DHS & DWS Adjustments Budget & Revised Annual Performance Plan; with Deputy Ministers

Meeting report

DHS: Revised budget and annual performance plan

Mr Joseph Leshabane, Acting Director- General, Department of Human Settlements (DHS), briefed the Committee on the revised budget in the light of the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Department had been able to secure R25 million in savings from goods and services. In the first quarter there had been a freeze on travel and subsistence as a result of the pandemic, resulting in a saving of R5 million. It had also managed to save R20 million from the title deeds project.
 

The DHS had scaled down its scholarship support by R4 million after funds had been made available indirectly to the National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS). An additional R3.5 million had also been saved, as the Mangosuthu Buthelezi University had failed to spend its allocation.

DWS: Revised budget and annual performance plan
 

Mr Trevor Balzer, Acting Director-General, Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), briefed the Committee on his Department's revised budget allocation.

An amount of R1.75 billion had been taken away from the original budget allocation of R17.2 billion.
The readjusted budget was to support Covid-19 water and sanitation intervention projects. Funds would also be used to implement source development or bulk linkage projects to replace the need for water tankering, and to sustain the supply of water after the tankering period.

An amount of R257 million had been suspended from the Department's allocation for the support of the Covid-19 macro economic stimulus. This amount included R50 million of under-expenditure resulting from various vacant posts across all four programmes. R214 million had been taken from goods and services, as well as an additional R7 million from capital assets.

Discussion

Mr R Mashigo (ANC) said he did not feel comfortable engaging on the report, as it had not been approved by the Minister.

Ms E Powell (DA) requested clarity on the cuts that would be implemented, especially as these related to the Division of Revenue Act (DORA). She wanted to know whether there had been any consultations with local and provincial authorities on these cuts. She recalled that other subsidies and transfers would be cut by R2.8 billion, and asked the Department to provide a list of the expected implications at the local and provincial government level.

She asked whether there had been consultations with the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure (DPWI) on making land available for human settlements, as the DPWI had ownership of large parcels of land and could easily make them available. She also requested clarity on the R20 million that had been allocated towards the title deeds programme.

She asked Deputy Minister Pam Tshwete whether the monitoring of municipalities would now be simplified by the District Development Model (DDM), and who had approved the implementation of the DDM. How had the DDM impacted on the current legislative mandate?

Ms M Mohlala (EFF) took issue with the scant presentation by the Water and Sanitation division, as it had only listed certain topics. Whoever had compiled the presentation had to learn from the Human Settlements division on how to compile a succinct presentation.

She recalled that during Minister Lindiwe Sisulu's interaction with the National Council of Provinces (NCOP), the Minister had painted a rosy picture at her Department, yet the evidence had shown chronic inefficiencies. During the same interaction, the Minister had also touted South Africa's international stature in water resource management by highlighting the Water Resource Master Plan. According to Ms Mohlala, the plan had been formulated in the Netherlands. This was the only reason why the Europeans had endorsed the plan. She asked why the Department had not made use of South African expertise to develop the plan.

She asked how the Trans Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA) would be able raise funding for bulk infrastructure, given the current precarious economic situation. She also wanted to ascertain what impact the reduction in transfers and subsidy allocations would have on service delivery.

Mr K Motsamai (EFF, Gauteng) wanted to know why the Department's budget had been cut.

Ms S Shaikh (ANC, Limpopo) wanted to ascertain what impact the reductions would have on set targets.

DHS’s response

Mr Leshabane said he wanted to clarify and confirm that the special adjustment had been introduced to accommodate the response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Department had engaged with municipalities, especially the metros, on the revised budgets for 2019/20. This had been done, as the metros had to be given special permission to rework their budgets. This process had revealed that R2.4 billion had not been spent, and this huge amount could not be spent within two months. The cuts proposed would kick in during the 2020/21 financial year.

The municipalities and provinces had been requested to provide a detailed report to the DHS on the expected impact the cuts would have on service delivery.

The Department would be focused on the following activities going forward:

 

• Upgrading of informal settlements;
• Scaling up of serviced sites;
• Fast tracking the issuing of title deeds; and
• Increasing bulk and link infrastructure.

 

Mr Leshabane said the Department was working with the DPWI, as well as with the Department of Agriculture, Rural Development and Land Reform (DARDLR) on the matter of rapid land release.
Cabinet had approved the rapid release of 14 000 hectares of land earmarked for human settlements.
The issue was not the buying of the land, but the provision of bulk infrastructure, link infrastructure, feasibility studies and related processes.

Regarding the Title Deeds Restoration Grant (TDRG), he added that the Department always had a dedicated unit that dealt with title deeds restoration. The new TDRG would be utilised for capacity and operational support.

Mr Balzer said he had taken note of the comments regarding the insufficient analysis provided in the presentation. The Department would take the comments into consideration.

He explained that while foreign advice had been sought on the Water Resources Master Plan, the plan was in effect a wholly-owned South African initiative. South African government officials and water sector experts had worked collectively on the plan. The Dutch advisers had provided key inputs on the design and implementation of the plan, but that was where their involvement had ceased.

At this juncture, he did not foresee a negative impact on the TCTA’s ability to raise funding for its projects.

Drought funding had been allocated to the Beyers Naude region from a special government allocation in 2018-2019.

Mr Balzer also clarified how the Department had arrived at the R256 million budget reduction. He said R43 million had come from the reduction in the compensation of employees (CoE), as the Department had not filled vacancies. The remaining R213 million had been taken from goods and services, where it had managed to save on travelling and related costs.

Regarding Rand Water's (RW’s) involvement in some municipalities, he explained that RW interventions had been specific, as they had been brought in to provide services whilst the bulk and link infrastructure was being completed.

Deputy Ministers’ comments

Deputy Minister Tshwete said that the DDM found its legality in the Constitution, and questioned Ms Powell's motives for asking about its legality. The DDM had been launched by President Ramaphosa in three provinces and allowed for the three spheres of government to work collectively. The DDM would even help with clearing the title deed backlogs.

She thanked the Chairperson and the Committee for their support and guidance, and added that the government officials had to be commended as well for the excellent work they had carried out.

Deputy Minister David Mahlobo commented that some grants, such as the Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG), also covered water infrastructure, and these had been presented in detail. Municipalities had to submit a business plan for all water services infrastructure projects.

He said Mr Balzer had been the architect of South Africa's Water and Sanitation Master Plan, and that the plan was aligned to the national White Paper on Water and Sanitation. He emphasised that bilateral partnerships were fundamental when it came to water, as South Africa could learn a lot from other countries, and vice versa.

Government had never proclaimed the DDM to be a "saviour". It would help to facilitate the implementation of the intergovernmental framework (IGF).

Follow-up questions

Ms Powell said she was more than aware of Chapter 3 of the South African Constitution, and the stipulations around intergovernmental relations, and asked Deputy Minister Mahlobo to show her where the DDM could be found in the Constitution, and how it related to the IGF. It was her duty as a Member of Parliament (MP) to hold the executive to account, and to fulfill her oversight role, so she did not appreciate the aspersions cast by Deputy Minister Tshwete.

Ms Mohlala indicated that she also did not know where to find the DDM. The DDM looked good on paper, but where was it in reality? She wanted to know how the DDM worked and how it would assist those South Africans who still had no access to water.

Mr Motsamai called for a thorough investigation into the eviction of people. He cited the recent incident in Cape Town where a man had been evicted from his house in the nude.

The Chairperson also wanted more information on what was being done to address the unfortunate incident that had occurred in Cape Town. According to her knowledge, there was supposed to be no evictions, as per Covid-19 regulations. The City of Cape Town had undermined the Covid-19 regulations.

She commended the Department for the good job that had been done on the Master Plan, and invited it to come and brief the Committee again on how funds would be mobilised to operationalise the Plan.

Deputy Minister’s response

Deputy Minister Mahlobo said he had been pleased with the Department’s performance thus far. He conceded, however, that there were communities that still had no access to water. His Department had been working closely with municipalities, especially those where there was a lack of infrastructure. He lamented the apartheid spatial planning, which seemed to favour urban areas.

He said that the sustainable use of water meant finding new water sources and developing them, and emphasised that groundwater was central to South Africa's water plans.

On the DDM, he cautioned Members not to create confusion where there was none. The Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) had briefed them on the DDM. He had been made aware that the DA intended to challenge the constitutionality of the DDM. The DDM facilitated intergovernmental relations.

On the eviction that had occurred in Cape Town, and the death of a man at the hands of a farmer, the Deputy Minister commented that having access to water was a right, and that his Department would be monitoring these two cases.

The meeting was adjourned.