Provincial and municipal land identification & acquisition plan for human settlements; National Upgrading Support Programme (NUSP) progress reports

Meeting report

Framework for Identification and Acquisition of Land

Ms Nonhlanhla Buthelezi, Chief Director in Policy: Department of Human Settlements (DHS), said that the Government had identified a need to create a framework for coordinating land identification and acquisition processes in order to facilitate the achievement of the goal of integrated sustainable human settlements. The Minister of Human Settlement had instructed the National Department to develop a practice note for this framework, acknowledging the myriad of South African policies and legislative frameworks that served as strategic guidelines in the identification and acquisition of well-located land in South Africa.

The objective of the practice note, among other things, was to ensure that provinces and municipalities coordinated the activities of land identification and acquisition that remained fragmented across provinces and municipalities. Secondly, it was to facilitate the process of the identification and acquisition of well located land and eliminate the acquisition of land at exorbitant prices that was done outside the mandate of the Housing Development Agency (HDA). Thirdly, it was to improve coordination with various sector departments that are expected to contribute to a coherent land acquisition programme that seeks to enhance the delivery of sustainable human settlements, including the land reform programme of South Africa. Fourthly, it was to eliminate the practice of disposing suitable and well-located municipal land with the expectation that the Department and the Housing Development Agency would later acquire such land for human settlements development.

With regard to parameters for land identification, the land identified should be strategically located and assist South Africa to achieve spatial integration. The following parameters, among others, were to enable the identification process:

• land parcels should have access to social amenities, economic opportunities, and employment centres;
• land parcels, so identified, should promote economic integration;
• land identified should reflect key historical, social, and economic linkages;
• land should promote existing survival strategies of targeted communities, with the minimum possible impact of relocation.

There were key considerations that needed to be observed before disposal of suitable land for human settlements. All stakeholders should consult the National Department and/or offer the portion of the well-located land that was suitable for human settlements before it was actually disposed of in the open market. All offers should be made in writing and contain valuation certificates and/or at least clear details of a property description, size, location, GIS coordinates, and ownership details and value. The Department and the Housing Development Agency should prepare a register of such land.

On the issue of institutional arrangements, the Department should, among other things:

• provide a Master Plan for Human Settlement Development that would direct the acquisition of suitable land for human settlement development;
• disburse the annual grant funding allocations for land acquisitions for human settlement development;
• prepare a national multi-year land acquisition plan for human settlements;
• support provinces and municipalities to package provincial and municipal multi-year land acquisition plans for human settlements;
• receive public written offers on land that was suitably located that could be utilized for human settlement prior to disposing such land assets in the open market.

The National Department would set up a joint evaluation task team to:

• review land identification and plans of both provinces and municipalities against the master spatial plan;
• engage with provinces and municipalities regarding intentions to dispose of land;
• collate national information and provide a benchmark on land acquisition;
• monitor the land acquisition transactions in the residential property market and the reports of the HAD, as reflected by the provinces and municipalities;
• identify challenges and recommend remedial action where feasible.

It was anticipated that there may be disputes in relation to the first right to purchase the land suitable for human settlements. Such disputes should be resolved through the Minister of Human Settlements, in consultation with the Provincial Executive. The Minister should partner with the Minister of Cooperative Government and Traditional Affairs (COGTA), the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) and the Presidency to table regular reports on disputes to the President.

She concluded that it was the intention of the National Department to ensure oversight compliance monitoring through a joint evaluation task team that would monitor the achievement of the objectives of this practice note. The Department would ensure that the land acquisition and potential land disposal reports served as standing items on the agenda of the Mintop and MinMec Forum.

Discussion

The Chairperson asked when the framework was expected to be ready.

Ms Buthelezi said it was hoped it would be completed by January 2016.

Mr S Gana (DA) wanted to know what the role of the Valuer General was. He also asked how the practice note was going to be applied to land owned by state entities.

Ms Buthelezi explained the Valuer-General played an important role when there was a situation in which the seller charged exorbitant prices and where the Department had done an evaluation and one arrived at two prices. The Valuer-General would look at the outrageous prices and try to find a solution. With regard to land owned by state entities, she said that the practice note was intended to deal with issues within the government and the selling of land by municipalities, but once the framework was completed, it was going to be comprehensive and include land owned by state entities.

Ms V Bam-Mugwanya (ANC) asked how the Department had been dealing with the land claims and land issues that had arisen. How did the Department know if there was land available?

Ms Buthelezi, on the issue of land claims, said it was difficult in the new era because the government had re-opened land claims. The Department was going to come up with better mechanisms for dealing with them. Concerning the availability of land, she said available land was first sold or given to the Department for socio-economic objectives. If there was a government department that wanted to dispose of land, a proposal was sent to the Department of Human Settlements, which conducted an evaluation and considered the socio-economic perspectives. The contestation was always between municipalities and provinces, where one found that a municipality sells land using the Urban Settlements Development Grant (USDG), and they are not bound to do that.

Ms M Mokause (EFF) asked how the Department dealt with some communities that took land that had not been used for a long time.

Ms Buthelezi said that this phenomenon was common in areas where there were informal settlements. There was always consultation with communities not to occupy land where there were unacceptable conditions, like river banks. Consultation was done with the three spheres of government. This situation was going to be prevented once the Master Spatial Plan was in place, to avoid corruption in the buying of land. In the last few years there had been strict geotechnical conditions that had been issued to protect communities from occupying land not suitable for human settlement.

Mr Mbulelo Tshangana, Acting Director-General: Department of Human Settlements, informed Members about the current standard operating procedure for land acquisition, saying that every municipality and province had its own acquisition plan. The Department bought land from provinces for human settlement. The Department did not bank it. Municipalities used the USDG for buying the land. However, this system was fragmented and not working for the National Department. If there was a central platform to verify and evaluate the land, it would be much easier. This had been discussed with Treasury and it had been agreed that the buying of land was to be done via the Housing Development Agency. In some instances, land was bought simply to use the budget, not because the land was in the plans.

Update on Provincial and Municipal Land Identification and Acquisition

Mr Lucien Rakgoale, General Manager: Housing Development Agency, said that currently provinces and municipalities were not doing medium to long term planning for land acquisition. The provinces provided about 1% of their Human Settlements Development Grant (HSDG) funding for land acquisition. The Housing Development Agency did not have capital funding to acquire land. It was dependent on provinces and municipalities for land acquisition funding, and this meant it was directed by the provinces and municipalities on land to be acquired.

The medium term strategic framework (MTSF) land acquisition target was standing at 10 000 hectares of well-located land, rezoned and released for new developments, targeting poor and lower middle income households. With regard to ad hoc planning for land acquisition and assembly by provinces and municipalities, a policy was being developed to address and promote forward planning. The HDA was working with the provinces to support development of multi-year land acquisition plans linked to the Master Spatial Plan (MSP) and MTSF targets.

Pertaining to provinces providing less than 1% of HSDG funding for land acquisition, land funding needed to be ring-fenced. The HDA had to be providing direction on projected funding allocations per province or municipality for human settlement land acquisition. The entity needed to be provided with land capital funding to ensure strategic land acquisition and land banking for the sector and as part of its developer role. To deal with slow or delayed approvals for land acquisition by custodian departments, particularly Public Works, the HDA was working with the provinces to support development of multi-year land acquisition plans linked to MSP and MTSF targets.

In his conclusion, Mr Rakgoale said that the Housing Development Agency had been established to assist with land planning, assembly and acquisition, and had specialist capacity in place to assist or complement the capacity which existed in provinces and municipalities.

(Graphs and tables were shown to illustrate the housing backlog per province, MTSF land acquisition targets, and the national land pipeline for 2015-2016).

Discussion

The Chairperson wanted to know how the Department interacted with the provinces to ensure their percentages in making use of HSDGs was higher.

Mr Rakgoale said that the land acquisition strategy was a concurrent function. The framework had to deal with this. Presently, it was done on an ad hoc basis. The Housing Development Agency had no money to acquire land. It depended on grants given to other spheres of government. That was why there were plans to approach the National Treasury and the Portfolio Committee with a proposal for capital funding so that it could be effective in its role of acquiring land. The framework had to look into this matter. Different provinces were not putting money aside for the Department of Human Settlements for land acquisition.

Ms T Baker (DA) asked if there were studies and forward planning done for the piece of land near the FNB Stadium in Gauteng, seeing that there were proposals for provinces. She also wanted to know about the future plans for Shelley Beach and Empangeni in KwaZulu-Natal, and asked if the figures presented for the housing backlog per province were based on 2011 or 2014 statistics.

Mr Rakgoale said they had looked at competing proposals concerning the piece of land near the FNB Stadium, and those proposals had been sent to the Minister. The Empangeni project was proceeding and they already knew how much it was going to cost to distribute water. Regarding the Shelley Beach project, the layout of the township to be built was being redesigned to accommodate low cost housing. The statistics were from 2014.

Ms Mokause asked if the housing units that were being built in Northern Cape were for the mining towns around Kuruman.

Mr Rakgoale said that the project was aimed at addressing mining challenges around Kuruman.

Mr Gana asked how the process was handled when Transnet wanted to sell land. He also asked if validation and verification had been done and if a budget had been set aside for land earmarked for acquisition.

Mr Rakgoale replied that from time to time Transnet made its non-core properties available to the Housing Development Agency for land acquisition. On land earmarked for acquisition, he said these land parcels had been evaluated already.

Ms L Mnganga-Gcabashe (ANC) asked who was going to settle the outstanding debts of the hostels that were planned for upgrades. She wanted to know if there were other methods of acquiring land.

Mr Rakgoale said that Transnet and the municipalities had decided to write-off the debt. The hostels were, in reality, a toxic asset. Pertaining to other methods of acquiring land, he said in instances where they did not agree with the property owner, they would tell the owner they were going to employ the expropriation route, and the owner would lower the price. This had been proven to work.

Mr Rakgoale also informed the Committee that the fundamental basis of what they did as the Housing Development Agency was contained in the integrated development plan. The HDA was there to assist municipalities and provinces on land identification and acquisition for human settlement. However, there had been reluctance from provinces and municipalities to make use of these services from the HDA, hence the introduction of the practice note in order to radicalise the land identification and acquisition process.

National Upgrading Support Programme (NUSP)

Mr Johan Wallis, Chief Director: Programme Implementation Support: NUSP, said that NUSP activities involved municipal upgrading programmes, assessing and categorising settlements (four categories), developing settlement upgrading plans, developing sustainable livelihood programmes, developing municipal capacity building programme, the transfer of skills to municipal staff, and the development of a comprehensive central capacity building programme.

The MTSF targets of the NUSP for 2019 were to assess and categorise 2 200 informal settlements, develop 2 200 settlement upgrading plans, and to implement a capacity building programme in ten municipalities per year. So far, the NUSP had managed to make progress in the following areas:

• Capacity Building Programme: Course material piloted in Ekurhuleni and final content material completed.
• Assessment and categorisation: 791 settlements completed or in progress.
• Municipal Informal Settlement Programme/Strategies: 31 completed and 14 in progress.
• Settlement level plans: 240 completed or in progress, and 322 in the procurement process;
• Monthly newsletter being produced and distributed;
• Investigation of tenure options on tribal land in process;
• NUSP operational website activated (www.upgrading.support.org)

For 2015/16, the budget of the NUSP was R72.11 million.

Challenges facing the NUSP included reinforcing the concept and implementation of incremental upgrading, increasing NUSP’s management/implementation capacity, building municipal capacity and knowledge, strengthening community-led planning/community involvement in planning, and institutionalising a pipeline of projects and ensuring funding availability through the HSDG and the Urban Settlements Development Grant (USDG).

Discussion

Mr M Shelembe (NFP) wanted to know how the NUSP was going to ensure that the R5m allocated for capacity building was not wasted on people who were looking for other jobs or in cases of changes in regime, because capacitated people would be deployed to other areas.

Mr Wallis said the R5m was not enough for capacity building. One could train people for 30 days, but one could not tell them they may not resign from work. From a labour point of view, that would not be appropriate.

Ms Mnganga-Gcabashe wanted to find out how the NUSP assisted municipalities with relocation when a settlement was densely populated. Was the NUSP on the right track with regard to its spending, seeing that it had a budget of R72 million? She commented that tenure security on tribal land could be resolved through PTOs (Permission To Occupy).

Mr Neville Chainee, Deputy Director-General: Planning and Strategy (DHS) said there were categories for relocation. When relocation had to occur, the land was identified. One had to take into consideration that one did not break the social fabric and cohesion of the area. Sometimes partial relocation happened, when the population density was found to be too high.

Mr Wallis added that when relocation had to happen, a plan was submitted to the municipality regarding the available land. The NUSP technical programme handled the facilitation with the people, but was not involved in the physical relocation.

Mr Chainee said the budget was not only the R72 million -- for each informal settlement identified, a budget was allocated. The R72m was for supplementing the allocated budgets. This represented a technical and capacity-related programme for municipalities. There were two people employed for the implementation of the programmes within the NUSP, which was working hard to have the budget spent by the year-end. Concerning the land tenure, he said there were instances where PTOs were issued as a form of tenure.

Ms T Gqada (DA) asked about processes that were followed when deciding on informal settlements that were upgradable, and wanted to establish how community engagement was managed during upgrades.

Mr Wallis, with regard to municipal selection, said that they held discussions with provinces on problems in municipalities. These discussions always yielded areas that needed to be prioritised in the upgrading of informal settlements. 62 informal settlements had been identified, including those located in mining towns. It was the municipalities that identified informal settlements that needed the upgrades and the ones that needed to be prioritised. On the issue of managing community engagement, he said the best monitoring mechanism was the community itself. That was the nice thing about informal settlement upgrading.

The Chairperson appealed to the NUSP to present the Committee with its programme which could be used when the Committee did its oversight visits in the provinces.

Adoption of Minutes

The Committee adopted three sets of minutes.

Mr S Gana (DA) moved the adoption of the minutes of 26 May 2015. Mr L Khoarai (ANC) seconded him. The minutes were adopted.

Mr Khoarai moved the adoption of the minutes of 2 June 2015. Ms T Baker (DA) seconded him. The minutes were adopted.

Mr Z Memezi (ANC) moved the adoption of the minutes of 23 June 2015. Ms Baker seconded him. The minutes were adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.