Sanitation programme: Minister of Human Settlements briefing

Meeting report

Meeting with Minister of Human Settlements: discussions on sanitation programme
The Chairperson welcomed the Minister of Human Settlements, Hon Tokyo Sexwale. The Committee appreciated the fact that the Minister found time to visit the Committee, as he was tasked with many different responsibilities, and said that he had been asked to discuss various challenges with the Committee.

The Chairperson noted that the sanitation programme had recently been transferred to the Department of Human Settlements (DHS or the Department). The Committee had engaged with the Department on these issues since the previous year, but recognised that some time was needed to implement this new programme properly, whilst also being aware that funds had been deployed to it and must be properly accounted for. The Committee had observed the milestones within the programme itself, and seen the challenges, including that of staff members that were reluctant to be transferred. The Committee felt that these challenges should be shared with the Minister.

The Chairperson informed the Minister that Mr A Steyn (DA) had reported that was under attack from one of the agencies reporting to the Department. The Committee would normally apply the Parliamentary rules to such a situation, but also thought that the Minister would be informed of it. However, the Committee understood that the matter could not be discussed if the Minister felt that it was sub judice.

Mr M Mdakane (ANC) gave the background to the sanitation issues. Sanitation was a very important Millennium Development Goal (MDG) and could not be delayed. Sanitation had just recently been transferred to the DHS, and it was important that the Department must build some capacity for the sanitation sector. There were large rural areas where sanitation became a critical issue, as it affected not only the dignity but also the health of the people, and there were schools still in need of proper sanitation. The Minister had visited many communities and therefore must be aware of the challenges around sanitation.

The Committee had also observed the capacity of the agencies assisting the Committee to achieve its mandate to implement and oversee implementation, and Members were concerned about policy and directives around ensuring sanitation and the fact that these may not always be properly enforced. At implementation stages, there seemed to be some problems around capacity. No communities were the same, and diverse interests were sometimes delaying implementation of part of the programmes.

The Committee’s recommendations were based on its concerns, gathered from observation. The Committee asked the Minister to comment on this new programme so that the Committee could also discuss and then formulate recommendations to improve the work of the Department. Once the Committee’s recommendations were accepted by the House they had weight and departments should comply.

Hon Tokyo Sexwale, Minister of Human Settlements, commented that it was always very inspiring to work with this Committee, because it followed a cardinal principle of keeping everything above board. As Minister, he was first and foremost a colleague, as a Member of Parliament, of the Members of this Committee. However, he was also mindful that as a member of the Executive he had to account to Parliament. He was not shy to do so, as this Committee dealt with matters of public interest. He received a budget through the vote of this Committee, who had every right to demand proper performance of the Minister.

The question of sanitation needed to be seen as a broadening, in line with the change of this Ministry and Department, from a mandate of Housing to Human Settlements. The transfer of that function from the former Department of Water Affairs to the new Department of Human Settlements had not been an easy one. The transfer from any department to the next was a major responsibility. Such a shift meant transferring people, funds, officials, tools, legislation and there were many rules and procedures attached to this. The President had made that proclamation, but in practice there was also a need to house the people.

Minister Sexwale drew on an article, recently reported in the media, written by the Crown Prince of the Netherlands, in his representative capacity as member of a United Nations body, in respect of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). He had pointed out that the whole world was experiencing challenges, and that more than two billion people worldwide did not have proper sanitation. South Africa was included in that number. The Minister had to find out how many people in South Africa still required access to proper sanitation – and by that he meant bathrooms and proper toilets. He did not wish to deal with the open toilets saga, save that to say that this should never have happened. When the reports were made about the open toilets, he had immediately called on the Director General saga to write to all provincial Heads of Departments to find out how many other areas had these open toilets. In fact, only two areas were found, but the media reports probably suggested to the world that these were found all over South Africa. The lesson to be learned from this was that, politics aside, people’s interests must be placed first. He was assured that there were no open toilets, other than in the two municipalities. He would be implementing the Cape High Court’s ruling on Makaza to apply throughout the country. He asked the Committee to help him to help the people. Communities must also take responsibility, and participate in making it known that toilets were still standing unenclosed. He asked where the Councillor was in the situation and stressed that somebody from the community should have reported this long ago. If people had used the hotlines, or had approached the premiers, or used some other official avenue, this could have been sorted out long ago. He reiterated that communities must help government to hold its institutions accountable, from the beginning all the way through to completion, on service delivery.

Mr Sexwale noted that the most pressing sanitation challenge was the continued use of the bucket system. Those were two situations of sanitation provided, but these were not compliant with human dignity. The transfer of the sanitation programme to Human Settlements would hopefully address that.

He agreed that the transfer of these functions did not come easily. There was also reluctance on the part of officials, who had wanted assurance on the security of their jobs. However, the interests of government came first. The President had proclaimed that people must fall in line. The transfer of the functions had left certain details with the Department of Water Affairs that should have been moved to the Department of Human Settlements. It must be remembered that sanitation could not be implemented without water reticulation, and that aspect had to be taken into consideration before the function became operational on the Human Settlements side.

The Minister noted that the actual implementation would be done by people on the ground –provincial officials, premiers and executive authorities and MECs. Constant changes in government also disturbed delivery. Whenever there was a new mayor or new councillor, there was a need to ensure continuance of delivery and try to find the best systems.

In relation to the provision of service on the ground, he noted that there was some contention around the appointment of the Independent Development Trust (IDT). IDT was an organ of government, and he stressed that the worst thing possible would be to take a government contract and hand it over immediately to the private sector. He had been in discussion with Hon Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde, Minister of Public Works, and the IDT needed to check its implementation, and the way it was working. The Ministry and Department of Human Settlements did not have authority over the IDT, but the new Minister of Public Works was aware of the fact that some of the IDT’s approaches had not been particularly effective. IDT had received funding, which was passed down to municipalities, and it was necessary still to get reports of what agencies were doing at municipal level. From the reports received, it seemed that there was a need for great improvement and correction of systems and structures within the IDT. The two ministers, however, were agreed that the IDT should operate optimally. It was not broadly known that IDT had challenges and difficulties, and it would be contrary to principles of good governance for Human Settlements officials to take any action against the IDT without a Ministerial decision. One official had been suspended, following the writing of unlawful letters that were contrary to the Constitution, and dereliction of duty.

The Minister stressed that he would not support the movement of contracts to the private sector before there was finality in correcting whatever needed to be corrected in a State agency. This would not only be unprofessional and illegal, but also contrary to good governance principles. Whatever was wrong with IDT must be fixed and it should not be undermined. Once these challenges had been addressed, the Committee would be kept informed.

Minister Sexwale said he would also like to brief the Committee on the question of the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC). He wished to take the Committee into his confidence into some rather shocking things that he had discovered. He had sent a very strong letter to the Chairperson of the NHBRC, in relation to an investigation launched by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU), and he would brief the Committee on these matters further, hopefully in the following week. These issues also affected performance on sanitation matters.

The Chairperson thanked the Minister.

Discussion
Ms M Borman (ANC) thanked the Minister not only for the report, but for his honest and open approach. She agreed that the Committee was of one mind on the absolute necessity for service delivery. She took the Minister’s point that the Committee must address the issues with IDT, but noted that this Committee had realised, last August, that there were problems with this agency, had tried to address it, but came to the point where it had decide to prepare a report for the Minister. The Committee would like to see the problems fixed. On that morning, the Committee had been engaging with National Treasury, who spoke of the large amounts of money being paid up front, and National Treasury had stressed that Accounting Officers who had allowed prepayments were taking a huge risk. The Committee was concerned as to how the IDT could be made to function properly. This was the reason why it had made this approach to the Minister. She pointed out that in the previous year, the DHS had only achieved 50% of its target for sanitation and that, in her view, did not amount to delivery.

Mr A Steyn (DA) said that he too understood the Minister’s reluctance to take a contract away from a government agency, but if that agency was not delivering, then people who depended on its service could not wait indefinitely for it to improve. The IDT was not only dependent, for its survival, on the sanitation contracts. The Committee had heard that the IDT was also involved in roads and other matters, and had received R22.6 billion from eighteen different departments, that there had been fiscal dumping at the end of the previous financial year yet the work was basically not done. He felt that there was not time to waste on getting this entity fully operational in the sanitation field. This was not its primary responsibility. It was indicated, in the tender document, that the IDT also had no experience in sanitation and its tender should not even have been entertained. It had been awarded a R550 million contract that it was unable to do. The second phase, in the new financial year, amounted to over R300 million. He did not think that the full contract could be fulfilled.

Mr Steyn noted that the Committee, after looking very carefully at various reports, had made fourteen recommendations. Recommendation 6 was that IDT should be given the opportunity to finish Phase 1 of the contract. However, it should not be continuing with Phase 2, as other service providers could take over. He believed that asking more service providers to assist would mean that the projects could be completed in far less time. The Director General had been asked, numerous times, to inform the Committee of the status of the contract, so that the Committee could exercise its oversight function. Mr Steyn had photographs of work for which money had already been paid. These showed doors that did not fit in door frames, an open pit, which had remained open for months, into which an elderly woman had fallen, a slab with no other construction on it, vent pipes being bricked up, a long and tall toilet that was built in such a way that no person could get into it. All of this work had been paid for. The Minister suggested that there was a need to improve the IDT and continue with the contracts.  Mr Steyn respectfully disagreed with the Minister, and asked that the Minister, instead, should entertain the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee was not saying that the IDT should be relieved altogether of the contract, but was asking that IDT be put on terms to complete the backlog for 2011, and that legal advice should be sought on how to terminate the remainder of the contract, based on their past non performance and their apparent inability to perform. He reiterated that the contract’s existing conditions would probably be sufficiently strong to allow for termination on Phases 2 and 3, as the IDT had not complied. He was not even touching on the amounts advanced to the IDT, which should not have been advanced.

Minister Sexwale assured the Committee that he would not hesitate to stop contractors who were unable or unwilling to perform. Once people started to dissemble, this was dereliction of duty. He assured Mr Steyn that he would take action. If the IDT fell under his authority, he would have no hesitation in how he should act. However, it must be remembered that in this case, there was the necessity for both ministers to deal with the situation. He shared the Committee’s concerns about IDT, but reiterated that there were certain actions that were simply not possible, for political and good governance reasons. The IDT had no future if it continued to work in this way. He agreed with Mr Steyn that ordinary people should not be made to wait while an entity sorted itself out. He was sure there were many good men and women who were prepared to work well, but something was blocking them. He noted that a Chief Director, who had since been suspended, also caused a delay in the signature of the contracts – and there was more to that case but he was still working on the matter through the correct justice channels. He personally had major objections to this type of operation in a government agency, but hoped, in the following week, to be able to tell the Committee more about the service providers.

Mr Steyn stressed that the Committee was not asking for the agency to be shut down. It was involved in provision of other services. However, the Committee was concerned that it appeared to have little expertise in sanitation. It was therefore asking that the sanitation contract be removed, and that IDT be left to deal with the other contracts, where hopefully it was providing a better service.

The Chairperson explained that the information referred to by Members had emanated from a National Treasury briefing to the Committee that morning, which explained that IDT was serving 18 departments and in the last financial year it received R22.6 billion.

Minister Sexwale asked what National Treasury had to say about the performance. He was not aware that IDT were undertaking so many contracts, and he made the point that there was only so much that an entity could undertake, if it was to provide proper service.

The Chairperson said the Committee had understood IDT’s lack of spending in the first and second quarters, but by February 2011, only 11% of the amounts allocated had been spent. Then, in March, there was a reflection that R52 million of the programmes’ allocation was spent. This raised the total expenditure to 63% for the whole financial year. This raised concerns. IDT had undertaken the contracts, possibly knowing very well that it had no time to perform on them. The question was why money had then been released; the agreement should have been reworked so that payment was made in tranches, against delivery, after perhaps five and then six months. The Committee, as part of its oversight function over public funding, was recommending that there should be an audit of the expenditure in this financial year, or some other investigation, to clear up what had happened. The Committee had sought more information from national Treasury around advance payments. However, the main concern remained that IDT had received R22 billion in the last financial year.

Mr R Bhoola (MF) supported the sentiments expressed by his colleagues. He noted that Members were hoping for a smooth transition of the sanitation mandate to the Department of Human Settlements, to add value and impetus to the delivery of sanitation.

Mr Bhoola added, as an aside, that it seemed that where the NHBRC became involved, there would be difficulties.

Mr Bhoola said that the Committee faced huge challenges. The open toilet saga of local government had taught lessons, and he cited that one of these, for his own party, had been to experience the hardship of people living in informal settlements. He had asked for intervention into a KwaZulu Natal municipality. People living in informal settlements had acquired certain rights, but were threatened with having to leave because a housing development would not encompass the whole settlement. People who had been living on land for more than six months had the right to basic services. He drew the Minister’s attention to the fact that even mobile toilets were placed very far from the dwellings, violating people’s rights. He had total faith in the Minister’s impeccable leadership and hands-on approach, and the TV programme where he delivered for a certain area informal settlements and homes was very touching and was fully confident that the Minister would continue to ensure that services were delivered to the masses who were still suffering.

The Chairperson said that the Department had been formally requested to brief the Committee on any areas where there might be other problems with sanitation. The Department assured the Committee that there were none, apart from those highlighted in Western Cape and Free State. However, the Committee had pointed out that the provincial reports were not entirely correct, since this Committee, on visiting Umzimkulu in KwaZulu Natal, had seen and photographed other toilets that showed a shocking picture. Provinces had to be honest. Parliament was trying to assist them, but challenges of funding or capacity could not be hidden, and everyone must try to cooperate to address the issues properly.

The Chairperson appreciated the cooperation, and what the Minister was doing. She reiterated that the Committee would support to leadership, for the benefit of the people. She returned to the IDT issue, saying that the Committee had received much correspondence, including from pensioners who had paid for work to be done, and given advance payment; including in a named municipality where the Councillor had now been promoted to mayor.

Minister Sexwale commented that there was a bigger challenge with IDT that was not directly within the mandate previously. He hoped that the Minister of Public Works would find a solution. From an operational point of view, it was not feasible that a company should be given so much work that it could not complete it. Any spikes in expenditure were an indication of problems. Even if that were corrected, provision of bulk infrastructure would remain. Many billions of rands needed to be spent to resolve the problems here.

The Chairperson added that provision of water was another problem.

Minister Sexwale agreed and said that this also include provision of dams, pipelines and transport of water across far distances. He was not trying to ascribe fault to anyone if there was not sufficient money to deal with these issues, but was saying that there should have been some progress. Project management was needed. Even if bulk services were provided, there would still be the need to appoint people with expertise to run the projects. One of the reasons for failures in municipalities arose because when new people were elected, they had little supporting capacity and a failure to spend, with quick fixes being sought at the year-end, rather than seeking capacity at the start.

The final problem was one that he wanted the Committee also to include in its debate. There were 2 700 informal settlements in this country, created not by government, but as a result of the economy. South Africa also faced a huge refugee problem. People would move from their own areas to land that did not belong to them, and create a crisis of strategic planning, with courts having to take decisions. No country facing those conditions could run properly. Nefarious and unscrupulous land barons deceived people into staying in an area, and the next day an informal settlement would have sprung up. All these settlements were on prime land, close to the cities, highways or railways, which raised security issues as well as issues around the use of the land itself. This situation applied over the whole country; people would simply arrive, in response to historical economic and social questions, and criminal syndicates were operating to “sell” land that did not belong to them, to others. The first thing that informal settlements needed was sanitation, and that went hand in hand with provision of water. He repeated the figures – 2 700 informal settlements, and 1.5 million people demanding access to services, which meant that the Minister had to rush around trying to find toilets and water, followed by electricity, all in places were there were no bulk services. If the government continued to react to this type of situation, this would result in a maze of different responses that were not planned.

The Minister thanked the Chairperson for the opportunity to address the Committee and said that he would return in the following week to outline what was being done to address some corrupt practices.

The meeting was adjourned.