Division of Revenue Amendment Bill [B17-2011]: Negotiating Mandates

NCOP Appropriations

14 November 2011
Chairperson: Mr T Chaane (North West, ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Chairperson opened the meeting by informing the Committee that the meeting was going to be short because there was nothing that needed to be discussed extensively. He informed the Committee that all provinces had submitted their Mandates.

All 9 Provincial Legislatures supported the Bill and voted in favour of it. However, the Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature had submitted recommendations that needed to be added to the Bill.
Some of the recommendations included the following:
•On Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant Schedule 7 ought to be adjusted to include individual figures as per allocation for the feasibility study for each respective municipality as reflected in Appendix 1 of the bill. The bill also ought to provide for the respective grants paid to the individual municipalities so that they could be in a position to pay upfront for the condition of the feasibility.
•The Equitable Share Formula was revised it should take into account all matters relating to backlogs in terms of health services as well as health facilities with specific reference to poorer Provinces. Lastly, the Legislature recommended the second above emphasis of flooding and veld fires so that the grant purpose had to read as follows “to relieve farmers from the effects of floods and or other natural disaster in North West, Eastern Cape, Northern Cape Free State, Gauteng, Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces.
It was noted that the issues outlined in the Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature needed to be addressed. The Committee had time to engage on the bill until the coming Thursday, 17 November 2011. Members were encouraged to submit their recommendations before the 17 November 2011 because the Committee would be dealing with the final mandates on that day. The final report would be tabled in the House the following day.

Meeting report

The Chairperson opened the meeting by informing Members that the meeting was going to be short because there was nothing that needed to be discussed extensively. He noted that all 9 provinces had submitted their Mandates. He asked delegates to read out the mandates from their respective Legislatures.
Division of Revenue Amendment Bill: Negotiating Mandates

Western Cape Provincial Legislature
Mr J Bekker (Western Cape, DA) stated that the Western Cape Provincial Legislature supported the bill without any recommendations.

Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature
Mr C De Beer (Northern Cape, ANC) stated that the Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature had put emphasis on 2 issues. Firstly, there was a view that the equitable share formula should take into account all matters relating to backlogs in terms of health services as well as health facilities with reference to poorer provinces when it was revised. Secondly the Mpumalanga Province was prone to fires and flooding and the legislature suggested that the above had to be included in the Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Grant to relieve farmers from the effects of the floods and veld fires as per Annexure 1 on conditional grant that catered for disaster.

The Legislture made the following recommendations; on Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant Schedule 7 ought to be adjusted to include individual figures as per allocation for the feasibility study for each respective municipality as reflected in Appendix 1 of the bill. The bill also ought to provide for the respective grants paid to the individual municipalities so that they could be in a position to pay upfront for the condition of the feasibility. Second recommendation was that when the Equitable Share Formula was revised it should take into account all matters relating to backlogs in terms of health services as well as health facilities with specific reference to poorer Provinces. Lastly, the Legislature recommended the second above emphasis of flooding and veld fires so that the grant purpose had to read as follows “to relieve farmers from the effects of floods and or other natural disaster in North West, Eastern Cape, Northern Cape Free State, Gauteng, Limpopo and Mpumalanga Provinces.

The Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature negotiated in favour of the Bill subjected to the above issues and recommendations.

The Chairperson informed the Committee that the Members had to discuss the issues that were raised by the Mpumalanga Province.

Mr A Lees (KwaZulu-Natal, DA) wanted to know if the meeting was recorded as the venue had no recording equipment and micro phones. He also wanted to know if the Mpumalanga Negotiating Mandate was the official mandate from the legislature as the Mpumalanga delegate was absent.

The Chairperson assured the Committee that the Mpumalanga Negotiating Mandate was the official mandate from the Speaker.

Mr D Bloem (Free State, COPE) suggested that the Mpumalanga Negotiating Mandate not be adopted as the Mpumalanga legislature had no delegate.

Ms Wendy Fanoe, Chief Director: Intergovernmental policy and Planning of National Treasury explained that the Mpumalanga Negotiating Mandate had already been to the Speaker so it could be adopted without the delegate

Mr De Beer said that absence of the delegate was not supposed to stop the Committee from considering the Legislature’s recommendations.

Mr Bloem informed the Committee that he was going to read what was written in the Mpumalanga Negotiating mandate.

The Chairperson informed Members that the Committee had already accepted the Mpumalanga Province apology.

Ms Fanoe explained that there were various structures of grant and some grants were schedule 4 grants which were the reason why they were infrastructure grants. She also mentioned that Old National Department had water scheme projects which transferred grants as in schedule 7 grant. On Regional Bulk Infrastructure Ms Fanoe explained that there was quite a planning that needed to be done for efficiency reasons and she suggested that the Department of Water Affairs had to take over the overseeing of the grant. She told the Committee that she would also take up the visibility study grant request with the Department of Water Affairs.

Ms Fanoe said that with the conditions of the disaster grant, the National Disaster Management had looked at disasters that had happened in the past and had to submit a report. She further explained that money had been allocated for the first time and not all monies were necessarily given for the disaster but monies were to be released.

The Chairperson wanted to know why there were no monies allocated for Mpumalanga.

Ms Fanoe answered that there were no disasters reported in Mpumalanga which was the reason why Mpumalanga was not allocated any funds. She added that it was only the Western Cape that was not going to get any disaster funds.

Mr De Beer stated that farmers were still waiting for the funds after they had flooding and there was R87 Million that was allocated for the flooding disaster.

Mr Lees wanted to know if there was a written break down on how the money was going to be spent. He wanted clarity as to whether Mpumalanga Province was asking for additional funds on the visibility study grant as he was confused how the bill worked.

Ms Fanoe explained that all other grants were detailed on page 250 of the Division Revenue Bill and as from 2011 the visibility study was linked with the projects so that there could be no extra money needed.

The Chairperson enquired what the correct procedure was when claiming for grants. This would assist the Mpumalanga Legislature.
The Chairperson wanted clarity on what was stated on page 7 of the Mpumalanga Province Report.

Ms Fanoe told the members that she did not have time to read the report and ask from the Committee to be given more time to look at the report.

The Chairperson gave Ms Fanoe up until Thursday to look at the Mpumalanga Provincial mandate and to furnish the Committee with information. 

Free State Provincial Legislature
Mr Bloem stated that the Free State Provincial Legislature voted in favour of the Bill.
Gauteng Provincial Legislature
Mr S Motshitsi (Gauteng, ANC) reported that the Gauteng Provincial Legislature supported the principle and detail of the Bill and therefore voted in favour of it. There were no recommendations submitted.

Northern Cape Provincial Legislature
Mr De Beer informed the Committee that the Northern Cape Provincial Legislature supported the bill.
Limpopo Provincial Legislature
Mr M Makhubela (Limpopo, COPE) read the negotiating mandate and stated that the Limpopo Provincial Legislature supported the bill without any recommendations.

Eastern Cape Provincial Legislature
Mr S Mazosiwe (Eastern Cape, ANC) read out the mandate and informed the Committee that Eastern Provincial Legislature voted in favour of the Bill.

KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Legislature
Mr Lees informed the Committee that the KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Legislature supported the bill.

North West Provincial Legislature
The Chairperson stated that the North West Provincial Parliament voted in favour of the bill.

The Chairperson noted that the issues outlined in the Mpumalanga Provincial Legislature needed to be addressed.
He indicated that the Committee Members had time to engage on the bill until the coming Thursday, 17 November 2011.
The Chairperson further proposed that Members with recommendations had to circulate them before the 17 November 2011 so that on Thursday the Committee would be dealing with the final mandate. The final report would be tabled in the House on 18 November 2011.

Mr De Beers reminded the Committee to diarise the meeting of the finance Committee as the Committee presence was needed.

The Chairperson informed Members that the last Committee meeting would be on 24 November 2011. 
Outstanding minutes of the 19 October 2011
The Chairperson went page by page through the document.
Members highlighted and corrected all errors in the report.

The Committee minutes of the 19 October 2011 were adopted without changes.

Outstanding minutes of the 26 October 2011
The Committee checked the minutes for corrections.

The minutes were adopted without any changes.

Outstanding minutes of the 09 November 2011
No correction or amendments were found in the minutes.

The minutes were adopted without any corrections.
The meeting was adjourned.       









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.

Share this page: