Department of Rural Development and Land Reform on its Annual Performance Plan, with Minister and Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Opening Remarks by Chairperson

The Chairperson extended a warm welcome to Minister Gugile Nkwinti and Deputy Minister Candith Mashego-Dlamini and the rest of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform (DRDLR) delegation. He said that the issues at hand were critical, particularly the question of land restitution and reform, and the Committee looked forward to the presentation and engaging with the department.

Minister’s overview

Min Nkwinti highlighted the four key issues that the Department’s plans would include for 2017/18:

• The plans would include all three spheres of government and be driven by the NDP.
• A decentralisation of operations away from centralised control and a devolution to regions, including the establishment of district land committees. 
• Less officialdom and more emphasis on district committees who would be empowered to make decisions.
• The required close co-operation and synergies at provincial level and between mayors involving district IDPs (Integrated Development Plans).

A report back to the Committee could be expected in July when these plans were finalised.

2017/18 Annual Performance Plan (APP) and Integrated Operational Plan

Mr Eugene Southgate, Deputy Director General (DDG) DRDLR, gave the Committee a high level overview of the departmental Annual Performance Plan (APP) and Integrated Operational Plan (IOP) for 2017/18. The plans showed targets and performance at provincial level, and were based on transformation the rural economy through agrarian transformation, illustrated by what the DRDLR commonly referred to as the “wagon wheel”. This diagrammatic approach showed the central key programmes and the activities they underpinned, radiating outwards:

• Community level programmes -- amenities, social infrastructure like roads, water services etc.
• Land-based programmes -- tenure, restitution, strategic interventions etc.
• Cropping programmes -- food security, agri-parks, fresh produce markets, credit facilities etc.
• Livestock programmes -- processing plants, small industries, abattoirs, feed-lots etc.

These programmes were discussed very briefly due to time constraints under the headings of Administration, Geospatial and Cadastral Services, Rural Development, Restitution and Land Reform. The comprehensive departmental APP and IOP targets and performance, which included information at the provincial level, was also discussed very briefly. Some of the key issues highlighted were: 

Administration:

• Ensure 100% compliance with government regulation -- pay valid invoices within 30 days.
• Obtain an unqualified audit -- which was achieved.
• Ensure that 100% of approved budgets were spent.
• 100% compliance with the awarding of bids within 67 days of the advertised date.
• 100% compliance with the implementation of all activities in line with the Provincial Communication Plan.

Geospatial and Cadastral Services

• Ensure an integrated and comprehensive land administrative system -- number of deeds and documents registered (annual target around 929 241), number of maps produced (204 maps targeted), number of days taken to process sectional plans and general plans (14 days targeted).
• Number of municipalities supported to implement Land Use Management (192 split across various provinces)        

Rural Development (development of rural infrastructure):

• Number of agri-parks infrastructure projects facilitated (target is 53). About R161.4m targeted and spread throughout provinces, with the majority in the Eastern Cape and North West provinces. 
• Number of youth recruited or enrolled in the NARYSEC (National Rural Youth Service Corps) programme.  The budget is about R345.5 m, and 2 650 youths have been targeted across all provinces. 
• 1 013 households have been targeted in the 1HH1Ha (one household, one hectare) and 1H2DC (one household, two dairy cows) programme. The budget is R134.8m, and the majority of programmes are in the Free State (39%) and the Western Cape (55%).
• Number of permanent jobs created in rural development initiatives targeted under Rural Enterprise and Industry Development (REID) -- 306 spread thoughout most provinces, with KwaZulu-Natal (KZN), Gauteng and the Eastern Cape taking up almost 70% of the jobs.

Restitution:

• Facilitate the restitution of land rights by finalising land claims (target 724) and settling land claims (target 1 001).
• R2.6bn budgeted to finalise and settle land claims - most of these are in the Western Cape, Limpopo, KZN and the Eastern Cape.  

Land Reform:

• Allocate R983.2m to acquire land for redistribution. 
• Target 48 000 hectares to be allocated to smallholder farmers -- budget of R108.3m and spread across all provinces, with most land being allocated in the Northern Cape, followed by KZN and the Eastern Cape.
• Target the creation of 5 000 jobs under this programme, as part of the recapitalisation budget (R60.5m).  The programme would be rolled out across provinces, with Limpopo, the Eastern Cape and KZN getting the lion share (48% in total).

Ms N Mkhonyisha, Director: Management Accounting, and Mr N Malisha, Director: Budget Performance Management, of the DRDLR’s finance department then briefed the Committee on the provincial budget allocations.

The overall budget for 2017/18 of R10.18bn had decreased by 6%. R6.4bn of the budget had been allocated directly to provinces a follows:

• Eastern Cape 11%
• Free State 7%
• Gauteng 6%
• KZN 20%
• Limpopo 14%
• Mpumalanga 16%
• Northern Cape 7%
• North West 10%
• Western Cape 8%

The majority of the provincial budgets were targeted at household support (72%) via the various DRDLR programmes.  At the central government level (departmental programmes), the overall R10.18bn was allocated for mainly for land restitution (32%), followed by about 26% for land reform and 19% for rural development. These amounts could be subdivided further in terms of key departmental priorities: R760m for Rural Infrastructure Development (RID), R439 for REID, about R2.6bn for land claims, R415m for the 1H1Ha/1HH2DC programme, and R1.4bn for land acquisition.

Discussion

Ms N Koni (EFF, Northern Cape) was allowed to start the discussion by the Chairperson, as she had to leave early for another meeting. She wanted to know if the DRDLR had started the process of restitution for blacks of land that had been stolen from them. She wanted President Zuma to look into this issue and wanted the Minister to respond to her via email. The debate on this issue became quite heated between some Committee members and Ms Koni 

The Chairperson said that the Department would respond to the Committee and not to individual Members. Responses to the Committee could also be directed at the Chairperson, but not directly to Members.

Deputy Minister Mashego-Dlamini said that the Department’s meeting with the Committee was not on the topic raised by Ms Koni. The DRDLR had come to brief the Committee on other issues, so the question was not relevant. If an answer was sought on the issue raised, she could direct a request to the Department

Ms E Prins (ANC, Western Cape) wanted more information on the 1H1Ha and agri-park programmes. She asked for quarterly updates on the progress of programmes, specifically on agri-parks, and whether targets were being met. Another concern was the appeal process on claims when there were disputes. She requested clarity on the appeal process and how this affected payments, referring to a case within her constituency, where payments had been made while an appeal process was ongoing, and she asked if this had been correct.

Ms Z Ncitha (ANC, Eastern Cape) quoted an example of payment being made to someone who was not related to the family for which a land claim was being processed, and wanted to how this was possible. She requested answers on whether some metros that were rural in nature could be incorporated in agri-parks, why there was only one rural development infrastructure project in the Eastern Cape, and what criteria were used to allocate provincial budgets -- was it based on population, or the number of historically disadvantaged South Africans (HDSAs)?

Mr C Smit (DA, Limpopo) had seven questions:

• Was there a monitoring system to ensure provinces complied, and were there consequences for those that did not comply with the execution of programmes and budgets?
• What were the plans to reform tribal land areas and engage with people that owned property in those areas?
• A lot of land had not been transferred as yet to new owners in terms of government plans - was there a plan of action to fast-track this process?
• What programme adjustments had the DRDLR made as a result of the reduced budget?
• Were there any plans to address the high level of land reform project failures?
• Which provinces were performing poorly in terms of their allocated funds for programmes?  
• Were there any plans to use state-owned enterprises (SOEs) like Transnet to help boost rural development? 

Mr J Julius (DA, Gauteng) said he felt the West Rand was like a stepchild and that the DRDLR programmes had not boosted development in this area. It seemed all the focus and development were earmarked for Johannesburg, Ekurhuleni and Tshwane. With all the agri-parks on the West Rand, there was still no market for the products, and all the produce went elsewhere. If there was a market for the products locally, it would boost job creation, factories and processing plants. He asked what process the DRDLR used to decide which programmes would run in various areas, and how the budgets were arrived at for allocation to the various areas. He was critical about the apparent lack of progress to address problems involving dolomitic land in areas like Khutsong and others. Was the Department able to help, and was there any inter-departmental co-ordination to address the sink hole problem.

Mr E Mlambo (ANC, Gauteng) raised a question related to the position of the Valuer General, citing a  case in Weenen (KZN) where it had taken in excess of three months to resolve a claim value. Why was it taking so long, and was this normal?

The Chairperson referred to the problem that currently existed between land rights and water rights. In some cases, when land was handed over to communities in terms of DRDLR programmes, the land deteriorated because there was no water for development as the previous land owner had sold the water rights to someone else. He wanted to know if there were plans to address this. He also wanted to know if the departmental auditors were internal or external. 

DRDLR’s response

Mr Southgate replied that if Members required more in-depth information on any of the programmes and projects, this would be provided. Due to the time limit, it was very difficult to give details on provincial programmes, but there were details for each and every programme available.

On the other questions raised by Committee Members, he responded as follows:

• Quarterly updates on agri-parks and other programmes were possible.
• He requested Members to forward to the Department with the exact details of the land claims cases mentioned so that these could be addressed.
• The DRDLR acted as a catalyst to increase production in rural areas around agri-parks, working closely with Department of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (DAFF).
• There was a monitoring system in place to monitor performance, which included consequence management and corrective action where necessary.
• Data was available on under-performing provinces, and could be provided to the Committee.
• SOE’s were involved in helping the DRDLR developing rural areas, including the Industrial Development Corporation (IDC), the National Empowerment Fund, the Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), the Agricultural Research Council (ACR), and others.
• On the issue of agri-parks in the Gauteng region, the provincial government leads the programme with support from DRDLR. Within the province, there is co-operation at provincial, district and municipal level. 
• He advised that the departmental audits were external.

Ms Mkhonyisha and Mr Malisha responded to the questions on financial matters:

Generally, all provinces had spent their budgets, with the exception of the Western Cape (88% of budget spent) and Gauteng (92% spent). The under-spending had been due to vacant posts not being filled. The Department had been able to negotiate lower budget cuts with Treasury so that only some rural development programmes had been reduced.

Deputy Minister Mashego-Dlamini said that the reason why there was only one rural infrastructure project from the Eastern Cape was because only one had been submitted. She also advised that the Department of Human Settlements should be involved to assist in addressing the problem of people living where there are dolomitic rocks

Minister Nkwinti commented on the following aspects raised by the Committee:

• Water rights -- the Department was engaging the department of Water and Sanitation to amend the legislation so that water rights were not attached to individuals, but to the land. It was also working with the DAFF to improve the monitoring of land used for agricultural purposes 
• Valuer General -- he requested more detail from the Member to enable the DRDLR to address the issue of the long waiting time. It should take the Valuer General about one month to assess a claim if all documents were place.
• Metros in rural areas -- provinces decided on which areas were to be designated rural. The DRDLR provided support in terms of the agreed rules and guidelines.
• Failure of land reform -- this was a big challenge for the country and the Department. Unproductive agricultural land required more direct involvement by the DAFF and provincial governments, but not the DRDLR.
• He requested that Ms Prins forward the details of the case she had raised to the Department so that it could be investigated
• On the question of land and traditional leaders, he said that it should be resolved by the Land Tenure Bill, so that the issue of land in traditional areas claimed by traditional leaders and democratic institutional values could be resolved

Ms Prins thanked Minister Nkwinti for his intervention in Deyselsdorp that had resolved a problem which had arisen where land given back to farmers under government restitution programmes, had been sold. She also wanted to know who did land audits --was it only the DRDLR, or could municipalities do it as well?

MInister Nkwinti said that only the DRDLR could do land audits. Two new Bills to improve the management of oversight of land ownership and help with land audits (the Regulation of Agriculture and Electronic Deeds Office) were currently being processed and once completed, the Department would come back and brief the Committee.

The Chairperson thanked the Minister, Deputy Minister and the Department for briefing the Committee on the crucial issues involving land reform and rural development.

The Chairperson advised that the Committee supported the departmental budget and APP.

Committee matters

The Committee wanted the Minister and Deputy Minister of Mineral Resources to be present at the next meeting when its oversight visit to Madibeng would be discussed, so that the issues and problems identified could be addressed. This proposal was moved by Ms Prins and seconded by Mr Julius.

The adoption of the minutes of the Committee meeting held on 25 May  was proposed by Mr Singh  and seconded by Ms Ncitha. The minutes were adopted.