DCoG, DTA & MISA Quarterly Performance Reports; Implementation of BRRR; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

DCOG's third quarter performance report

Mr Seabelo Molefi, Chief Director: Strategy, DCOG, presented the report on the third quarter performance of the Department of Cooperative Governance (DCoG). The presentation provided a summary overview of the Department's performance, responses to issues raised in the budgetary review and recommendations report (BRRR) for 2020/2021, and its recommendations.

The summary dashboard was explained, indicating that they had achieved 21 of the 28 targets set for the quarter. They gave reasons and a progress update on targets not achieved.

(Please see presentation for more details.)

DCOG progress on implementation of budgetary review recommendations
 
Mr Molefi presented the financial performance on behalf of the Department's acting chief financial officer (CFO). This covered the specific 2020 and 2021 Budgetary Review Recommendations (BRR) made, as well as the progress with their implementation.

He also provided an update on the charges against the former chief executive officer (CEO) of the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency (MISA), based on the findings made by the Hawks.

(Please see presentation document for more details.)

MISA quarterly performance and financial statements

Mr Ntandazo Vimba, CEO, Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency (MISA), presented the entity's quarterly performance and financial statements for Quarter 3 of 2020/21. The presentation included MISA's vision, mission and mandate, its performance against annual performance plan (APP) targets, its financial performance, and progress on the preliminary BRR report.

The updated MISA mandate was presented to highlight the changes to the Committee.

The Agency had achieved 19 out of 23 targets set. He presented the targets achieved and gave reasons for not achieving others, as well as the progress on those targets.

Ms Nombembe Ofosu, CFO, presented MISA’s financial performance for the period. Contracted services had double the expenditure compared to the previous year, as that was the year that had the lockdown. No wasteful expenditure had been incurred, and no irregular expenditure had been reported to date.

(Please see presentation for more details.)

Department of Traditional Affairs performance information and financial report

Mr Mashwahle Diphofa, DG, Department of Traditional Affairs (DTA), presented the financial performance of the Department. The presentation provided a summary of the DTA's performance for the third quarter of the 2021/22 financial year, its detailed performance per programme, a summary of the National House of Traditional and Khoisan Leaders (NHTKL) performance for the quarter, the 2021/22 financial performance, and a progress report on the implementation of the BRR.

(Please see presentation for further information.)

Deputy Minister input

Ms Thembi Nkadimeng, Deputy Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA), commented that based on the advice of the Portfolio Committee, the three presentations had given feedback on what was achieved during the third quarter. They also gave feedback on what was not achieved, even though this was not a requirement. Based on the challenges faced and remedies put in place, the Department was bearing the fruit from the remedies. The overall performance of the entities for quarter three was commendable. It was a performance they were happy to bring forth to the table for the Committee to give feedback on and take note of the areas that needed improvement.

Discussion

Ms H Mkhaliphi (EFF) commented that the DCoG had a weak performance when it came to monitoring municipalities. They needed the Department to be strong because municipalities needed the monitoring. This was raised as a concern, since people generally expected service delivery, especially after the local government elections had taken place.

What did the local government support and interventions management programme do? Who could people contact when they were unhappy about local issues not being attended to? The only point of contact was the ward councillor, but they were difficult to get hold of for ordinary citizens. Citizens became frustrated when they were not receiving services promised and had no one to report this to.

Was there any update on the Demarcation Amendment Bill? Would the Monitoring and Intervention Management Bill still be submitted to the Committee by 31 March? These bills were important for governing municipalities.

Was there any clarity they could give on corruption cases? They had promised that 90% of cases would be investigated by 31 March. Was there any update on this?

There were rumours about why people were resigning, but no clarity had been given on this. Why were people choosing to leave the Department? How many people had left? Witnesses complained about the role of the Department in service delivery. Why would key members with crucial experience resign with no follow up or investigation being done on their reasons for leaving?

There was also no clarity on the issue of high court cases to take place in April. Could they give details and why this had been presented in the meeting?

There was also a concern about the role of MISA in rural areas. The role of the Department was unclear around service delivery. They had over-expenditure on contracted services, while targets had not been met. People still did not have water in rural areas. What were they saying, since there was still a water crisis in rural areas? People needed to wash their hands and be clean. The expectation was that MISA would ensure that the technical side was fulfilled so that people in rural areas could have water.

The CEO of MISA should advise on how far they were with addressing short staffing and other challenges. There was no clarity on posts for these positions.

There were unconfirmed rumours that Treasury had not released funds to allow people to get water. Were those rumours true? How have they dealt with such situations?

Mr I Groenewald (FF+) said that during the first presentation it had been stated that only 44% of the budget was spent. Why was it not redirected towards fighting and combating Covid-19?

The District Development Model (DDM) Integrated Monitoring System (IMS) was placed on hold due to failure to deliver a milestone. Were there any costs? Had they appointed new service providers? If there were costs from the previous service providers, what had happened to those?

The DCoG's expenditure was high in the presentation given, even though they failed to meet most of their targets. Why was that? The municipal systems improvement grant (MSIG) expenditure was only 27%. Given the state of local governments, why was the spending so low?

MISA was asked for a list of the boreholes they were involved in constructing, including the locations and coordinates. Why had nothing been submitted yet? Relating to maintenance plans, how many municipalities had been assisted?

Given that only 44% of municipal infrastructure grants were spent, did they follow up on any of the construction backlogs?  Had they been executed? If so, could they provide details?

Only five districts were helped with waste-water treatment plants. Was there a willingness to prioritise water systems being polluted?

For the projects not achieved due to elections, how was this the case, as municipal staff members did not run elections? Only politicians did that. Why was there no service delivery during the elections? How would they address that?

Mr A Matumba (EFF) commented that support and interventions to assist executive councils in running councils were not visible. There were leaders of councils who did not know how to lead them. In some areas, members of the executive committee were not allowed to speak. There was a resolution taken by a speaker alone. This frustrated councillors. In some communities, there was slow service delivery, especially around water and electricity servicing. This required water infrastructure repairs.

Given that there was poor service delivery around electricity, people were now selling electricity on social media and then had their power cut off when they were caught. The Department must conduct electricity audits to close such markets and cut electricity losses. These matters were expected from the report.

From the budget reports, the Committee expected reports on the totals, classified as operational or capital budgets. Municipalities were now seemingly spending to keep municipalities afloat instead of spending on service delivery. Some were using MIG money to pay salaries, and to invest in the Venda Building Society (VBS).

How much of the spending went to the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF)? What were the outcomes after the Department investigated? This usually came out only after the Hawks investigated, even though departments were meant to investigate.

What was MISA doing with municipalities that would have special economic zones relating to becoming water service authorities? What assistance was being given in their application processes?
 
In the last presentation, which dealt with the participation of the traditional houses in development, there had been no clarity. What participation had this been? Some were demarcating stands in municipalities, without authority. What was their participation in terms of development?

What were the programmes of social cohesion where targets were not met? Were Khoisan leaders not part of traditional leaders? If they were, why were they separated and not presented as one?

There was a problem with the Community Work Programme (CWP) and the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP). The CWP was being treated as the EPWP, and the EPWP was being used for other projects. Municipalities were approaching the CWP on jobs when it was a job safety net for people capable of being employed so they had funds to seek employment.  How many had participated? How many got jobs from the stipend they were given? What were the participants being trained for?

Mr K Ceza (EFF) said that the under-spending indicated that those reserves could be declared and sent back to National Treasury revenue fund. At times, it could be a good thing for Departments to be efficient and spend less. At other times, spending less may have a negative effect, as a lack of spending affected service delivery. This was because money was allocated based on a needs assessment. When it was returned due to departments having a poor capacity to deliver, it affected the future allocation of funds to that department. To what extent was the Department holding off on spending during the first half of the year to escape public accountability? How had DoCG addressed its underspending trend, as they tended to spend less than other departments?

What was the role of the Budget Justice Coalition regarding under-spending?

MISA was asked what they had done to improve municipal infrastructure. In which areas had they ensured that infrastructure was improved to reduce the impact that rain and floods had on people’s homes? What were the time frames to resolve drainage problems in townships? The drainage challenges were a clear sign of poor maintenance. Being poor did not mean that people deserved to live in infectious conditions. What was the timeline for addressing township and rural area infrastructure in accordance with the additional 10% that was mentioned in the presentation?

The Municipal Demarcation Board (MDB) had created a mess. There were wards that stretched over 60km, which made it nearly impossible for service delivery to occur, as only one ward was overseeing multiple areas. What review measures were in place to correct the delimitation created by the MDB?

How many water districts had established district hubs thus far? Would the funding target in collaboration with National Treasury be ready by 31 March? If so, how? How many CWP participants had secured permanent jobs as a result of being trained in the programme?

The DTA had mentioned discriminatory practices. Who was monitoring this, since there was a high number of discriminatory practices which linked female values to virginity, where men were not treated in the same manner? What was the time frame for a resolution to this matter?

Ms D Direko (ANC) asked MISA about their under-expenditure due to having vacant positions. This was concerning, as the current unemployment rates were high, with active job seekers. When were they planning to fully fill those positions? Vacant positions also affected service delivery.

They had also mentioned R173m meant to be rolled over to them, but Treasury believed otherwise. Was there a plan in place to recover that money? What processes of engagement had been followed? What would happen if this money did not get released to them? Would it affect service delivery?

The DCoG had reported that 2 000 CWP participants received training annually, and this year the target would be achieved by 31 March. How far were they with the process of training? What kind of training was being given to participants? How would it assist them?

Could the Department ensure that participants received their stipends on time? Participants had complained to the Committee about stipends not being paid on time.

All the administration targets set by the departments were not achieved. That was concerning, as they set the targets themselves. Why had they set unrealistic targets, or were they set only for compliance purposes without research done?

Was the Department still interested in tabling the Monitoring and Intervention Management Bill in Parliament by 31 March, as indicated in the 2020/21 APP?
 
During the last financial year, the Department had under-spent by R1bn, and had cited Covid-19 as a reason. Was there a possibility of under-spending this year again? If so, what would be the reasons?

Ms P Xaba-Ntshaba (ANC) complained about the lack of water provision in the past year for KZN. The MISA chairperson had sent their team to her home because she was constantly calling for water. She was taken to view the water plant to increase the area’s water pressure. After three months, her community had received water. This had worked for eight months and then they had no water again. MISA should ask the municipality what had gone wrong.

Committee Members should do oversight and visit municipalities to check if any work was being done. The media was failing to report on all the municipalities.

The municipalities had used Covid as an excuse in the previous year, but this should not be the case again. They took advantage of Covid-19, and the people had suffered.
 
How best would MISA help people with boreholes, since water treatment plants were not working? Pipes had been constructed by MISA, but they were not functioning. They had not been functioning since 2009. Rural communities had to buy water from trucks instead of using their grant money to buy food.

Mr G Mpumza (ANC) asked DCoG about their commitment to investigate 90% of reported corruption charges by 31 March. How many corruption cases had been reported thus far? What percentage of these cases had been investigated?

MISA had mentioned that they had identified almost five water service authorities to support and assist. How far had MISA progressed in ensuring that those water streams and dams that were not regulated, were now regulated?

Relating to interventions in municipalities, there were still a number of municipalities under intervention. What was the progress with the bill the Department had committed to bringing forward to Parliament?

Department's responses

Mr Pieter Pretorius, Deputy Director-General (DDG): Corporate Services, DCoG,  addressed the question about people resigning from the Department. Its employee turnover rate was not abnormally high. People left for promotional and personal reasons. Posts would be filled with new employees.

The statistics about the number of CWP participants who had found permanent employment were not available. The Department did not know if participants exited the programme because they found employment, or for other reasons. The available information indicated that very few exited into permanent employment. That was the reason the CWP was being revised.

The training was not empowering participants to be ready for employment, as they were not receiving skills that would allow them to exit the programme. A new policy had been implemented, and the policy framework was being finalised. It had been found that some of the programmes were for compliance purposes, and did not fulfil the needs of the participants.

So far, it seemed that only 15 000 of the expected 25 000 targeted participants would be trained. Very strict procurement requirements had been introduced. In the past, there was very limited oversight over procurement by NGOs. These were now stricter, so the correct documentation needed to be submitted before procurement could be approved. Procurement of goods was not compliant in the past. The change had resulted in a delay in procurement, which had resulted in the target of 25 000 not being met.

The challenges around paying participants had been presented. They were reliant on the State Information Technology Agency (SITA) systems and shared the frustration of participants when payments were delayed, as the stipend was the only income most participants had. A process to build a new system had been started to address this problem. CWP under-spending was because of the change in contracts and a tender process being followed. The membership fees paid to NGOs had been reduced significantly. That saving had been used to increase the stipend paid to participants and increase the number of participants. That took time to implement.

No corruption cases had been reported for the period. The forensic investigation had been conducted and completed a year and a half ago and been handed over to the Hawks. It was unclear if there was corruption or not, but there was a possibility that corruption cases might arise.

Mr Chaka Moloto, Acting CFO, DCoG, addressed the highlighted under-spending and said the Department would under-spend in the current financial year because of the uncertainties identified during the presentations.

The MIG had never been under-spent in the past six years. The current under-spending was based on projections of 14%. The presentations showed transfers, not actual expenditures. This was because municipalities' financial years were different from the Department’s, so the transactions may not be reflected fully. Funds transferred in December had not been used fully. The details would be made available in future.

Current MIG under-spending was related to stoppages, as some municipalities had under-spent in the previous quarters, so National Treasury monitored, and the Department was also monitoring them.
If more than 45 or 50 percent was under-spent, the money was withheld until they improved. As they improved, money was released gradually. This had been happening, so funds were being released.

The fund allocations were based on other grants being approved. If other municipalities performed poorly, a portion of the funds would be withheld. They would then be reallocated to municipalities performing well. When the stoppages and withholding happened towards the end of the year, the money was taken back by National Treasury.

Under the National Disaster Management Centre (NDMC), there was a disaster relief grant meant for municipalities that had faced disasters. This was released only when they had finished their own fund allocations. During the current year, R137m had been transferred from this grant.

Mr Molefi addressed the role of the Inter-governmental Monitoring and Support Intervention Bill. The APP required the Bill to be submitted to Parliament by July 2022. They were also frustrated by the delay in completing the consultation processes, as the Bill was important for unlocking the support and interventions needed for implementation.

The Department had not received any corruption cases that needed investigation. The high court case was related to the Committee’s question about the charges against the former CEO. It was responding to a risk raised in the recommendation document from the last quarter.

Regarding the cancelled contract, payments had been made to the previous service provider in accordance with the documents signed for work they had done. The new service providers had taken over the process, so they were on track.

The high expenditure and low performance mentioned required them to consider the acting CFO’s presentation. Some key projects did not have much expenditure required, so spending had been less than expected.

Mr Vimba addressed the concern on the water issue directed to MISA. Their focus had been on water-related projects over the past few years. There was evidence of this, and some Members could attest to it. The water issue was vast in the country, and the resources available were not enough to assist all areas. They worked with the departments to cover as many areas as possible.

He could not comment on rumours around certain districts being frustrated by National Treasury, as he was not aware of them.

Their report was submitted in November, but it had not reached the Committee, so he apologised for this. It was available and would be sent to them again.

They had assisted 20 of the targeted 30 municipalities with maintenance plans. This involved assistance in developing maintenance plans or updating existing ones for those who had already done so. They were also assisting with the execution of those maintenance plans.

They had followed up on the infrastructure backlog, and their engineers were deployed in the four districts. Their main function was to assist municipalities with infrastructure backlogs, and that any challenges faced with their submitted plans were addressed. They also ensured that allocated funds were being spent on their intended purpose.

Capacity challenges were being addressed by bringing in young civil engineering graduates and pairing them with experienced engineers to allow them to gain valuable experience. They had also recruited engineers only for district manager positions, so they could also assist with the technical work municipalities needed to be done.

Wastewater treatment was a priority, even for municipalities. Work was being done with the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) to develop intervention plans. They had targeted these instead of just leaving them to municipalities. Assessments of challenges had been done and they had identified water service authorities that were not complying with the guidelines. They had an action plan to address this.

With elections being a reason for targets not being met, municipal officials should normally not be impacted by-elections, as they were not politicians. However, it had been difficult to secure meetings with municipalities during the election period. They were not available to attend meetings due to committing to election events. Those issues were addressed after the elections took place.

Water risks and electricity losses were a big problem in the country. They cost the country over R12b in losses each year. There were plans to assist municipalities with non-revenue water and electricity included in the Department’s plan. It was a challenge that was linked to the lack of maintenance of infrastructure, hence the review of grants and funds available. This was to assist municipalities with accessing funds to execute the plans in place to address these problems.

MISA was assisting special economic zones (SEZs) by deploying town plans and deploying electrical engineers and water engineers to support the districts. There was support being provided to these areas.

The water challenges were noted, and teams would be deployed to the mentioned areas to assess the challenges. Tangible work being done by MISA in the provinces was evident, and they were willing to present all the available interventions they had done so far if the Committee was available for that. This had led to National Treasury complaining about MISA doing work beyond what they were required to do, resulting in them spending more than anticipated.

Given that municipalities were struggling to raise financing for infrastructure, a request had been made to allow funds to be redirected to capital projects and asset planning. This would allow for infrastructure development to take place.

The timeframe for dealing with rural and township water issues could not be given, as it was not MISA’s direct responsibility to address the issue. They merely helped municipalities with developing plans and projections to reduce backlogs. Municipalities would have to prioritise water issues to eradicate them. A lot of capacity and investments were needed to do that, and MISA alone could not realistically provide a timeline.

Under-spending due to vacancies not being filled was a concern that they had progressively reduced. Filling positions created a fluctuation in their technical expertise, so there was a challenge of employees with different skill levels. They could not offer competitive salaries, as they were a public service, unlike private companies which were not limited by public service regulations.

Regarding the R117m being retained by National Treasury, they had appealed that decision as it was going to impact the funding of current approved projects. They would now be delayed, avoiding over-committing the execution. They would have to use current funds to pay for those projects, and communities would miss out on projects planned for the current year.

If those projects were stopped, valuable progress would be lost. They would have to find and pay new consultants, which would increase the cost of the projects. The best way forward was to appeal for the reserve funds that had been withheld, to allow the projects to be completed.

The Chairperson gave a summary of the discussions thus far. Concerning corruption cases, the responses given had been generic. They did not take the environment they were operating in into account. He suggested that they put some thinking into it and consider the environment they operated in, as corruption was a problem. Explanations and choosing to leave matters to the Hawks were not enough. This showed that the matter was not being taken seriously. The Department was asked to go back to the matter and respond to it as it was raised.

The responses to questions about the former CEO of MISA were also generic. That was not enough -- that matter required a response that showed evidence of them applying themselves properly.

Lastly, under-spending and overspending were both problems, equally. The feedback could not be that they consistently under-spent with the expectation that the Committee would understand. They expected change. What were the measures being put in place to ensure adequate spending? How could they report to the public? This engagement was meant to represent consumers in the public, so the presentations and responses had to be for them.

Deputy Minister Nkadimeng responded to the key issues raised by the Chairperson. noting that the responses needed to be specific and transparent.

The issue around vacancies and resignations had been responded to by Mr Pretorius. It was not that the Department did not care if people resigned, as she was also worried. She had suggested to the DDG that they conduct exit interviews for those employees who were resigning to understand why members were leaving. It was also true that some left because they needed to advance their careers, or as a result of a more attractive salary being offered to them. It would be a good idea to formalise the exit interviews as part of the HR process, to ensure succession planning and maintenance.

Members had not responded well to the issue of district hubs relating to water infrastructure and plans. They had worked on 39 out of 52 plans, and those were at the Premier’s office for quality assurance and rollout. These projects were mainly around water, roads, electricity and waste management and collection. They were not at the same stages of rollout and implementation.

Given that they were allowed by the Chairperson to investigate the corruption matter before reporting back, Deputy Minister Nkadimeng opted to respond to it at a later stage, once they had gathered the required information. Relating to under-spending, the presentation had highlighted the challenges they faced in the previous financial year.

MISA’s role was to help municipalities to develop plans to ensure that service delivery took place. Their role ended at the planning stage, and municipalities oversaw the execution. They therefore could not ensure that service delivery was taking place, as that was the role of municipalities. The impact of those plans would be evident only once the municipalities implemented them. It was important to note that the presentations only included work done during the third quarter, so there were many plans they had worked on that were not included.

The report on boreholes and their coordinates had been submitted by MISA to the ministry’s office but had not been forwarded to the Committee. They had forwarded that report to the secretary so that it was signed off and available for Members. MISA had submitted this report on 29 November 2020.

Mr Diphofa responded to the three questions raised for his Department. Regarding the district development model for local houses and participation, a district may be considered the equivalent of a local house. There were national, provincial and local houses. The Department had previously developed a guide for the participation of local houses to define their role and participation in the district development model.

Implementation required the local houses to assess challenges and opportunities and report these to the Department so that implementation plans could be drafted. They were looking to move away from a maintenance role to more of a developmental one. They had thus come up with a mass rural development plan which identified pillars of development for water, infrastructure, education and training, and tourism. Discussions around development were then guided by these developed plans, providing insight into rural areas.

A range of issues had been raised around social cohesion. These include the issue of foreign nationals and how they affected national traditional communities. Addressing these issues included having conversations in traditional communities as well as the institution of traditional leaders on what it meant, and how they could improve or deal with it.

Clarity on the role of traditional houses was given, which was to support the departments as well as the courts. They had assisted the courts in the past by defining what certain terms meant in each culture, to ensure that the court had a good understanding of practices, so they could deal with cases relating to cultural practices. They aimed to identify such instances, provide clarity and intervene where the opportunity arose.

Further discussion

Mr Mpumza asked MISA how effective their technical support and planning were as part of their mandate, particularly in addressing the misalignment problem with the five water services authorities that had been identified? Had this intervention and support addressed the threat that was posed by the overflowing Ludeke Dam? Communities were at risk of being washed away, given the heavy rainfall in that area.

Was the support and technical skills MISA was providing to municipalities yielding the desired outcome? Did municipalities have the infrastructure for streams to function?

In 2021, the Department had committed to moving away from receiving qualified audit opinions to achieving a qualified opinion. When were they planning on implementing the 2021 audit outcome plans? They seemed to be dragging their feet.

When was the Department going to table the Monitoring and Intervention Bill to Parliament?

Ms Mkhaliphi agreed with the Chairperson’s remarks. The Department seemed to not be taking the Committee seriously. They were failing to address weaknesses in their performance and reports. They were presenting information without knowing the details of the information. There seemed to be no structure to address challenges faced by communities. What was meant to happen, since the Department was failing to respond to their questions?

She was grateful for the response by the Deputy Minister, as Mr Pretorius had failed to give reasons for senior employee resignations. The Department was losing employees with key expertise, so it was shocking to see the Department downplaying this problem. Could the Department provide explanations for senior management resigning? Could the DG respond to this? Many senior managers were leaving the Department since the arrival of the DG. The Committee needed a report on this, to prevent the possibility of people being victimised and forced to leave the Department. New members were also leaving, not just those who had been there for a long time, which indicated that there was a problem.

Rumours were circulating around there being a lack of procedures for recruiting senior employees. This indicated a risk of nepotism. How many people had got their jobs this way?

The Department was failing to present on issues identified during the previous meeting, including gender-based violence and femicide (GBVF). The reasons for delaying the Amendment Bill were also unclear. Where was it stuck? What needed to change for the bill to be completed?

What was the stance of the Department around the confusion of the king in KwaZulu-Natal? The government recognised a king that the families did not agree with, so what was the DTA going to do about this? Could the DG give a response on this soon?

Mr Matumba needed clarity on why Departments were not reporting details to the Committee. No details on the breakdown of the expenditure had been given. They still did not know what portion of the expenditure was for the UIF. The reports given were not sufficient for oversight.

Some municipalities had been spending their capital budgets on salaries. These details were not being shown in the presentations, as they were too summarised. There were no annexures provided with the presentations, even though the Committee was willing to read them. Departments should give the Committee reports instead of debating on whether or not this would be feasible.

He asked MISA what the water shortage challenge or the shortage of infrastructure was. If the infrastructure was what was lacking, what were they doing to temporarily deal with the problem? Could they implement the use of boreholes in communities where villages were far from one another?

Ms Mkaliphi said she had received a contradictory answer to her question regarding the remodelling of the CWP. What were the main programmes that the people part of the programme were doing each day? What were they being paid for?

Ms Direko said the Committee had received a report on the case involving the CEO of MISA. It had been presented to the Committee, and they were waiting for the final outcomes of the case from law enforcement. They were not referring to that case when speaking about corruption.

The Department had committed to investigating 90% of corruption cases by 31 March in the 2021 APP. How many cases had been reported so far? What percentage of these had been investigated so far?

Traditional leaders were not being recognised in the traditional councils. They were not participating without a valid reason. Remuneration was not the same between the provinces. The land summits were meant to be held to deal with these issues. What was the progress on these three matters?

Department's responses

Mr Pretorius suggested that the Department provide the Committee with a detailed report per site, to clarify the type of work that CWP participants did, as the Department had given the Committee only generic answers. That would provide a better overview. Participants generally helped with planting trees, sweeping the streets, as well as assisting schools with homework.

On the corruption matter, the APP target referred to any corruption case reported to the Department. There had been no cases reported to the Department, but they had a few cases reported internally within the Department relating to financial misconduct. This ranged from a supplier not being paid within 30 days to more serious cases. These cases were being investigated, and action had been taken on some of them. Those did not really involve corruption.

The Prevention and Combating of Corrupt Activities Act (PRECCA) required that they report any possible corruption which was above R100 000 to the Hawks. They had done that, and the media had reported on some of the arrests that had happened in the North West relating to ghost participants. There were a number of similar cases, but they could not conclude if these certainly amounted to corruption.  The Department lacked the capacity to investigate complex cases like those.

They were not saying that there was no corruption, but that where there was smoke, there was fire, which was why they had reported those cases. Investigations would then reveal if those were actual corruption cases.

MISA response

Mr Vimba responded on behalf of MISA.

Regarding areas like the Ludeke Dam surrounds, a report had been shared with the Committee secretary that would give detailed information about the progress made and support provided to address these areas. It would also detail the bulk infrastructure in place.

For the Ludeke Dam, the Department of Water and Sanitation was assessing the matter. They had conducted a study on it and were addressing the issue so the Committee could follow up with them regarding the progress made.

The report presented showed the projects MISA was directly involved in. MISA assisted with the preparation of the reports, as well as ensuring that those projects were fully implemented.

The effectiveness of their support was difficult to articulate, as MISA would want their involvement to be effective. Parliament could engage with the supported municipalities directly to get feedback on this, as they were better equipped to rate their support. There were municipalities that were reliant on MISA support only due to having no infrastructure, so MISA could conclude that their support had been beneficial to those communities. Those municipalities had been able to deliver water to their communities.

South Africa was a water-scarce country. There were areas in the country where water was a serious challenge. Some areas have underground water, so a challenge would be the municipalities’ capacity to fast track the implementation of water projects. These capacity issues could be either financial or technical.

An underground water business case had been developed in 2020 to advocate for borehole drilling and spring protection instead of waiting for large infrastructure projects, as these took time to complete. That case had been used to reprioritise the use of funds to fast-track water provision to communities that did not have water.

Closing remarks

Deputy Minister Nkadimeng gave her closing remarks. The matter of additional people being added to staff development had been noted. This, and the remaining matters, would be brought to the Committee, as well as the progress made, as that information was not currently available.

The demarcation board would meet with the Deputy Minister, and then the bill would be discussed. This would also be presented with the other reports to be submitted.

The Chairperson commented that they were beginning to engage in the process of oversight. The Committee was trying to avoid a situation where they were not aware of what was going on in the Department, especially issues relating to corruption. The ministry was expected to guide the Committee in how they were dealing with these matters, so general responses would not be accepted. The Committee was looking forward to this information, as the corruption cases affected people. The Department needed to be held accountable.

The meeting was adjourned.