The Ingonyama Trust Board provided a detailed performance report from 1 April to 31 December 2012. This report showed the annual targets and the quarterly achievements. Matters discussed included Tenure Rights concluded, the Land Holding Register, the Land Management Related Projects, the Traditional Council Empowerment In Land Management, the Human Capital, the Traditional Council Support, the Legal Matters, the New Administration Building, the Ingonyama Rural Development Forum, the Partnership With Tongaat Hulett, the Billboards Project, and the Provincial Planning Commission. The ITB managed to meet their target with regards to the land holding register. However they were unsuccessful in their performance on the number of tenure rights concluded, number of planned land management projects and the number of traditional councils supported through training.
The Ingonyama Trust Board supported 241 Traditional Councils and this support came in the form of financial assistance inclusive of building some traditional leader a homestead to reside in. The ITB had also set a target to sign off land tenure rights but they were unsuccessful in meeting this target as they were under staffed. Tongaatt Hulett helped upcoming sugar cane growers in the Zululand community and Ithala Limited provided subsidies to the community through a system of bonds. This ensured that the community had funds to enable them to start projects that generated some form of income. Additionally the Ingonyama Trust Board, handed out bursaries to 89 university students who came from previously disadvantaged communities.
The Committee asked several questions about the ITB building residences for traditional leaders as they argued that this was a waste of developmental funds that were meant to benefit the community rather than one individual. Members noted that the presentation in terms of the bursaries was not clear as it did not show gender and some of the names of the beneficiaries were not clear. They asked what plans the ITB had in place to ensure that they had enough personnel which was ITB's reason for underperforming on targets. The ITB was asked what policies, if any, they had in place to determine how much the traditional councils obtained when they requested vehicles or bursaries. The ITB was asked to specify the gender of the bursary recipient; whether they were getting value for money for these bursaries; the traditional council should have a relationship with the bursary recipient and hold them accountable. In the next quarterly report, the ITB should show a list of their projects. The Chairperson said the training of Traditional Councils or communities should be reviewed on the basis of demand as it had been noted that dysfunctionality was a problem.
The briefing on the Geomatics Bill was presented by the Chief Surveyor General in the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. He explained that the Bill aimed to accelerate transformation of the Geomatics profession. In the current Act, only the Institutes were allowed to nominate Council members. In this Bill, four members will represent the State, five members were not state employed, one member was from the public and one from the Council on Higher Education. There were four registration categories for the Geomatics profession. The Committee did not have any questions on the Bill. The advert for public hearings on the Bill will appear in newspapers during the weekend of 16/17 March.
The Chairperson thanked the Director General for the hard work on the Bill and asked Members of the Committee if they had anything to add on or comment with regards to the Bill. Thereafter, all parties agreed to the formalization of the bill.
The Chairperson extended apologies from the Minister and Deputy Minister for not making it to the meeting. The Chairperson noted that the agenda was long but priority was given to the Ingonyama Trust Board.
Ingonyama Trust Board Quarterly Reports
Judge Jerome Ngwenya Chairman of the Ingonyama Trust Board presented the quarterly reports for 1 April – 31 December 2012. Matters discussed included Tenure Rights concluded, the Land Holding Register, the Land Management Related Projects, the Traditional Council Empowerment In Land Management, the Human Capital, the Traditional Council Support, the Legal Matters, the New Administration Building, the Ingonyama Rural Development Forum, the Partnership With Tongaat Hulett, the Billboards Project, and the Provincial Planning Commission.
The ITB overall underperformed on the number of tenure rights concluded which should be signed by both parties. Their target was to conclude 258 tenure rights quarterly however they managed to achieve 242, 164 and 174 for the first, second and third quarters respectively. The underperformance was due to the fact that the Ingonyama Trust Board offices were based in Pietermaritzburg. Therefore the signing off of both parties in a timely manner was problematic mainly due to travelling arrangements of both parties that needed to sign off the rights.
The performance on maintaining the land holding register on a quarterly basis was looked at. This register pertains to immovable assets. The ITB managed to meet their quarterly target despite the fact that this was an administrative issue and tended to be complicated.
On the number of planned management projects, the ITB was successful and managed to achieve double the target set.
In terms of the number of Traditional Councils or communities supported through training. The ITB underperformed in this area. They set their annual target at 33 but their quarterly performance analysis was set at 8 but they achieved 3,7 and 2 respectively. Their reason for underperformance was the shortage of human capital to administer the Traditional Councils as they were spread out through the province.
An analysis of income and expenditure indicated that income was from two sources: a transfer payment from the government (R7 million or 65.42% of the total income) and income from land tenure and mining activities. The ITB had had to use some money to expand their offices. The staff was 100% funded by the government.
In terms of the approved organogram, the total number of approved posts was 27. In the 1st quarter, 24 of those posts were filled, leaving three vacant. In the 2nd quarter, 26 of those posts were filled, leaving one vacant. In the 3rd quarter, 25 of the approved posts were filled, leaving two vacant. This gap was because two people left and it took time to have the new organogram approved thus ITB had to employ people on a contract basis. In terms of people on contract, in April, 12 people were on contracts and it increased by one until the third quarter.
The various disbursements to Traditional Councils were listed. This included about 241 councils although not all were listed in the report. The money given to the councils went towards bursaries, vehicles for day to day running of the communities and in a few instances the money was used towards construction of the dwellings of the leader of that community. All this went through council, an example, being the construction of Inkosi Zungu`s residence. The Zungu council asked for assistance from Ingonyama Board and they were assisted.
The report noted 89 students from the Zungu and Tembe Traditional Councils were awarded bursaries at the University of Zululand and the Durban University of Technology.
Performance indicators were noted. The Mpumalanga Location Upgrade - Precinct Plan was discussed. This was divided into three phases. The first phase represented the shopping centre due to be completed and fully functional by April 2013. Phase 2 was the government structures and municipal infrastructure. Phase 3 was a housing development.
The ITB had signed a contract with Tongaat Hulett to develop sugar cane growers. ITB also entered into a partnership with Ithala Limited to help people living in traditional areas get access to finance and bonds.
Discussion on the Quarterly Report
Mr R Cebekhulu (IFP) questioned the ITB about the house they built for Inkosi Zungu and the fact that according to Zulu culture a son did not reside in his father`s house. Would the ITB therefore spend more money building Inkosi Zungu`s heir another house? This was a waste of developmental funds that were meant to benefit a lot more people rather than one individual. Inkosi Zungu who was supposed to get a subsidy as a leader, was there for a short period of time.
Mr S Ntapane (UDM) agreed with what Mr Cebekhulu that houses should not be built for individual benefit when the majority of the community did not benefit.
Judge Ngwenya replied that if the ITB was to build every traditional leader a house, it would be unsustainable and this was therefore not its intention. It was customary that the successor of the traditional leader did not occupy the homestead that his or her predecessor occupied but would need to build their own house.
Mr B Zulu (ANC) said that as African people we have our own culture, one can be a lawyer but if one becomes the traditional leader, the tribal council or authority must maintain you thus they have to see to it that you have suitable accommodation.
Mr S Ntapane (UDM) asked ITB what influenced their targets. How did ITB set their targets with regards to the number of traditional councils or communities supported through training? Their target was 33 but they only achieved 12, which was less than half of what the target.
Mr S Ntapane firmly asked why ITB said it was understaffed since it made its own targets.
Ms P Ngwenya-Mabila (ANC) asked the ITB what plans they had in place to ensure that they have enough personnel as they said it was the reason for their underperforming.
Judge Ngwenya replied about the lack of human capacity, saying that the ITB was in the process of setting their new organogram so that they would have an increased number of approved posts. Thus they would have more permanent staff than contract.
Ms Ngwenya-Mabila asked the ITB what policies, if any, they had in terms of what and how much the traditional leaders obtained when they requested something such as vehicles or bursaries.
Judge Ngwenya replied that there was no policy per se. It mainly depended on the revenue they got from traditional councils.
Ms Ngwenya-Mabila sought clarification on why ITB financed any study stream even if the people do not work for them afterwards. For instance, the Department of Social Development (DSD) funded people to study its area of expertise so that when they were done with tertiary education, DSD could absorb them into their department.
Judge Ngwenya clarified saying that the ITB did not decide on its own who got a bursary. The traditional councils deliberated on which students they wanted to send for tertiary education. Thus ITB has no influence.
Ms Ngwenya-Mabila asked why the bursary amounts were different and what made them different.
Judge Ngwenya replied the arrangement with the universities was that you pay what the universities say you should pay whether or not it included pocket money or anything else.
Ms Ngwenya-Mabila added that the ITB had to be clear in its presentation about who gets the bursaries. In some cases, the list showed surnames only. The ITB also should specify the gender of the person.
Ms Ngwenya-Mabila asked ITB about its strategic partnership with the Zululand Anthracite Colliery (Pty) Ltd . Did it help the women who were given the opportunity to grow spinach to market it as well? Did the ITB make arrangements with the communities and schools that were part of a nutrition programme and the Department of Trade and Industry to ensure that there were markets for these women?
Judge Ngwenya replied that they had helped the women to access markets and the Zululand Anthracite Colliery was the women`s first market.
Mr J Van der Linde (DA) said that since targets were not met in the first quarter, they should be compensated for in the second quarter and not be carried forward without anything being done about it. When would the ITB catch up and meet their targets? He asked the ITB how far they were with the problems regarding Ethekwini rates. He asked what they would do with regards to illegal occupation of land
There was no response to these questions
Ms P Xaba (ANC) asked ITB if they were coming to build houses for all the chiefs in KwaZulu Natal that were under the Ingonyama Trust Board.
Judge Ngwenya replied that it was not ITB` s intention to build every traditional leader a house because if they did so, it would be not sustainable.
Ms Xaba pointed out that one of the traditional leaders who died in KZN had his son still living in his father’s house
Ms H Matlanyane (ANC) asked ITB if it was getting value for money with regards to the bursaries they gave.
The Chairperson added to this by pointing out that some students asked for money from the ITB, saying they want to study surveying. However, once they get to university, they figure out that studying surveying was difficult and thus they changed their degree courses. There should be a relationship between the traditional council and the student. This relationship would ensure that students were held accountable.
Ms Ngwenya-Mabila asked how many houses have been built and for which tribal council. How many vehicles were bought and what were the costs?
Judge Ngwenya responded that the leader of Tembe Council asked for assistance after he had built his house halfway and could not finish and contribution to that house was about R500 000.
The Chairperson recommended that the ITB should have a project list when it came to present their next quarterly report. The training of Traditional Councils or communities should be reviewed on the basis of demand as it had been noted that dysfunctionality was a problem.
Geomatics Profession Bill: briefing by Department of Rural Development and Land Reform
The briefing on the Geomatics Bill was presented upon by Mmuso Riba, Chief Surveyor General in the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. He explained that the Bill aimed to accelerate transformation of the Geomatics profession. In the current Act, only the Institutes were allowed to nominate Council members. In this Bill, four members will represent the State, five members were not state employed, one member was from the public and one from the Council on Higher Education. There were four registration categories that fell under the principles of the Geomatics Profession Bill. These were candidate geomatics practitioner, geomatics technician, geomatics technologist and geomatics professional.
The bill was started as the Surveying Profession Bill in 2005, thereafter consultations were conducted with various voluntary organizations. In 2008, they further engaged on the bill and the department adopted the name Geomatics Profession Bill, only then did the department start re-writing the bill. In 2009, the bill became part of legislative programme but it did not go through to Parliament as the emphasis in the department had changed to rural development. In June 2010, there was a consultation with all stakeholders around the bill, thereafter the bill was forwarded to forwarded to the Cabinet committee in 2011.
The Chairperson thanked the Director General for the hard work on the Bill.
The Committee did not have any questions on the Bill.
As neither the Committee nor Director General Mduduzi Shabane had any further comments, the Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
The advert for public hearings on the Bill will appear in newspapers in the weekend of 16/17 March.
- PC Rural: DRDLR on performance of Ingonyama Trust Board during first, second & third quarter for 2012/13 financial year1
- PC Rural: Ingonyama Trust Board performance: Apr-Dec 2012; Geomatics Profession Bill [B4-2013] 2
- PC Rural: DRDLR on performance of Ingonyama Trust Board during first, second & third quarter for 2012/13 financial year2
- PC Rural: Ingonyama Trust Board performance: Apr-Dec 2012; Geomatics Profession Bill [B4-2013]1
- Ingonyama Trust Board Third Quarter 2012/13: 1 October 2012 to 31 December 2012 Report
- Ingonyama Trust Board Second Quarter 2012/13: 1 July 2012 to 31 September 2012 Report
- Ingonyama Trust Board First Quarter 2012/2013 Financial Year 1 April 2012 to 31 June Report
- Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB) Quarterly Reports 1 April to 31 December 2012 presentation
- Ingonyama Trust Board (ITB) Quarterly Reports 1 April to 31 December 2012
- Presentation on Geomatics Profession Bill 2013
- 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.