposed that the local municipalities should come and meet with the Committee to separate the matters of concern they experienced. He thought that is was very seldom nowadays that any community was inaccessible due to them living in farmland areas. The IDT should not use this as an excuse for why they had not started work in those areas yet. 

The meeting was adjourned.