UN Habitat III Conference: report by Minister; Development Finance Institution consolidation

Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation

29 November 2016
Chairperson: Ms N Mafu (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

The Minister of Human Settlements briefed the Portfolio Committee on the participation by South Africa at the Third United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III), which had resulted in the adoption of the New Urban Agenda (NUA).

Habitat III was hosted by the United Nations every 20 years to secure renewed global commitments to addressing housing and sustainable urbanisation through the adoption of a forward-looking, action-orientated outcome agreement expected to be implemented by all member states, including the Republic of South Africa. As part of implementing the NUA, South Africa would be expected to ensure that transformation was realised over the next few years. The transformative commitments included sustainable and inclusive urban prosperity and opportunities for all, as well as environmentally sound and resilient urban development.

The Minister said the position of South Africa at this particular conference had been as a leader of the African voice, as well as being the leader of the developing countries, particularly regarding areas in which SA had expertise. Currently 61% of the country’s people resided in urban areas, but the history of South Africa had not prepared it for the influx of urban migration. The past had prepared for the direct opposite, because the rural areas were meant for the bulk of the citizens, while the urban areas were reserved for a particular people -- those employed and for those with a specific level of engagement with the economy. However, its resolution was a matter of urgency for South Africa, as well as for other developing countries of the world. Integration was a concern, and the term ‘Integrated Sustainable Human Settlement’ was treated with caution within the vocabulary of NDHS, because it denoted the core, which was the reversal of apartheid spatial planning. The intention was to finally reduce the inequalities.

The Minister advised the Committee that the UN Secretary-General and the Chairperson-President of UN Habitat III had requested South Africa to consider the establishment of an office for the UN Habitat in South Africa. This was an attractive offer, because South Africa was at the forefront of policy making.

In discussion Members commented that since the intention had clearly been to make a mark for both Africa and South Africa, it was encouraging that the world had both recognised and accepted it. It was excellent that the trip to Ecuador had yielded positive results and created a sense of pride in knowing that South Africa was well represented globally, as there was a collective goal that citizens should be housed decently and emancipated from past suffering. These aspirations should, however, be strengthened to deal with challenges that may hamper progress and delay citizens from being housed. It was commendable that South Africa was a recognised leader in the service delivery of human settlements, but time frames were needed to ensure that this would be achieved, and it was necessary for the citizens to be made aware of what had been agreed upon at the conference. 

Meeting report

UN Habitat III Conference: Minister’s briefing

Ms Lindwe Sisulu, Minister of Human Settlements, said that the UN Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Habitat III) conference that had taken place in Quito, Ecuador, from 17 to 20 October, had been important because it occurred only once every 20 years. The first conference been held in 1996, but as South Africa had been a new democracy and was uncertain about the particulars of implementing its vision, the input had therefore not been as substantive as currently warranted. The position of South Africa in this particular conference was as a leader of the African voice, which was a very strong voice, as well as being the leader of the developing countries, particularly regarding those areas in which SA had expertise. That which had been agreed upon in Ecuador would serve as the basis on which the world would expand for the next 20 years.

The preparatory work had taken two years, formulated with caution to ensure that the position propagated was an African one, and the heads of state of the African Union (AU) had accepted it. The National Department of Human Settlements (NDHS) had not only been extremely prepared, but had been accompanied by several South African non-governmental organizations (NGO) that had a sonorous voice. The Department had arrived at Habitat III two days after the South African Government Association (SALGA) had participated in the United Cities and Local Government (UCLG) summit in Bogota, where it had been decided that the new president of UCLG would be a South African councillor, Mr Mpho Parks Tau. This had set the tone to enter the conference in a celebratory disposition. Also, the Chair of a South African NGO, Slum Dwellers International (SDI) was elected as the chief procurement ambassador, which was chairperson of the World Urban Campaign, and quite a prestigious title for someone who came from the NGO sector. It was exciting that South Africa had made its mark globally and hads continued to do so.

The Minister of Local Government, the chairperson and executive council members from SALGA, and Members of the Executive Council (MEC) of Human Settlements from Mpumalanga had accompanied the NDHS. Officials from the following departments had accompanied as the delegation as well: the Department of International Relations and Cooperation (DIRCO); the Department of Cooperative Governance (DCoG); the Department of Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation (DPME); the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), including the Housing Development Agency (HDA); officials from the provincial governments of Gauteng, Mpumalanga and the Western Cape; a member of the mayoral committee of Ethekwini, and councillors and officials from the local governments of Ethekwini and Johannesburg, all of whom constituted a formidable ‘Team South Africa.’

There had not yet been an opportunity to thank the Members of the Portfolio Committee for their participation in the thematic conference in Pretoria to deliberate on the themes for discussion at Ecuador. The chosen topic was the upgrading of informal settlements. The upgrading of informal settlements was successfully addressed, with representatives present as a top priority for two days, on 7 and 8 April 2016. In 2005/6 the world had gathered in South Africa to discuss the sustainability of the world at the Cape Town Convention Centre. Heads of State had adopted a convention regarding how sustainability would be ensured globally, and at that particular time the President of South Africa had decided to pledge on the National Development Goals (NDGs) and the suggestion that South Africa would be able to deal with the issue of informal settlements, as it was a growing concern. When discussing this issue at the preparatory meeting in Pretoria, the figures dealt with had been staggering, since there were people who came from a developing world migrating into urban areas on a daily basis, which resulted in what was called the ‘povertization’ of those in urban areas, coupled with the decline of the rural areas.

This phenomenon was staggering in South Africa, as currently 61% of people resided in urban areas. Notably, the history of South Africa had not prepared it for the influx of urban migration. The past had prepared for the direct opposite, because the rural areas were meant for the bulk of the citizens, whilst the urban areas were reserved for a particular people -- those employed and those with a specific level of engagement with the economy. However, its resolution was a matter of urgency for South Africa, the whole world as well as developing countries. The NDHS had wanted to ensure that the world was aware of this phenomenon and the intention to have brought it to attention was to enable a collective resolution to the problem, which had concluded with the Pretoria Declaration.

The Minister said that Ecuador was a beautiful country. The South African exhibition at the conference had become a popular exhibition, because it provided a platform to inform the world that South Africa was No. 1 regarding the delivery of houses. This status was also recognised by the United Nations and should be continually striven for, because the citizens of South Africa had endured a great deal of suffering. Yet there was much more work to be done and accommodation should be made for the influx into the urban areas.

One of the discussions at the conference was about predicting and planning for the influx of migration into the urban areas. Additionally, as the rural areas were analysed, the issue of globalisation required consideration due to the migration of non-citizens into the country, because South Africa was deemed an open-opportunity economic society. This consideration was amidst an increasingly negative reaction towards non-South African migrants. Thus, alongside the upgrade of the informal sector, it was essential to teach citizens that globalisation mandated harmonious living with other people.

The Minister said that the Pretoria Declaration had been very well received, creating a platform for extremely exhaustive engagements on important global issues. South Africa was allowed to give an opening address to the plenary, although when this took place not a single South African was present, because the delegation of the NDHS had been locked out. This had been due to the over-subscription of the UN Habitat III at Ecuador, which had resulted in an inability to achieve the maximum input that the NDHS would have preferred for that specific session. The in-depth particulars would be presented by the delegation of the NDHS.

The Chairperson commended the high-profile outcome achieved at Ecuador, and commented that the Portfolio Committee was disappointed that they had been unable to have attended in person. It had been greatly anticipated, so the report to follow should contain as much detail as possible.

The Minister added that it would have been important for the Members to be present, because of the experience they would have gained from the citizens and culture of Ecuador, as they were incredibly humble. Their history could be traced back to the Conquistadors and the invasion of Christian Crusaders that perceived the country, as well as the surrounding countries that were now Spanish-speaking, as much too barbaric and had subsequently Christianized it. The experience denoted that the people of Ecuador were an incredible people, and while enacting with them, it provoked a desire that South Africa would be the same. The citizens were immensely responsive to each other, as well as responsive to outsiders. Thus, it would be worthwhile to visit Ecuador in one’s personal capacity to experience the amazing people with a remarkable culture; astounding dedication to their own citizens with patriotism; sincere love for their country; cherished the struggles of their history, and had a shared vision that Ecuador would be one of the best countries there was internationally. Their background also included the challenge of having 12 volcanoes that could explode at any given time.

Conference Report: Department of Human Settlements

Mr William Jiyana, Deputy-Director General, NDHS, said that the report was the result of work that had commenced during the past two years. The presentation was comprised of three parts -- the original declaration, the process of negotiation, and the UN Agenda. He handed over to the Director of International Relations to elaborate.

Ms Monika Glinzler, Director: International Relations, NDHS, added to the background given by the Minister. A political steering committee chaired by the Deputy Minister of Human Settlements had guided the preparatory process, and the NDHS had participated in the informal consultations prior to the release of the Zero Draft of the Habitat III outcome document, which had formed part of all four rounds of negotiations in New York for the Habitat III outcome document. The conference had ended with member states adopting the New Urban Agenda, comprising the Quito Declaration and the Quito Implementation Plan, to guide participants in terms of policy and practice until at least 2036. As cited by the Minister, South Africa also had a very popular exhibition stand, which saw the team engage with approximately 2 000 visitors during the course of the conference, although an exact headcount could not take place.

She said that during the Habitat III Conference, the South African delegation had participated in special sessions, high-level dialogues and roundtable discussions, which were held in parallel. These included

  • The special session on informal settlements;
  • The panel discussion of the policy dialogue on urban governance, capacity and institutional development;
  • The panel discussion of the policy dialogue on urban ecology and resilience;
  • The panel discussion at the high-level round table on Strategic Planning;
  • The panel discussion at the Policy Dialogue on Municipal Finance; and
  • The Professionals’ round table.

The South African delegation had also participated in a number of side events and networking events, including:

  • As keynote speaker at the side event organised by Slum Dwellers International (SDI), the residents of informal settlements could contribute to improving their lives through advocacy, information and data collection, and partnership with local, provincial and national government;
  • As speaker at a special side event with the executive director of Un-Habitat on “Housing at the Centre;”
  • SA hosted a side event to present South Africa’s baseline study of informal settlements targeted for upgrading;
  • On the panel, at the side event hosted by the University of Kwazulu-Natal, on participatory slum upgrading good practice;
  • On the panel at the workshop on resilient and resource-efficient infrastructure by the World Bank, presenting Johannesburg’s multiple approaches for unlocking urban regeneration and catalyzing local development;
  • On the panel of the side event on ‘cities for climate change,’ organised by the German International Cooperation Agency (GIZ);
  • In the panel discussion on integrated urban and territorial planning for the implementation of the New Urban Agenda in a session on sustainable partnerships hosted by UN-Habitat;
  • In the panel discussion at the launch of a journal on rural-urban linkages and at a side event on rural urban linkages hosted by GIZ.

During the Habitat III Conference, the South African delegation had participated in the main plenary, which dealt with the organisational matters, including adopting the rules of procedure, electing the chairperson and members of the bureau. Throughout the conference, member states and accredited stakeholders delivered their formal statements on their respective priority issues in the implementation of the New Urban Agenda at the main plenary. Minister Sisulu had delivered the country statement on behalf of the Republic of South Africa.

Ms Glinzler said the outcome of UN Habitat III was the New Urban Agenda, expressed as the Quito Declaration. The Quito Declaration had effectively set the scene, outlining the agreed principles and values, and ending with a call for action to implement the concrete proposals of the New Urban Agenda. The plan of action outlined the transformative commitments to be made by member states, what needed to be done for effective implementation, and how the implementation of the New Urban Agenda would be supported and tracked internationally.

There were three elements that comprised the Quito Declaration -- the shared vision, the principles and commitments, as well as the call for action. It recognised the four universally applicable fundamental drivers of change, which were the national urban policies; urban legislation; urban and territorial planning; and effective financing frameworks. The Quito Implementation Plan for the New Urban Agenda had three substantive parts that were divided into transformative commitments, effective implementation and the follow-up and review.

Transformative Commitments for Sustainable Urban Development:

The transformative commitments were aligned to the three pillars of sustainable development -- social, economic and environmental. Following that logic, the transformative commitments were further grouped into three areas -- sustainable urban development for social inclusion and ending poverty; sustainable and inclusive urban prosperity and opportunities for all; and environmentally sound and resilient urban development.

Effective implementation:

This section identified strategies that translated the commitments into concrete actions to bring adequate solutions to the vast urban and human settlements challenges. It was comprised of three sub-sections: Building the urban governance structure by establishing a supportive framework; planning and managing the urban spatial development, and the means of implementation.

Further elaboration included:

Building the urban governance structure by establishing a supportive framework. Under this section, the objective was to encourage the establishment of national and local frameworks, including the stakeholder engagement framework, and inclusive and implementable national urban policies that could guide the sustainable urban development actions at all levels.

Planning and managing urban spatial development. Under this section, the objective was the implementation of integrated urban spatial development strategies, supporting the realisation of integrated and well-connected cities and human settlements, including peri-urban and rural areas. The focus was on the following areas able to harness social and economic benefits of urban opportunities: urban and territorial planning; housing and slum upgrading; land; transport and mobility; urban basic services, as well as heritage and culture.

Means of implementation. Adequate financial resources and capacities at all levels, and the deployment of a wide range of means of implementation, were critical to address the challenges and opportunities of urban development. To achieve the objectives, the New Urban Agenda identified the following tools: domestic public resources; financial management, referring to the revenue and expenditure, borrowing and climate finance; partnerships; international development cooperation, as well as the science, technology, innovation and capacity development, including data collection and analysis.

Follow-up and Review:

Under this section, the objective was to carry out the follow-up and review of the New Urban Agenda. This included ensuring its effective implementation and progressive impact by establishing a periodic, effective, inclusive, and transparent framework that were at the global, regional, national, sub-national and local levels, which would feed into and be coherent with the 2030 Agenda follow-up and review, recognising and strengthening the existing platforms and processes.

Ms Glinzler said the contribution to the New Urban Agenda made by South Africa resulted in the successful debate of the following:

  • Any new agenda for urbanization and human settlements must place people at the centre.
  • The people-centered approach must ensure the integration and mainstreaming of the issues that affected young people, women, people with disabilities and people in vulnerable situations.
  • It must harness their energy and creativity in order to address their particular challenges with regard to education, health, shelter and livelihood opportunities.
  • Global recognition that urbanisation could not be divorced from overall economic, social, political and physical development of any region, country, city or local area. It was therefore critical that urbanisation be seen as an integral part of the national and regional development agenda.
  • Full endorsement of the international guidelines on urban and territorial planning, which among many provisions, enjoined national governments to collaborate with other spheres of government in formulating national and urban and territorial policy frameworks that promoted adequate standards of living for current and future residents.
  • The need for informal settlements and slums to be fully mainstreamed and addressed in the New Urban Agenda was emphasised.
  • The imperative for integrated participatory development planning was enshrined in the legal framework.
  • Annual integrated development planning was driven by local government, but encompassed investment in infrastructure and service delivery by all spheres of government.
  • The need to harness urbanization as a force for structural transformation was recognised, which implied the economic, social and spatial transformation of cities and human settlements along the rural urban continuum.
  • Housing policies must be flexible, varied and adaptive -- addressing a wide range of housing typologies, a full spectrum of tenure security options, and diverse market and state-driven approaches.
  • Public transport in urban areas must not only be resource-efficient, space-efficient, operational, clean and safe, but should also be affordable.
  •  An efficient inter-governmental fiscal framework for the funding of human settlements was critical to the successful delivery of this function.
  • With regard to issues of financing and resourcing, it was important to plan for the full life-cycle cost of needed infrastructure, including the resource requirements for refurbishment and long-term maintenance.
  • Coordination between spheres of government was critical to avoid situations of once-off investments by national government, which leave municipalities without the resources or revenue-raising capacity to maintain the infrastructure down the road.
  • National urban policy must complement and not replicate sectoral strategies and local government policy and legislation.
  • A key goal of a national urban policy was to create an overarching framework which aligned purposes while setting out clear roles and responsibilities for each level of government, so that when all policies were operationalised in a single urban space, a common goal was achieved.
  • Land use planning and transport planning underpin human settlement planning and deserve recognition as key drivers in spatial transformation. Thus, coordination between the spheres of government responsible for these two critical functions was paramount.

Team South Africa called for the strengthening of UN-Habitat III in order for it to support member states and stakeholders in the implementation of the New Urban Agenda. This included considering extending the membership of the UN-Habitat to universal membership and giving this universal body the mandate to undertake the follow-up and review of the New Urban Agenda. It also meant giving UN-Habitat a clear mandate to co-ordinate the implementation of the New Urban Agenda.

The participation of Team South Africa at Habitat III could be considered an unmitigated success. Firstly, the New Urban Agenda adopted at the Conference contained the entire key points South Africa had hoped to see included, and would serve as a blueprint for a South African implementation plan to be jointly developed by all stakeholders. Secondly, South Africa’s successes, approaches and views were well profiled and recognised throughout the Conference, largely on addressing informal settlements. Thirdly, Team South Africa had been a cohesive participatory team.

Ms Ginzler concluded that the way forward would include a national forum on Human Settlements and Urban Development workshop to be convened for the purpose of sharing the New Urban Agenda (NUA) adopted in Quito, as well as developing a comprehensive implementation matrix for all the commitments South Africa had fought so hard to have included in the Agenda. South Africa had also been requested to champion an international network for the implementation of the aspects in the New Urban Agenda relating to informal settlements upgrading; tenure security; inclusion; and the reduction of inequality and poverty, which was referenced 51 times in the New Urban Agenda. Additionally, South Africa would form part of the international expert group on the indicators for the implementation of Sustainable Goal 11.

The Minister of Human Settlements had offered to host a meeting of African Ministers of Housing and Urban Development and shack/slumdweller organisations affiliated to the SDI to foster a partnership commitment on informal settlements upgrading. Under the auspices of the African Union Specialised Technical Committee No. 8, South Africa would continue to promote the implementation of the common African position for Habitat III, and the NUA may be proposed as the basis for the development of an African guideline on housing and urban development). South Africa may engage with UN-Habitat on a concrete country programme, for UN-Habitat to share its expertise for the implementation of the NUA with government. The Institute for Housing Studies in Rotterdam may resuscitate the India, Brazil, and South Africa (IBSA) partnership in the field of human settlements, with concrete areas for co-operation to be co-ordinated.

Discussion

Mr H Mmemezi (ANC) said it was a disappointment that the Portfolio Committee had not been present at the UN Habitat III, but the report had served as a comfort. The intention had clearly been to make a mark for both Africa and South Africa, and it was encouraging that the world had recognised and accepted this. However, there was a concern to highlight. It was one matter to be highly regarded internationally, but to what extent was the inclusion? The major cities of South Africa were still largely racially segregated, as the white population still resided mainly in the most luxurious areas. Why would flats not be built for students or the middle class among those areas as a means of integration? What if those international bodies were to come to a major city in South Africa and witness the inequality -- would not that evidence contradict the aspirations? It was the duty of the Department of Human Settlements to really transform South Africa, so that when one came to Cape Town there would be evidence of integration. Another aspect of review was that reducing inequality entailed in-depth consideration. For instance, small building contractors from townships could be utilized to achieve this integration. In so doing, it would empower a ‘nobody’ to become a ‘somebody’ too, which was socio-economic empowerment and not merely a change of living circumstances. It appeared that the virtue of the changes proposed were merely theoretical.

Ms M Mokause (EFF) said that it was indeed important to have attended and participated in a global forum. The trip to Ecuador had yielded positive results and it created a sense of pride knowing that South Africa was well represented globally. There was a collective goal that citizens were housed decently and emancipated from past suffering. The aspirations should, however, be strengthened to deal with challenges that may hamper progress and delay citizens from being housed.

Ms T Gqada (DA) said a picture to reflect the approximately 2 000 people at the SA exhibition would have been appreciated, and agreed that it was commendable that South Africa was considered a leader regarding service delivery, and had achieved global recognition. She then referred to a document that had been circulated solely to the Members, and asked for clarity on a number of issues in the document. She said that when the Portfolio Committee had conducted an oversight visit at the University of KwaZulu-Natal and other parts of Durban, the upgrade of human settlements was not being done strongly. There was a need for improved infrastructure in Kwazulu- Natal.

Ms M Nkadimeng (ANC) said the presentation indicated that there was a light at the end of the tunnel. It was commendable that South Africa was first in service delivery of human settlements. It sounded disappointing that while the Minister had presented at the plenary, there had been a walkout. However, the outcome of the UN Habitat was overall pleasing and the Portfolio Committee was proud of the NDHS.

The Chairperson noted that there were issues to action post-conference, so time frames were required to ensure that they would be carried out. Also, it was necessary for the citizens to know what had been agreed upon at the conference. Hence, awareness was paramount, as well as advocacy with speed, so that the citizens could support its virtue and not forget that Ecuador had taken place. There had been round table discussions, but further national public awareness was necessary. It was an inter-departmental endeavour, but the NDHS was leading the initiative of the UN Habitat III, so the Portfolio Committee should familiarise itself with the particulars of what had been agreed upon and adopted in Ecuador.

Mr Jiyana answered that time frames would be devised. He also noted that UN Habitat had always saved all of the speeches by the various Ministers on the UN website, and should the Portfolio Committee want a copy of the speech made by the Minister to the plenary, it would be made available. The UN website could also show visual clips of the event. There was no walkout during the Minister’s presentation to plenary - there had been over 35 000 people present at the conference, but poor organisation regarding control of access. Team SA had registered everyone early enough to have ensured that attendance throughout would occur, but ultimately due to the congestion at the door, the rest of Team SA had been prohibited from entry in spite of all its efforts. The challenges that the Committee had put forward had been accepted and would be drafted in the White Paper going forward.

The Minister said that integration was a concern, and it was treated with caution. The term ‘Integrated Sustainable Human Settlement’ was used within the vocabulary of the NDHS because it denoted the core, which was the reversal of apartheid spatial planning. The NDHS no longer used the term ‘housing’ to promote integrated human settlements, even though the desired outcome would not be achieved in this lifetime, but the foundation had been laid within the policies and the work that it actioned. However, there was work towards integrated areas by means of ‘gap land’ -- for instance, the NDHS owned land in Blouberg Strand, and wanted to build houses on it. The intention was to finally reduce the inequalities. Integration was already evident in COSMO City and Cornubia.

The NDHS was also transforming the economy through the development of small, medium and micro enterprises (SMMEs), and examples were evident in the Eastern Cape and the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro (NMBM) with the recruitment of people who previously had no skill, but were interested in construction.

Regarding Ecuador, the exhibition stand was the most popular one, and it became even more popular after a picture of the late Nelson Mandela with an incredible quotation of his was brought out, because everyone had wanted to take a photograph with his picture. They had been informed that having used his picture was in conflict with the marketing strategy of Brand South Africa, but such a legality would be dealt with later.

It should be clarified that no walk out had occurred, but no South African had been present at the plenary presentation because of a problem of space.

Going forward, a new forum would be established to propagate the agenda of the UN Habitat III, and the Portfolio Committee should indicate how that agenda would be implemented. The UN Secretary General and Chairperson-President of the UN Habitat III had requested South Africa to consider the establishment of an office for UN Habitat in South Africa. This was an attractive offer, because South Africa was at the forefront of policy making. What was previously a disadvantage by having starting late had become an advantage, because South Africa had been able to show other countries how to action matters that they could merely theorize about. Another advantage was that South Africans would be employed, and since South Africa was under-represented in the international arena, the Committee should consider this offer before it was tabled for Cabinet. Another consideration was to affiliate with the Slum Dwellers International Association, because they worked with informal settlements and could do a proper census, as currently the NDHS had only an estimation of those living within informal settlements, but SDI conducts and train their staff members to enumerate properly. Firm cooperation with them, or any other structure that accommodated slum dwellers, would enable faster liaison with the slum dwellers due to the neutrality of such a third party, as opposed to a MP or any sphere of Government. If the answer was positive regarding the proposal, it would be formally tabled to Cabinet for consideration.

The Chairperson replied that the Portfolio Committee was interested in assisting with the building of houses, particularly in every province, so this could be incorporated in the oversight visits.

Progress on consolidation of Development Finance Institutions (DFIs)

Advocate Menzi Simelane, Advisor to the Minister of Human Settlements, said that the consolidation had taken place successfully, as assured by the Minister. The National Housing Finance Corporation (NFHC) board had met on Thursday last week to receive the donation of all the assets. Additionally, the shareholder (the Government) had agreed that four new members should be appointed for the Board, the details of which would be advised to the Committee by the Minister. The intention was to enhance the board of the NFHC. The only formality that was outstanding was the approval by the Tribunal that the NFHC had received those assets and liabilities, because in terms of the law, non-profit organisations could not donate their assets to profit-making institutions. The intention was also to protect the government’s investment in the NFHC so that it was not privatised. Going forward, the three institutions would operate under one name.

The Chairperson clarified that consolidation was on track, but the NDHS should revert with a full presentation, because it would assist with the oversight function to ensure that no one faltered with regard to their job responsibilities.

Committee business

The Committee adopted the minutes of 15 November 2016 without amendments.

The Chairperson thanked the Portfolio Committee for their efforts in 2016, and wished Ms Gqada well with her endeavours in the new committee that the Democratic Alliance would assign her to.

The meeting was adjourned. 

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: