CSIR on sustainable human settlements; provincial housing business plans; discussion with Australian MPs

Meeting report

Opening remarks to Australian delegation
The Chairperson said it was an honour to host the Australian delegation especially since the Committee had led a South African delegation to Australia. As a result of the experience the Committee had passed very good bills that were generally accepted by everyone including business people. The Committee expected always to draft legislation that is accepted by all sectors of society.

She briefly explained the role the South African Parliament played pertaining to department budget allocation and oversight. Currently Parliament was busy with the budgeting process where departments had to indicate their delivery plans and targets for the current financial year. The Committee ensured it maintained oversight over government work, and over any other executive authority that fell within a particular portfolio. Parliament appropriated funds to the national departments, who in turn distributed to provinces and municipalities.

In South Africa’s system of governance provinces and municipalities had to account to Parliament. They had to indicate their responses to the State of the Nation Address (SONA), but that did not mean the plans from previous years were out of the equation. Provinces still had to account for those. Regular reports were received from departments.

The South African Parliament worked throughout the year. During what was perceived as recess, Parliamentarians conducted constituency work. There was no recess in SA; oversight was very broad and required that Members never got tired of the task. This was how all the Portfolio Committees functioned.

Ms D Ramodibe (Chairperson: Portfolio Committee on Women) commented it was important to talk about the mandate of the Committee on Women, Children and People living with Disabilities. The Committee exercised oversight on government departments responsible for implementing policies that impacted women and people living with disabilities. The work of the Committee cut across all departments. The Committee monitored and evaluated departments on the progress they made on empowering women and people living with disabilities. Empowering would include everything even how budgets benefited women. The Committee wanted to know how departments were progressing with the programmes that sought to empower women. If women were not empowered, the country was doomed to fail as women constituted a significant portion of the population.

The Chairperson had invited the Department of Human Settlements to explain the human settlements portfolio to the Australian delegation.

Department of Human Settlements briefing on the Human Settlements portfolio
Mr Neville Chainee, Department of Human Settlements (DHS) Deputy Director General (DDG) Strategic Planning, said the Department derived its mandate from Section 26 of the Constitution. SA’s Constitution was the only one that guaranteed the right to housing. It made an imperative that the state should take reasonable legislative measures to achieve this right. Also eviction could to happen, but if it happened, it had to be by order of the court.

He said of the 12 decisions on socio-economic rights decided by the Constitutional Court, eight of them pertained to human settlements. The country had a comprehensive way of holding government to account for its responsibilities. Human settlements was a concurrent responsibility of the national and provincial government. A series of legislation had been adopted to support the Constitution.

The key policy instruments that were sometimes referred to as the Housing Code, comprised the Housing Plan; funding and implementation framework. The key pieces of legislation that had been enacted included the Housing Act; Social Housing Act; Rental Housing Act; Social Housing Regulatory Act; Housing Development Act and the Community Services Ombud Act that was in the process of being implemented.

The Department had got comprehensive planning, funding and regulation policies that supported sustainable human settlements. Within the human settlements portfolio one of the key issues was the national environmental policy and legislation that ensured that all developments complied with sustainable development. Sustainable environments in the human settlements ethos were a serious condieration.

The Department was currently adapting building and regulatory standards to ensure acceptable energy efficiency standards. People in the country had been active participants, particularly in the green economy initiatives. What had been done at international level got implemented at local level. Building standards as of last year were changed to ensure SA's international commitments were implemented.

The Department had a key regulatory body – the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC) – that ensured building standards. There also was a strong set of rental housing regulations. Strong emerging rental housing was evident in many towns and cities. Finance for state funded programmes was done through a legislative process, and there was a vibrant parliamentary oversight process over the Executive and public servants.

There were approximately 12 million households in SA. Most important to government were the lower categories that included those that lacked basic infrastructure like informal settlements, shacks, and backyard dwellers. These categories did not ascribe to adequate housing standards. There were approximately 1.2 million households who lived in informal settlements. This was the category that did not have adequate services, shelter and did not have title deeds.

Grants allocation had substantialyl improved since 1994 and indicated government’s seriousness in dealing with human settlements. As of last year, grants amounted to R15.7 billion. In the last couple of years DHS had been looking to improve the quality of houses. When house provision programmes started, quality was least focussed on but as the standard of living had increased, the standards improved and size had increased as well.

There had been substantial improvements in monitoring and evaluation through the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME), drawing from the Australian model. To deal with the infrastructure backlogs the President had established what had become known as the Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Council (PICC). There was a specific chapter in the National Development Plan (NDP) focussing on human settlements. The NDP gave a clear picture of what the Department needed to do, and it was in the process of aligning that with the strategic plan.

There had been delivery agreements between the Minister and the President on housing provision, upgrading land and land release, and affordable financing. One of the issues that much focus had been given to was ensuring eradication of sanitation backlogs. Sanitation was another right guaranteed in the Constitution through the all encompassing 'right to dignity'. SA still lagged behind in improving on housing density by international standards. This had an impact on cost effectiveness in terms of planning.

He stated that Parliament oversaw government and municipalities. Local government was responsible for municipal planning. Given the history of SA, there was a very long history of community participation. This was legally regulated and had been drawn from a range of different jurisdictions.

The recent Census had provided data on migration patterns, and it was discovered that 60% of the population was in urban centres. Funding was allocated to provinces and municipalities on the basis of approved formulas. DHS, together with the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR), was in the process of eradicating the single sex hostels around centres where mining activity took place.

Parliamentarians interact
Mr H Smit (DA: Portfolio Committee on  Mining) commented that SA’s mining industry employed about 500 000. Mining was an important sphere as it contributed 20% to the economy, about R458 billion to the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Previously, only 2% of those employed by the industry were women but that had since improved to about 9% or 40 000 of the total sum. Until recently, legislation had prohibited women from working underground. The legal impediment was removed in 1996 hence the increase in numbers.

In order to transform the industry there had to be a Mining Charter, and it required that companies conform to 10% employment of women by 2009. That had since been revised and it was hoped by next financial year, 40% of all employees needed to be historically disadvantaged individuals and that would include women. The field was male dominated and challenges persisted.

The first female black engineer had only been employed in 2005, and she graduated from the University of Pretoria. The industry was transforming such that women employment in mining had overtaken figures in the traditional industries where women were employed such as clothing. Female engineering graduates increased significantly between 2007 and 2010. Women employment tripled in the last decade. Another area that had unfortunately come to the fore was abuse. DMR was dealing with the matter and was part of the Charter to ensure that companies worked on changing attitudes. The situation in the mines was not as conducive as it ought to be for women. Work was being done towards this end, but results were not as progressive as they ought to be. It was incumbent on mining companies to ensure that this was dealt with as speedily as possible.

He asked if Australia had any policies to increase the proportion of the woman workforce in mines. Secondly, had there been particular abuse incidents directed at women and, if so, how had that been dealt with in Australia. These were matters of concern for the employment of women in the mining industry in SA.

Ms Claire Moore, Australian Labour Party, Senator for Queensland, said in all the portfolios raised,  there was a great deal of shared reality. Australia since 1983 had already employed women although in non-administrative roles. From that period there had been a series of court cases to end discrimination in employment law. A group of strong women, with some support from the unions, led the employment fight in mining. That led to a change in practice. There had been a great increase in the employment of women in areas of engineering and that had been adequately supported by a number of mining companies. These companies had issued a number of scholarships and were working with support groups. There was a large number. She said she did not have the actual figures, but that would be later availed to Parliament.

Good numbers of women were also reported in the transport and machinery areas. The greatest number of mines in Australia was the large open-cut mines. Since 1999 there had been an amazing increase of women in the two fields. There were no regulations specifying what numbers to employ but the internal processes in individual mining companies determined the numbers. There was a national union organisation called Women in Non-Traditional Employment and it was concentrated in mining.

She worked in annual conferences of this organisation, and its membership was concentrated in the major mining states of Queensland and Western Australia. There had been a 30% increase of women working in that area; mining was an area of high wages in Australia. This was an area where women had to take a stand, since they were excluded up until about 1974.

Ms Moore commented that housing in Australia was referred to as such and not human settlements. The responsibility was shared between states and the federal government. Australia’s Constitution did not have a strong focus on housing as the South African Constitution. The federal government could not interrogate what states were doing with their money.

The Constitution was written at about 1900 and it had been very difficult to get a referendum across the whole country. The federal government brought policies and funding to specific areas within housing as it pertained the aboriginal people. There had been an extensive increase in funding in that area; over the last few years, the indigenous housing had required a great deal of the budget.

The Australian government had a national plan to improve access to affordable housing. It had since been found that the cost of providing housing had risen to alarming rates in order to service those who wanted to buy houses and those renting. This had been a huge sociological change in Australia; government had expected people would finish education, get a job and get a mortgage. The country came to a realisation that this was not going to be the future for everybody. This impacted all society. The federal government changed the policy to emphasise greater support for people renting. There was a partnership with private enterprises to provide rental stock.

More rental stock was needed for areas that had been affected by the mining boom. In parts of Queensland there were areas where more gas, coal and oil had been found. Mining people had taken all the housing and that had divided towns.

She said there was an office that focussed on women in Australia. The purpose of the office was to identify those policies that impacted on women. Progress on that front had to be monitored lest the country slipped up on the gains it had made. In the areas of disabilities, the government worked closely with opposition to devise a national disability insurance scheme. The growth of people in need of services was so great that the planning was not coping with it. Legislation had been passed two months ago to determine the way services were provided to people with disabilities over the next five years. This was something on which more information could be shared.

Ms Hellen Polley, Australian Labour Party, Senator for Tasmania, said Tasmania was exploring and investing in the mining industry. Mining companies were opting for women in areas of driving because they were not as rough and women treated machinery with good care. The country made progress in that aspect. She said she found the concept of human settlements very interesting.

Mr Patrick Secker, Electoral Division of Barker, Liberty Party, said there was no policy to increase women in mining but that had been happening any way. Mining companies chose to employ women because they treated machinery much better. In certain areas of the economy, women had been increasing as a result of good government policies. Abuse directed at women in the sector was non-existent; it just did not happen as there were laws to deter such behaviour.

Ms F Bikani (ANC: PC Mining) sought clarity on the coordination of laws as it pertained salaries. Were there policies that regulated how women were paid in relation to men? Did those policies take care of women in mining to improve their lives?

Ms Moore replied coordination was there in both the safety and industrial laws. Protection infrastructure was adequately provided for people employed in mining. There were particular concerns that the industrial laws were silent on women but national laws directed such things as maternity. The country worked hard over the years not to have pieces of legislation over individual groups, rather general legislation that accommodated issues of equity. Trade unions were a bit slow to act on this, because they were protecting the general membership. When the trade unions  started in the ‘80s they were the ones who pushed protection of women in the industry. Mining was so important in both countries, and there was a need to ensure that women had a right to be there; safe, with well paying jobs.

Ms J Sosibo (ANC) asked if there was a specific committee in Australia that looked at issues of amending the Constitution given the conservatism around constitutional changes that had been cited.

Mr S Mokgalapa (DA) commented SA was faced with a challenge of slum upgrading that was a result of rapid urbanisation. How did Australia handle slum upgrading?

Ms G Borman (ANC) commented it was a world phenomenon that people flocked into the cities. As a result of poverty and inequalities, SA government gave people houses, whilst in Australia people paid to receive houses. She said she was not sure if Australia faced the challenge quite as SA did. South Africa’s legacy had brought about this challenge. Another challenge in SA related to the “gap market”, where people earned enough not to qualify for government’s low housing, and yet did not earn enough to qualify for bank loans. These were professional people such as nurses and teachers.

Ms H Lamoela (ANC: PC Women) sought clarity on how disabled persons were taken care of in programmes such as slum upgrading.

Mr Secker replied Australia did not have the percentage of slums comparable to SA. The country had an area of disadvantaged people in urban indigenous communities that it needed to improve on. Housing policy was pretty effective, and there was a long term public housing administered by the states, but also overseen by the federal government. The challenge of slums in SA was just too great; Australia had a high home-ownership rate. There was a policy that regulated viability of homes provided to people in wheelchairs; but still the country could do better.

He said changes to the constitution could be done by their parliament as long as the correct majority of the votes were attained. Due to the country’s conservatism, only one amendment would be passed out of every seven constitutional amendments mooted. Parliamentarians had been reluctant to make constitutional changes in Australia. And this was democracy.

Ms Moore commented there were people in Australia who were obsessed with the constitution. This group was mainly academics, and were very vigilant about how the constitution operated. This group stimulated the interest. There was no standing committee to look at the constitution, but one could be convened when the need arose. Any discussion about making a change to the constitution really stimulated the interest in Australia.

A couple of matters had at the present time stimulated interest and they included the proposal to include indigenous people in the constitution. To Australia’s shame, that group had not been accommodated in the constitution. There was a select committee set up to look at that proposal. But also there was an interest in putting local government into the constitution.

As SA, Australia had three tiers of government, but local government was not mentioned in the constitution. In the 1900s when the constitution was founded there was no local government; it was the third time that there had been such an attempt, and in the past it was voted down. In terms of the process, it was not a constant, but it came as needs determined. Such a change required to be supported by all parties in the Parliament for it to go ahead.

Ms Moore agreed with Mr Secker that the challenge of slums in Australia was nothing compared to SA. There was a challenge of people in Australia living in houses that were in a pretty bad state. The challenge was with planning in the local government sphere. They need money to do that, and it came from the federal government and the state. There was not enough money. The current policy arrangement of encouraging people to build for themselves was not as well arranged as the Public Housing Partnership (PHP) programme in SA.

Urbanisation continued to be a challenge, but not like in SA. It was noticeable that the small country towns were dying out. Farming was not doing well and people moved to the cities. In Queensland, mining potential outside of big cities had reversed that trend, because people opted to go back. Urbanisation remained a constant challenge for governments to address and meeting people’s needs in those cities. This was an international issue; governments across the world should work together to address the issue.

Ms Moore commented that the concept of affordable housing was identified as one of the sociological challenges. In order to provide affordable houses there was a need for a collective effort from governments, developers, and civil society. Australia’s government had funded a number of advisory councils to work on social inclusion. And much focus had been dedicated on this aspect; there was a special parliamentary committee, and the current work was specifically social inclusion.

Ms Polley said homelessness was a challenge to all developing countries including “our own”, and had been put on the political agenda since 2007. A lot of money had been invested on homelessness. The challenge mainly faced middle-aged and mature women. As a response, the government was looking to ensure there was adequate age-care guidance to citizens. Australia was fortunate when it came to disability and accessible homes, in that it had strong legislation in terms of access. Any housing development had to take this aspect into consideration.

Mr Graeme Wilson, Australia’s High Commissioner to SA, said it was important to highlight the working relationship and diversity in the two countries. Australia had the strongest ties – trade and investment links – with SA than any other country in Africa. Australia had invested about R5 billion in the country; and there were strong people-to-people links as well as in sport.

There was a well established South African community in Australia now. There were a number of multilateral issues between the two countries in international institutions (United Nations; G20 and Commonwealth. There was the scope to lift the relationship to a new level especially as Australia for the next two years would be on the UN’s Security Council. Australia’s focus would be Africa and the continent’s input, as well the country would chair the G20 next year, and SA was the only G20 member from the continent. The two countries were jointly hosting the Square Kilometre Array (SKA), the biggest scientific project in the world. People-to-people links would further be strengthened on the sporting and political front.

Ms Ramodibe thanked the delegation and said SA and Australia were in a very strong relationship and that it was hoped that continued.

Members from the Women and Mining Portfolio Committees were excused.

Chairperson's remarks on Human Settlements Budget Vote preparations
The Chairperson said the Committee had been hoping to meet with the provinces since last year. The Committee would not address under-spending. But because it was time for the budget vote debate; it was important to have provinces present when engaging the National Department. The Committee was aware interactions with provinces had taken place during preparation of business plans. But it was important that when the Committee got a briefing on the business plans, provinces as implementing agents be present.

The session would set a tone on issues of the budget, and on how DHS would respond to matters arising from the State of the Nation Address (SONA). Although the portfolio had been allocated a whopping R139 billion by National Treasury; it practically had only about R39 billion of that money. The question was where the other R100 billion would be found. There were various issues aligned with human settlements but the budget was not correctly allocated.

The rest of the money was allocated to other departments; this necessitated good inter-governmental relations. Another issue to consider was how the Department related internally and with other departments. The relationship should be established at municipal level, right through to the provinces, and then nationally. This would ensure targets in the SONA were achieved.

She contextualised the statement in the requirement, as stated in the SONA, that all new housing development should roll out solar geysers. This was a challenge for the Department because it had no control on provision of energy. Good inter-departmental working relations became critical. There had to be strong links with Parliament as well. Oversight over Government need not mean animosity; rather good interaction on delivery matters. It was important to be cordial with each other for the benefit of the citizens.

She said the CSIR had been invited to present in front of everyone in the human settlements portfolio. The challenge with departments was that they avoided using government institutions deliberately; and relied on consultants. The Committee had observed this tendency. The purpose should be to ensure that the capacity within government was used adequately, even if one opted for consultants.

Council for Scientific and Industrial Research presentation
Dr Cornelius Ruiters, CSIR Executive Director: Built Environment, said the Council would share information on technologies developed in the human settlements portfolio. The work was not only limited to the provision of houses but also the kind of infrastructure used to support human settlements such as roads, bulk services and other social facilities required for decent settlements. Bulk services were critical within human settlements, and the social facilities that went along with that.

The CSIR was approached by the Presidential Infrastructure Coordinating Commission (PICC) to do research and come back with a business case on alternative building technologies for SA. That report had to be tabled in six months.

Today's presentation was divided into three aspects: planning; alternative building technologies and water and sanitation services. Firstly, to design functional human settlements one needed to ensure integrated planning. The CSIR was looking to find suitable options when it came to urban developments. The CSIR was also looking at densities and appropriate technologies for building. Another critical aspect for planning and design was how it addressed safety and crime for newly established communities.

Human settlements were not about housing; there were other considerations to be looked into, and those included the position of the social facilities. Provinces had guidelines on how they wanted new settlements to look like. Accessibility analysis could be used to test sufficiency and user acceptability of facilities in settlements.

The CSIR had done work for the Department of Public Service and Administration (DPSA) on the backlogs in the eThekwini and the Nelson Mandela Bay Metros. The focus was more on the human capital requirements – in terms of the key professionals – and the kind of alternative technologies that were required to provide the services. The guidelines were out there and adequately addressed forward planning.

Human settlements played a critical role in the South African development vision. Early in the year the CSIR presented to Gauteng provincial government on the infrastructure master plan, and it indicated human settlements was critical on how the province planned for infrastructure. This also related to the spatial dynamics that the province encountered. The migration of people from other provinces to Gauteng made planning virtually impossible. A study done with the Human Sciences Research Council found that highly qualified young professionals migrated to towns for job opportunities, and they looked more at the rental market. These were profound observations in terms of how one provided for human settlements in towns and cities.

There had to be synergy in terms of the development dynamics that were there in the country and the challenges they posed to provinces. The important role that the regional towns had to play should be noted when it came to housing the national population. But also how that translated to the settlement patterns in the country was also crucial. Migration made planning difficult; did government plan for the person who would move, or plan for where the person would move to. Migration occurred mainly in provinces like the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu Natal, the North West and Limpopo. An atlas had been developed in terms of where the country could look to develop human settlements.

The country had a legacy that had to be addressed as to how human settlements were planned in the past. Those legacy issues were important to address by focussing on a multi-disciplinary approach, so that a determination could be made as to how the country moved forward.

Mr Lewellyn van Wyk, CSIR Principal Researcher: Alternative Building Technologies (ABTs), said poor urban design and planning were identified as challenges that hampered delivery. This clearly was evident in the townships of Mdantsane (Eastern Cape) and Claremont (KZN). Units often faced every direction, and the layout of roads was not thought through. There was no variation in house design, and communities were poorly integrated.

He said it was possible that low cost housing could be moved to the middle of a town without distracting from anything. The township of Claremont was a case in point. The established community was very nervous about an establishment of the RDP housing in the middle of a town. But because of the integration and how it had been carried out fears were allayed. Variation as opposed to one house design for every house was important. Houses needed to be built and designed in a way that assumed there would be extensions in the future. So the one-size-fits-all approach did not work.

Poor construction techniques were a challenge and should not happen. The fundamental flaw in construction was treating a concrete block like a brick. This was a general trend throughout human settlements developments and that had led to weak structures. With correct building measures quality projects could be completed in relatively fast times. This kind of right training was provided to those involved in the construction of Claremont project.

Another challenge was poor technical documentation as it related to technical skills and delivering the typical input required. Knowing the poor level of skills and supervision, it was impossible for poor bricklayers to do the kind of job that would do justice to low housing construction. The CSIR had availed a whole series of construction details that advised contractors, advisory staff and the block-layers on what was expected.

He indicated that funding was made available for the programme on Solar Water Heaters (SWH), as a pilot project to test innovative technologies. A rebate was applied for from Eskom, and it was granted. All of the money that was spent on the project was given back by Eskom. When it came to construction, ABTs building technologies outperformed the conventional method of building.

Savings of up to half the value of construction on conventional methods were made when ABTs technologies were used in the Eastern Cape and North West schools. Human Settlements did not use these technologies adequately. Clearly there were social acceptability issues that needed to be unpacked. But gains in terms of time, cost, and indoor comfort on ABTs technologies building were worth exploiting.

Mr Petrus Matji, CSIR Competence Area Manager, said sanitation was integral to the water value chain. Whether one referred to ground or surface water the relationship would always be there. To have a sustainable delivery of services, the country needed to rethink the way it invested in innovation and technology development.

Most of the water in rural areas was not treated. People just pumped from the boreholes; and even when they captured rainwater, it was a matter of capturing and use. What CSIR was doing with some of the technological advances was it sought to treat water at the household level. The technology had been piloted in the Eastern Cape and it was working. CSIR would continue discussion with the Department to update information on the red book and the atlas. But it was important to remember that sanitation was an integral part of the water value chain, irrespective of where the function was located.

Discussion
The Chairperson said this session was not for the Human Settlements portfolio only. Everyone in the meeting was welcome to engage the CSIR. The debate could also be taken to provinces.

Ms Borman commented that the country did not have to reinvent the wheel as it had a good organisation that could spearhead innovation in the area of human settlements. She asked if Departments used the services offered by the CSIR adequately. Were provinces tapping into the resource that the CSIR was? She said there was a need for a mindset change.

Mr Kenny Mmoiemang, MEC Human Settlements: Northern Cape, commented that it would be ideal if the presentation could be made a policy proposal, and forwarded to the Director General. It was important that the type of sanitation projects that were there on the ground be relooked at, especially as they were a health hazard to communities. If Government was not cautious, the projects like the ventilated improved pit (VIP) toilet would create a problem. The original concept could have been better but the amount that was there for the subsidy quantum dictated that a substandard product was settled for. It was important to partner with the CSIR with regards to the type of human settlements programmes that were there on the ground, especially with a view to improve on the product using the new technologies.

Ms P Duncan (DA) commented something could happen around housing with the involvement of the CSIR. Government had only delivered 2.2 million low cost houses in two decades; this was no mean task, but with the involvement of the CSIR this figure could be improved on. How many provinces and municipalities had made use of the CSIR services when it came to ABTs building technologies.

Ms Duncan said almost a billion rands had already been spent on rectification and yet government continued to budget for it. The country should not be budgeting for rectification. She asked if the CSIR shared experiences with smaller companies.

Mr Mokgalapa commented that the CSIR had given the Committee hope, but that it still boggled the mind to realise that rectification and poor workmanship were still there with all this technological potential. This was a question of political will. Why was there reluctance to the use of alternative technologies despite being scientifically proven that it was the most cost effective way of building houses?

Mr Mokgalapa commented that he found it difficult to comprehend the role of the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC) if there was the CSIR. The presentation was clear, and had comprehensively dealt with spatial planning. The CSIR had dealt with issues of urban development and urban design; these were fundamentals to any human settlement developments. If government could just sort out this basic consideration of where and how a house was developed, then all else would be in order.

Mr Mokgalapa asked if brick and mortar were the most effective way of building houses, if not, why then did SA not use alternative technologies? He failed to understand why rural provinces did not use CSIR on alternative sanitation technologies. This was a government institution, and departments did not have to pay a cent for its services. Yet poor workmanship and collapsing houses continued to be built for the poor. The logical conclusion that could be drawn on departments’ reluctance to enlist the services of the CSIR was the lack of political will.

Ms Jennifer Mirembe, DHS Director: Provincial Planning, said although she acknowledged the presentation, it should have included the people’s responses to the urban designs and planning. The presentation could have gone further to explain how alternative technologies could be used to transform townships into suburbs. If the debate was not moved beyond the presentation, it meant the country might risk not addressing the problems faced today in poor communities. RDP houses got given to families that grew over time. The house might be given to an old granny, but the extension to the house was occupied by another generation. The CSIR as a top research institution needed to bring to the table this argument as well.

Mr Bonginkosi Madikizela, Western Cape MEC Human Settlements, said there were provinces that used CSIR and his was among those. Social acceptability was a challenge with alternative building technologies. The Western Cape had appointed a company to build 2000 houses using the ABTs. People were interdicted from preventing the contractor to build the houses, and a security company had to safeguard the site. People thought the houses were of a cheaper quality; social acceptability should be looked at further. Government needed to be flexible on the subsidy itself. The upfront payment looked as though it was more, but there would be long-term benefits.

He said rectification was Government’s problem. Rectifying houses built before the establishment of the NHBRC, and those whose condition deteriorated as a result of negligence, need not be the responsibility of Government. The Government should worry about those houses it failed to monitor during construction, and as a result were built shoddily. Rectification put Government in a difficult situation in that the little resources it had, had to be spent on correction, and yet new houses still had to be built.

Ms Sosibo commented that she was happy to hear the admission that provinces had failed to monitor some of the projects. What were officials paid for if they failed to monitor the projects? It would be ideal if the ABTs could be used to build houses for people in rural areas as they were the social strata that struggled the most.

The Chairperson asked if the houses built using ABTs could withstand the challenges posed by the phenomena of climate change. She sought clarity on the non reusable ‘grey water’ and what could be done with the new technologies. The VIP toilets had long been denounced by the Committee because they dehumanised poor people. The bushes were much better than those toilets.

CSIR response
Dr Ruiters replied that ABTs was an area that the CSIR had been tasked to look at by the PICC; the ABT schools worked fine in the Eastern Cape, and outperformed bricks and mortar. Developed countries of the Northern Hemisphere were building using ABTs, and it was not an issue there. It was strange that the British colonies still regarded bricks and mortar the better option.

Mr Van Wyk said the design of the units anticipated change, and one looked at the sites and where best to locate the house; these were considerations in house design. This was meant to allow people options. This aspect was central to the design process to ensure that this was easily available without cost implications. He did not want to create an impression that ABT was a ‘silver bullet’, in the same way that ABT was not one-size fits all. The use of ABT required decision making, and making sure the right product for the right place was availed.

Mr Chainee said there was a working relationship with the CSIR. In relation to human settlements there was a bigger picture with the use of alternative technologies. Human settlements was not about just the house, and officials needed to remember the mandate of the Department. It was simply not about ABTs, but also livelihoods around the services, the PHPs and rural housing.

Mr Mongezi Mnyani, NHBRC CEO, said CSIR was an agent that designed without looking at implementation and production challenges. The product was good, but the NHBRC had sat many times with many companies who had failed in the market. The production cycle of these materials was problematic.

He pointed out that the images shown were based in Cape Town; the companies were contracted to Gauteng and they could not establish a single site and could not find a factory because of capital costs. Government had to come with capital costs upfront for them to actually put the site in some of the areas. It was good to have all these programmes but the implementation process was always a challenge. Were SA companies ready for this?

There had been about seven products in Gauteng and they all started well, but when the capital challenges crept in, there were challenges. Many of these contracts had collapsed. It was not as if these products were not implemented; they were implemented, but experienced challenges as those with normal contractors of bricks and mortar. He suggested another discussion together with the CSIR where pertinent challenges should be tackled and how the process would be implemented in future.

Mr Mnyani said on sanitation there were issues such as the Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs) that came up with the system. There was a very good proposal from the Engineers in Gauteng’s Sweetwaters, to say while waiting for the sewer to come up in Sedibeng there had to be something in the interim. When that was put to communities, their proposal was rejected precisely because the risk that the alternative sewer system would have a ripple effect on the environment in future. These projects needed to be practically tested via a pilot. The NHBRC was prepared to work with the CSIR in all of its projects.

Mr Caster Sharpley, Eastern Cape DHS Head of Department (HOD), commended the work the CSIR was doing in the province for schools. It was important that a demonstration was not presented as a solution. There were realities that had to be taken into consideration when it came to implementing alternative technologies.

The Eastern Cape was implementing 1800 houses built using alternative technologies; one harsh reality was the set up costs. Human settlements was highly contested; one could not give a project of over 1000 houses t to one developer. This created political uncertainty, given the number of people who would naturally have an interest in participating in that particular project.

The case had been to present these projects as though one saved when using the alternative materials. This was not the case. But also it was not true that the communities did not want the alternative technologies; just that the communities were being asked the wrong questions. One could not ask communities about the difference between a block and a wall plastered with wire. It was important to apply logic to the conversation that had been over-complicated by the sector. There was a need to think beyond changing what existed, rather organise communities in such a way that they would live and play as per the human settlements mandate.

Mr Sharpley proposed that there be a meeting with the CSIR where standard building plans were looked at and thoroughly discussed. Provinces paid every time a building plan was developed; this was waste of money, and those compiling the business plans always motivated why provinces had to pay. But the reality was that the Department could come up with national norms and standards for standard houses, including all the aspects that were involved.

The Chairperson supported the proposal, and afforded the CSIR an opportunity to respond to questions.

Mr Matji replied the comment on grey water re-use would be looked at. CSIR programmes were ongoing, and grey water re-use would be looked at as part of the overall water conservation and demand management programme.

Mr Matji said he did not have a ready answer on VIPs. The CSIR would gather data and try to understand the challenges and innovative ways that could be put in place that could lead to infrastructure development.

Mr Van Wyk replied the climate change challenge would need to be a separate presentation. The CSIR had looked at projected climate change patterns in SA over the next 100 years. Two issues that became critical were higher temperatures of around about 5 degrees inland, and heavy rains in the coastal areas of KZN and the Eastern Cape. This meant that high levels of thermal performance needed to be designed into the houses. Also, with the anticipated higher volumes of precipitation something had to be done about slippage.

The “holla concrete block” was performing at the required scale; but the levels that the country had to get to were beyond the block. Most of the ABTs would deal with the challenge of climate change successfully. Condensation remained a problem area, but the CSIR had to investigate the higher wind speeds because of the prevalence of cyclonic activity along the coast around Richard’s Bay. He welcomed the comments on the ABTs and this reinforced what the CSIR already knew.

Chairperson on DHS business plan
The Chairperson said Parliament was preparing for the budget debate, and it was a crucial moment because Members had to represent the portfolio in general. The Members would speak to the nation about what government was doing. And the people were aware of what the issues were. Members could not just go and motivate without information. These sessions assisted Members to articulate exactly what was going on including the challenges. It was important that the broader portfolio owned up to the challenges, and seek to rectify them.

She said input from provinces and metros – especially those receiving grants from NDHS – was highly appreciated. The departmental response to the invitation needed to focus on the SONA, and the budget proposals that had been put forward. Most importantly would be the response to Outcome 8, on the strategic goals of the Department. That would also include the five key priorities set by Government.

She said the Millennium Development Goals were important, and these in agreement with Outcome 8 on the upgrading of informal settlements. This was not only a national priority goal but also an UN priority objective and should, thus, respond adequately to it. This also spoke to the sanitation function, even though it had not yet been transferred. The ruling party’s 53^rd Mangaung Conference mandated human settlements to maintain implementation on Strategic Integrated Project (SIP) 18.

Director General comments
Mr Thabane Zulu, DHS DG, said the presentation was a consolidated business plan for the portfolio. There could be things in the presentation that could be specific to provinces - such would be replied to by the respective province.

As per the request DHS had agreed to present but had arranged for a technical meeting on Friday 19 April. The meeting followed considerations of the various submissions from provinces. The meeting provided DHS an opportunity to further scrutinise the business plans just before they were finalised on Friday. DHS had conditionally approved the business plan in terms of protocol of government. Various issues would be concluded on Friday’s meeting with HODs.

The presentation dealt with the delivery trends of human settlements in the last two years. This would allow the Department to analyse its delivery. The presentation would cover allocations for the current financial year, Outcome 8, rectification, rural development, critical projects, and SIP.

CFO and DDG comments on the provincial housing departments
Ms Funani Matlatsi, DHS CFO, referred to the allocation that got transferred to Human Settlements in the form of the Human Settlements Development Grant (HSDG). The total amount gazetted for the grant was R16.9 billion. The Department had been requested to separate the Disaster Grant allocation, hence it got allocations for two consecutive years. The idea was to have the Department indicate how the grant would be funded. The Department would not be in a position to indicate the disaster allocation yet.

The current allocation for the HSDG was according to a formula that had been used for the past number of years. She emphasized this item because there were new data figures that would be used in reviewing the allocation formula. A process to use a new allocation formula had been started with National Treasury, and would hopefully be used before the end of the 2014/15 financial year.

There was a request from the Committee that DHS separate the disaster allocation from the HSDG. The amount of R299 million was earmarked for repairs on infrastructure damaged by the floods. This funding could only be used for damaged infrastructure and nothing else. The Department expected reports and specific plans on requests from provinces with respect to damaged infrastructure. In the business plans, DHS had sought to understand the root causes of under spending and why the money was spent very late in the financial year.

The approach taken by DHS would provide for a quantitative and qualitative method of reporting. DHS also looked at how the business plans had been costed by provinces. The separation of the R299 million disaster funds from the R16.9 billion, left the Department with R16.6 billion to fund creation of development houses in the current financial year. This was an increase from the prior year’s R15.7 billion. The actual delivery for the current year was an improvement. DHS would work with provinces to ensure that business plans complied with the minimum requirement of the Division of Revenue Act (DORA).

Mr Chainee said the presentation was a collective between DHS, provinces and the housing entities. As indicated there was a meeting on Friday to tighten up some of the issues. This year there was more robustness in terms of where the Department wanted to be. Eastern Cape indicated that it needed emphasis on house construction, and in turn the Department indicated there were variances with regards to Outcome 8. This was an issue that the province had to deal with. DHS also indicated that the NMB Metro had not eradicated the bucket system. This was an issue that the province and the metro had to take up, but also the matter of the 10.8% committed to rectification, which was substantially higher than other provinces.

The Department submitted that the Free State targets were ambitious given the level of performance previously. DHS was highlighting the fact that the province should not come back and say it was not warned. But also the rationality of the business plan, financial planning and the reporting systems were a challenge. The DG had requested strict compliance in respect of HSS. And the absence of a detailed audit both on financials and deliverables was another challenge. It was also indicated to the province that there were backlogs when it came to the eradication of the bucket system. In relation to the informal settlements, the Department was proposing affordable rentals, Finance Linked Individual Subsidy Programme (FLiSP) and land as a measure to deal with the challenge. These were the key programmes.

In Gauteng, the performance risk required attention; if accreditation and assignment happened, the province had to ensure there was sufficient capacity for programmes and project management. The MEC and HOD remained the accounting principals.

DHS indicated that in KZN there was a need for emphasis on rural housing. There was a substantial amount of traditionally owned land. A lot of the programmes took place under urban areas, but because of the title issue they fell under rural housing. NDHS had indicated to the province that it had to ensure there was greater focus on slum upgrading. DHS had expressed a concern about the Cornubia project.

It indicated to Limpopo that it would not achieve its rental target, and that it needed to put more emphasis on rural housing. Only 15% of what was prioritised for the Lephalale project was being utilised and an explanation had been requested. During the course of 2012/13 financial year, R300 million was surrendered. In the analysis of the business plan, DHS argued that what provinces budgeted for in the 2013/14, the money received should be utilised for delivery, and not for what provinces failed to achieve in previous years. The Department could not have a situation where it was not sure what it paid for.

In Mpumalanga this year the implementability of the business plan had been called, and it was agreed that DHS and the province had to work out a management process to highlight the issues. It also highlighted the eradication of the bucket system backlogs. Accurate performance audits were needed, given what the province had projected and what it had delivered. Both the MEC and the Acting HOD had given that commitment. An extensive process would be entered into with the DHS DDG for Performance Monitoring Unit (PMU) and the province.

The Northern Cape would simply not meet the target on affordable rentals. Mitigation strategies would have to be looked at.

In the North West, there was inadequate funding reserved for the rental programme, particularly around the mining towns. There should be a better balance between provision of basic services and house construction.

The Western Cape was unlikely to achieve the Outcome 8 targets. There had to be changes here and there and the business plan would be supported. There were issues with the City of Cape Town metro abilities in relation to the Urban Settlement Development Grant (USDG).

Mr Chainee said a better balance between informal settlement and house construction had to be struck. This was a political issue that needed to be weighed up. DHS was not doing too well on affordable rentals. Given where the Department should be, and where it wanted to be, the issue of affordable rentals had to be addressed.

He said he would not go into detail on FLiSP as there was a workshop the following day with the National Housing Finance Corporation (NHFC), but more ground had to be covered on this aspect. On acquisition of land, there were about 117 000 hectares of land, 19 parcels for R314 million. Rectification required about 10% of the budget, but the allocation towards this was currently at 4%. Rural housing would see 36 000 units being erected on 8800 sites that were being serviced. All new projects being built should undergo the NHBRC enrolment process.

Mining towns – of Sebatse, Matlosana, Lephalale, Madibeng, Rustenberg, Matjebeng, eMalahleni – were presidential designated projects, and had been allocated money for upgrading. The President monitored the projects through the Ministers of Rural Development and Land Reform (Gugile Nkwinti) and Economic Development (Ebrahim Patel). Money was allocated through the USDG to the projects.

Discussion
Mr Mokgalapa welcomed the presentation and said there had been alignment in the national and provincial business plans. The issue of the budget versus the targets had been troubling the Committee. It would be undesirable to be discussing targets missed whilst the budget was here for next year. He wanted to be satisfied that the targets put forward were correctly aligned with the budget, and that they were realistic.

Mr Mokgalapa said the issue of the SMART principle needed to be further explored. The AG indicated the previous year, that the Department was not adhering to this; this surely filtered down to provinces. It would be interesting to hear how provinces were going to ensure that their plans were based on the SMART principle.

Mr Mokgalapa said the vacancies at senior management level was concerning and held to ransom the function of the Department. If appointments were not made, the whole department could not move. Secondly this had always come as a reason why there was under-expenditure in most provinces. He asked if the Department was satisfied that provinces had put enough systems in place to ensure monitoring happened.

Mr Mokgalapa sought clarity on the issue of land. The last time the Committee engaged the Housing Development Agency (HDA), it indicated the release of land was good, but the units still had to be constructed. Release of land should translate to housing development. Some of the land that was being released was not strategic enough for human settlements.

He commented that the 400 000 units as envisaged by the President were unlikely to be reached by 2014. He asked what was the backup plan to get as close as possible to the target, or would the reality, that the target was not achievable, be accepted? He asked what measures were there to ensure there was better spending on the USDG, and that the metros understood for what they used the USDG.

MEC Madikizela commented officials had to be honest about the figure of 400 000 as it was “thumbsucked”. The figure was given to the Department without checking whether provinces, in terms of their business plans, were in a position to reach that target. The business plans ndicated a number of things had to be looked at. In the past, provinces accepted business plans from municipalities that were a wish list of projects that municipalities wanted to implement without having done any planning. This resulted in provinces missing targets and having to shift funds to other programmes. Provinces now had to retrospectively deal with the targets that had been set on their behalf, before answering whether provinces could deliver on the targets.

MEC Madikizela said the bucket system was a challenge. Some provinces battled with the challenge of bulk infrastructure. This was the biggest challenge; and the PICC was formed to deal with this problem. The country was still confronted with a trillion rand backlog to deal with the challenge of bulk infrastructure. In some areas it was still not feasible to build dignified sanitation facilities. Migration to big cities further compounded the challenge as well, because migrants settled in un-serviced areas.

Mr Andries Gamede, MEC Human Settlements: Mpumalanga, said provinces would try to achieve the 400 000 target. The challenge was with the small contractors used to carry out projects. It was important to rope in contractors who had a delivery record, but used in such a way that would empower those small contractors.

MEC Gamede said the challenge with vacancies was that the system had got saturated and there was too much fluidity. The qualified people often moved around departments and to such an extent that work was carried out by inexperienced people. Government needed to strengthen the mentoring system with the experienced officials. People were there at the posts but capacity was a challenge.

MEC Mmoiemang disputed the claim that the 400 000 units was a thumbsuck. There was a Minister / MECs meeting (MinMec) held in Klerksdorp where this figure was arrived at. The matter had to be taken up during the annual reports, where a detailed explanation should be sought. It was difficult that at the end of the current administration’s term, such a claim was made.

Ms Borman sought clarity on how quickly provinces could access the disaster funding. She requested that the difference in the use of “sites” and “units” as contained in the business plans be clarified. Were the sites independent of the units? There had been massive improvement of the business plan, and the effort that went into it was readily evident. It was just a matter of helping Members understand how the targets were arrived at. She requested that the rectification of sites in the Eastern Cape had to be clarified. What rectification took place on these sites? She also sought clarity on whether sites were allocated for emergency housing. Ms Borman commented that the figures on Cornubia were not adding up. She asked how provinces on their own put the figures down. KZN should comment on the criteria used to allocate beneficiaries; but also if the province could indicate if it had policies around percentages of low cost housing and bonded houses.

Ms Sosibo wanted to know if there was a reason those provinces who had not eradicated the bucket system indicated for that failure. There was money, why was the bucket system not eradicated?

The Chairperson said during the time when quality was not a focus area, the Department could build up to 500 000 units annually. When the current administration took over the figure dropped to about 250 000, and the reason put forward was that the focus had shifted to quality. The President proposed that during his term of office, 400 000 houses ought to have been built. This was not a thumbsuck figure. If the Department could have built 250 000 units annually why could it not do 400 000 in five years.

The Chairperson said the budget had always been allocated for the construction of houses. The weakness was that provinces did not spend, and were therefore continually missing targets. It was a disgrace that in January 2013, only 32% had been achieved in the eradication of slums although the programme had been ongoing for a while. Members were yet to recover from the shock that expenditure for the current year stood at below 50% in January, and yet within two months, it was recorded at well over 97%. Members were interested to find out whether fiscal dumping had occurred.

The Chairperson said the monitoring systems of the Department needed to be upgraded so as to detect early, when provinces were likely to under-spend. These were challenges that were there; Parliament wanted functional systems for government. She said FliSP was not a new programme. Had analysis been done on why FLiSP failed? People complained about FLiSP; the programme could be project based, but also it needed to accommodate other individuals. This policy was incorrect; the Department should be realistic.

The Chairperson said the USDG was a grant meant to address bulk services infrastructural challenges, and not upgrading of cemeteries. Why were municipalities not followed and oversight given on this grant. She said it would be proper if municipalities account to MinMec for the USDG.

The Chairperson said she agreed that rectification could not be avoided. Shoddy work was also done by the big companies, smaller companies were not the only challenge. It was important to improve on oversight and monitoring. Rigorous systems that would follow the money should be put in place.

Stakeholder comments
Mr Nono Maloi, MEC Human Settlements: North West, commented that the North West did not under-spend. The province exceeded its targets and entirely used its budget. The province applied the smart principle to its fullest. This was not to say there were no challenges. The myth that most people went to the Western Cape, KZN and Gauteng was not entirely true. A considerable number of people went to the North West, and yet the budget allocation did not take this into consideration. The province did not have enough money to build sufficient houses for the people.

He said there was a serious problem with rental stock as it was very expensive. Out of the 450 units the province was expected to have built, it only built 100 units in Tlokwe. It was important to balance rental stock with low cost and rural housing. Another challenge that the province had was land availability. Municipalities had sold land many years ago. The province had been allocated R75 million this current financial year for the purpose of buying land. Over and above this, the provincial government had agreed to take funding from the provincial equitable share and use it to acquire more land.

Mr Olly Mlamleli, MEC Human Settlements: Free State, said he noted comments about targets not being achievable, but it was important that government was ambitious sometimes. Challenges were there in the Free State, and five senior managers faced disciplinary action. This was a challenge in terms of capacity.

The strength of districts was another issue that needed consideration because this was where delivery happened. There was a lack of technical capacity at district level. The focus for the department in the current financial year would be to acquire technical skills for the districts. The Department had largely outsourced the function, and even its staff complement comprised mainly of administrators; this was being attended to.

Mr Mdu Zungu, Human Settlements representative: KZN, said the clarity sought with Cornubia was difficult to provide because different components were being compared. The allocation policy for the project had been taken through to the metro committees. This was finalised and it was awaiting ratification by the executive committee of the metro. The main issue with the project was the low income component that would be completed by June.

The Chairperson pleaded that there be progress in priority projects. The Committee should not speak of Cornubia since 2009 to 2013 and yet only 500 houses had been completed. It was unacceptable that people remained in transit camps for a period longer than three years. This was a debate for another day, but for now the Committee was interested in the current budget.

Mr Sharpley clarified that the Eastern Cape had to have rectification on services. In 2005, some of the services like the water and sewerage pipes were twinned, and in instances of bursting that resulted in a mess. The quality of those pipes also was another challenge. The province wished to state that the way it went about its business was constructive.

He said the bucket system in NMB metro would change, as the metro had finally appointed a municipal manager. The province was assisting the metro to get rid of the bucket system. The metro still perpetuated the bucket system by budgeting for it, instead of reducing it. Discussions were ongoing with Buffalo City metro to get a project manager for Duncan Village. The province was also happy with the 10.8% rectification figure, and it considered it quite conservative compared to the old projects that were still in existence.

Mr Mnyani commented that the NHBRC would not take a back seat, and that all projects would be enrolled. The NHBRC also considered availing technical capacity with a view to ensuring geotech requirements. There were also ongoing roadshows with the HODs focussing on enrolling specific projects. The problematic formula formerly used by the NHBRC had been changed.

Mr Paul Mohlala, General Manager Human Settlements: Limpopo, commented that the reason there was no budget allocation for the PHPs was because the provincial budget had decreased. The Lephalale project was being implemented but there had been challenges with the site. The owner of the site had initially agreed with the department, but it appeared he wanted to renege. Good care was being taken of this.

Ms Mahlatsi commented monitoring systems like the CFOs forum and reviews were in place. The monitoring and evaluation unit conducted the physical verification of programmes. It was agreed that province would accompany the Department when visiting projects. The DG had indicated that he had conditionally approved the business plan that would address disaster allocation.

A separate report would be prepared on this, but provinces had been requested to come with plans on how they would immediately attend to issues. Money would be released in May; the payment schedule had been approved and cash flows to provinces would be released. DHS was prepared to assist provinces when there was a need.

There would be a physical verification of projects to ascertain that the R4 billion not spent by January had not gone to waste. DHS would want to ensure that there was service delivery on the ground. The Department was not worried that the money had been spent, rather that people had houses.

Closing remarks
The Chairperson requested that issues surrounding hostels and PHPs be clearly clarified in the next meeting. The use of infrastructure as a term was too broad. There was a need for guidelines to determine which infrastructural damages the disaster grant was spent on. The Committee wanted FLiSP to happen, as it was a policy directive from the President. All the things contained in the SONA, would be implemented. The Committee would not be forever negotiating.

The meeting was adjourned.