GaRankuwa/Mabopane and Breede Valley Petitions

Meeting report

The Chairperson said that the virtual meeting was intended to address and provide updates on various housing and land issues related to petitioners, municipal housing projects, and coordination between multiple Departments and agencies. The discussions would be primarily focused on resolving land allocation and housing challenges for the four petitioners: Ms B Sepeng, Ms M Ledingoane, Mr E Kgasoe, and Mr M Mere. These challenges involved site identification, land zoning issues, delays in formalising townships, and resolving disputes over land ownership and subsidy qualifications.

He requested that the National Department of Human Settlements (NDHS) take the lead in coordinating the meeting, given its significant role, and ensure that the reports were well-organised.

The Chairperson called upon the Member of the Executive Council (MEC) for Human Settlements in Gauteng, Ms Tasneem Motara, to provide introductory remarks, as she was the only political head present, before the presentations from the various departments and entities.

City of Tshwane update on GaRankuwa/Mabopane petitioners

Ms Nonto Memela, Group Head: Human Settlements, City of Tshwane (CoT), said the CoT had been addressing the concerns of three of the four petitioners, noting that Mr Kgasoe was being handled by the North West DHS, as the site was located within that province.

She said the final step for Ms Ledingoane was the construction of the house, which would involve collaboration between the CoT and the Gauteng Provincial DHS.

She called upon Ms Petal Thring, Divisional Head: Housing Administration, Housing and Human Settlements, CoT, to make a presentation on the remaining two petitioners.

Ms Thring said that the city faced issues with Ms Sepeng’s site. In May of the previous year, the CoT had requested additional stands from the North West Housing Corporation (NWHC), as the last two allocated stands were zoned for public open space. The NWHC could not find a suitable stand for Ms Sepeng, so the CoT had asked the property department to find alternative sites. The entities expected to identify possible sites within the coming week, and meet with Ms Sepeng soon after.

Ms Thring said that in the case of Mr Mere, the CoT was waiting for two plots of land to be consolidated for township registration so that title deeds could be issued. One plot had been transferred to the Gauteng Department of Infrastructure Development (DID). The CoT had been advised by the MEC to check with Mr Mere if he would consider alternative land. She emphasised that the CoT would continue working with the DID and the province to complete the transfer and register the township.

MEC Motara called on Ms Crezelda Venter, Chief Director: Beneficiary Management, Gauteng DHS, to make a presentation on the Department's timeframe and progress.

Ms Venter said that the Department was conducting verifications to determine what needed to be overridden in the housing subsidy system (HSS). She said that an active project in Mabopane Extension 1 had been identified, a contractor would be appointed soon, and emphasised that discussions with the petitioners regarding provisions would take place once the Department could meet with them. She stressed that the allocation would adhere to the military veterans' design specifications.

North West Department of Human Settlements

Ms Kgomotso Mahlobo, Head: North West Department of Human Settlements, said that Mr Kgasoe was not satisfied with the military veteran design, despite the municipality agreeing to the site for the construction. She highlighted that the Department had raised additional funds for the military veteran's allocation, bringing it to R462 312. Mr Kgasoe’s preferred design amounted to R849 639.45, which exceeded the Department's allocated budget.

Ms Mahlobo added that in December 2024, Mr Kgasoe had requested the funds in cash, but the Department had advised that the grant framework prohibited cash disbursements. This had led to a disagreement between Mr Kgasoe and the Department.

She said that on 28 February, Mr Kgasoe had indicated a willingness to compromise. She had instructed Mr Kgasoe to submit his commitments in writing so that the Department could proceed within the guidelines of the grant framework, once the necessary documentation was received.

North West Housing Corporation (NWHC)

Mr Solly Machaba, Company Secretary: NWHC, apologised on behalf of Mr Sello Mogodiri, the Chief Executive Officer (CEO), for his absence from the virtual meeting. He provided an update on the progress made so far, stating that the power of attorney had been signed under the NWHC. However, the townships were still pending proclamation and registration.

Mr S Dithebe (ANC) expressed concern about the CEO's continued absence from the meetings, stating that it undermined the Portfolio Committee's proceedings. The Chairperson acknowledged Mr Dithebe’s concern, and mentioned the possibility of escalating the issue if the absence persists.

DHS progress report on GaRankuwa/Mabopane petitioners

Dr Alec Moemi, Director-General of the Department of Human Settlements, called upon Ms Luanne Werner, Director: Human Settlements Planning, to present a detailed summary of the issues raised by various parties and provide a clear update on each challenge and the current status of the portfolio.

Ms Sepeng
Ms Werner explained that finding a suitable site for Ms Sepeng was challenging. A larger area in GaRankuwa/Mabopane had been identified, only to be later deemed a public open space. Many of these open spaces were located in wetlands, making them unsuitable for building. In November 2024, alternative sites had been found in GaRankuwa and Zone 4, but both were unsuitable for residential use. The NWHC had requested the City of Tshwane to help identify new sites for Ms Sepeng.

Ms Werner concluded that the subsidy qualifying criteria might need to be overridden. The CoT had submitted a request for subsidy approval to the Gauteng Human Settlements Department on 27 February.

Ms Ledingoane
Ms Werner reported that Ms Ledingoane had requested counseling following the last meeting in November 2024, which the Department facilitated. However, she remained unreachable by phone. Ms Ledingoane had a title deed, confirmed by the CoT, but still needed to be included in the subsidy approval process. The CoT had resubmitted the request for subsidy approval to the Gauteng Human Settlements Department on 27 February.

Mr Kgasoe
She reiterated that, as mentioned by the North West Head of Department, Mr Kgasoe wanted to plan his own house, which exceeded the subsidy amount provided by the Department.

Mr Mere
She said Mr Mere's case was part of the Mabopane/Winterveldt/Ga-Rankuwa (MAWIGA) project related to township formalisation. The Department was working on procuring a service provider for this project. Original documents of the Power of Attorneys were required, and the NWHC had provided only scanned copies. The procurement process had faced delays due to changes in procurement methods and internal delays in advertising and appointing a service provider.

Ms Werner assured the Committee that by the end of March, the project would be presented to the budget delegation committee, and then advertised for a service provider. She added that the CoT was facing challenges with one of the portions, which had been escalated to the Housing Infrastructure Department.

See attached for full presentation.

Discussion

Ms Z Abader (MK) asked if the Department had exhausted all avenues of getting hold of Ms Ledingoane, such as calls, emails, or a physical address? She then inquired why the implementation of previous findings of the 2014 and 2018 Public Protector had not been enforced, despite two official investigations, with no remedial actions being followed. What mechanisms were in place to hold accountable those responsible for failing to act on these reports? How did the government plan to fast-track township formalisation and land transfers considering the ongoing legal disputes, particularly the court case between the City of Tshwane and the North West Housing Corporation, which was delaying progress. Was mediation an option to settle land compensation and expedite township establishment?

Ms Abader mentioned that, due to time constraints, she would forward her recommendations and comments to Ms Kholiswa Pasiya-Mndende, the Committee Secretary.

Mr Dithebe stressed the importance of the Committee not being seen as making rules on the go, but rather remaining flexible within the boundaries of the law, recognising the limitations. He commended the North West Head of Department, the City of Tshwane, and the Gauteng Department of Human Settlements for coming up with a solution, particularly acknowledging the North West Head of Department for securing additional funds from the private sector.

He advised the Committee that significant progress had been made in accommodating Mr Kgasoe. He pointed out that the cost of the unit, which was R462 312, appreciated over time, marking a milestone for the Department.

He echoed the DG's suggestion that the Department must continue engaging with Mr Kgasoe and ensure he submits his commitments in writing, as it was unlawful to provide him with the money he requested.

He emphasised that the DHS had shown evidence-based, solution-driven efforts in managing other petitioners' cases.

Mr K Sithole (IFP) asked what the status of the investigations conducted by the City of Tshwane and the Public Protector was How far along were the investigations by the Special Investigating Unit (SIU)? Had any consequence management been taken by the Department, either by Gauteng or the North West?

He asked about the mediation process, and whether any negotiations had taken place between the Department and the petitioners.

Ms B Kegakilwe (ANC) acknowledged that her questions had already been addressed by Mr Dithebe, particularly concerning the progress made by the City of Tshwane and the North West Department. She proposed that the Department should attempt to reach Ms Ledingoane through other petitioners.

Mr C Poole (DA) confirmed that most of his concerns had been covered by Mr Dithebe, and emphasised that Mr Kgasoe must submit his commitments in writing so that the process could be finalised. He cautioned that the Portfolio Committee must not be seen as persuading officials to deviate from things they could not do.

Responses

City of Tshwane

Ms Memela said that the City of Tshwane had provided one of the forensic reports and other relevant information to the Committee, to help assess the extent to which the city had acted on the implementation of the findings. She clarified that neither officials from the CoT nor from the North West Housing Corporation (NWHC) were implicated in the findings of the report.

Following consultations with legal advisors, the CoT had referred the matter to the SIU for further investigation and potential prosecution. However, the SIU had found that the officials implicated in the report were not part of the CoT, and had since passed away. The key official identified in the forensic report had left the city around 2017. She provided an update from the SIU, confirming that the investigation would not proceed, as the two implicated officials had passed on.

Regarding the investigation by the Office of the Public Protector, Ms Memela said the report was still under review by the court. She assured the Committee that the legal team appointed to represent the city was actively engaged in the case, and the CoT would provide an update on the status of the Public Protector’s review as soon as more information was available.

She highlighted the progress made between the City of Tshwane and the North West Housing Corporation. The North West Department had sent a letter to the City on 28 February, confirming that the Powers of Attorney had been signed. This would allow the CoT to proceed with township establishment and proclamation in certain areas, as well as the transfer of properties under NWHC.

Ms Memela concluded by noting that the CoT was now waiting for the original documents to proceed with the process.

North West Housing Corporation

Solly Machaba confirmed that the Corporation would send the original papers by Friday 7 March at the latest, so the township establishment process could proceed.

North West Department of Human Settlements

Ms Mahlobo noted that Mr Dithebe had addressed the questions raised by Ms Abader. She further explained that the design for the R462 312 unit had been determined based on the additional funding available. When the North West Department met with Mr Kgasoe, he had presented a design that exceeded the Department's proposed cost, coming in at over R850 000. She clarified that the Department would not implement consequence management, as no wrongdoing had been identified.

She emphasised that the Department only required Mr Kgasoe to submit his commitments in writing to proceed with finalising the process, as the contractor was already on standby.

Dr Moemi expressed the need to resolve the petitioners' matters swiftly so that the Committee could focus on the larger MAWIGA issue, specifically the challenge surrounding title deeds. He stressed that resolving the petitioners' concerns should be prioritised as the first step towards addressing the broader MAWIGA matter.

Western Cape Department of Infrastructure presentation

Ms Kahmiela August, Chief Director: Human Settlement Planning, Western Cape Department of Infrastructure, provided an update on the progress of the New Mandela Square project.

She began by highlighting that the verification process for the project was 99% complete, and the Department had now transitioned to the subsidy qualification process. While there had been no notable changes in North Mandela Square and Aspad, eMagwaleni had experienced slight growth in informal settlements.

The Department of Infrastructure had engaged the Department of Rural Development to negotiate the use of drones for additional aerial imagery, scheduled for March.

Regarding ownership disputes, Ms August explained that three families were contesting ownership of their sites. The Department had decided that in the case of disputes, the original approval list would be used to verify ownership. A challenge had arisen during the verification process, as 506 households were found not to be listed in the municipality’s housing demand database, which was a requirement for subsidy eligibility. This issue was complicated by the need to verify these households against the original allocated site list.

She informed the Committee about the subsidy application process that was done in February. Although the community had been informed of the special session, the turnout was low, with only 24% attendance. A follow-up session had been held on 2 March, though the Department had yet to receive the statistics.

Ms August also discussed the land identified for decanting, noting that five parcels of land were found --three owned by the municipality, and two by private owners. The Housing Development Agency (HDA) was now focused on pursuing the privately owned land to complete the project.

She said that in December 2024, the HDA had conducted an assessment of the 652 structures to determine the condition of internal services. A qualified service provider began an engineering services status report in February, with a completion date set for 14 March. Early findings indicated that the electrical infrastructure was adequate.

Ms August also mentioned that the Department had drafted a budget for rudimentary services for Emagwaleni, Aspad, and North Mandela Square, and was continuing discussions with the Department of Infrastructure (DoI) on service provision plans. Regarding the use of chemical toilets, the provincial Minister had opposed their implementation due to the high cost and maintenance requirements, prompting the consideration of alternative interim services.

See attached for full presentation

Discussion

Mr T Gamede (MK) commented on the planning of the New Mandela Square project, highlighting that it demonstrated a well-structured approach, with a budget allocation of R5 550 000 for the 2023/24 fiscal year. The project covered critical activities such as the assessment of informal settlements like Orania, imagery analysis, location-based relocation strategies, engineering assessments, and upgrading plans.

He acknowledged that flexibility in the project planning allowed for adjustments based on feasibility studies and community engagements. However, he also pointed out key challenges that might arise, including infrastructure readiness, access to electrical, water and sanitation services, and issues related to sewer blockages, fire-prone informal housing structures, and water leaks. These concerns emphasised the need for careful planning and maintenance.

He raised concerns about the decanting and relocation strategies, stressing that coordination with municipal and private landowners was necessary to secure suitable sites for affected residents, ensuring a smooth transition.

Mr Gamede asked, when considering the planned decanting and relocation strategy for the New Mandela Square project, what potential social, economic and infrastructural challenges could arise from relocating residents to temporary relocation areas (TRAs)? How could these be mitigated to ensure minimal disruption to affected communities?

Given the assessment findings on internal and engineering services, such as the lack of electrical, water and sanitation infrastructure, as well as issues like sewer blockages, flammable construction materials, and low water pressure, what specific engineering interventions and regulatory measures should be prioritised to enhance the safety, sustainability and long-term functionality of the upgraded housing project?

He expressed concern regarding Members using the report to attack a particular Member. It was disheartening to witness such behaviour, as all Members were part of the Portfolio Committee and should engage in discussions respectfully.

Mr K Sithole (IFP) raised concerns regarding the project budget. He pointed out that while different studies had been conducted, infrastructure development had not yet been budgeted for. He expressed skepticism that the budget presented would be sufficient to cover both infrastructure and construction.

He questioned the issue of land ownership, noting that the project involved both privately owned and municipal-owned land. He asked how much land would be sourced from private landowners. What information was available regarding land negotiations? Had there been any meetings with private landowners regarding land acquisition?

Mr Sithole raised concerns regarding the allocation of the 652 houses planned for construction. He asked whether beneficiaries had already been identified, or if they would be identified only at a later stage.

Mr Dithebe sought clarity on the status of three families affected by the relocation process. He asked the city representatives to explain the current situation, and whether any dispute resolution mechanisms had been engaged to prevent these families from delaying the project.

Could Ms August provide an estimate of how many other deserving cases -- like this project -- had not yet been included in the business plan?

He questioned the feasibility of redirecting funding towards this project, given that the City's objective was to make a significant impact on informal settlements in the area. Were there alternative avenues for the city to mobilise resources for land acquisition? Could profiteering by private landowners pose an obstacle to these efforts? Did the City have a stance on using the recently passed Expropriation Act to address these challenges?

Mr Poole raised a fundamental concern about the overall impact of the project. He questioned how the initiative would tangibly improve the lives of the more than 5 000 residents in informal settlements, emphasising that this was a key question asked within his constituency.

Responses

Ms August confirmed that the infrastructure engineering report had been finalised and would be officially received on March 14 as part of the project implementation readiness report. She assured the Committee that the report would address critical concerns, including blockages, sustainability, and water needs.

She said that by the next presentation, the Department would provide a comprehensive update, and since the team was meeting at the end of March, it would also provide additional input from the National Department if required.

Ms August explained that the studies were funded through the Department’s Human Settlements Development Grant (HSDG), managed by the HDA, which integrates the costs into the Department’s business plan. She also highlighted that an emergency housing fund at the national level might be leveraged for the project.

In response to the issue of three families resisting relocation, she said that the Department would refer to the original allocation list of the site to determine rightful ownership and resolve any conflicts. The Department would work closely with the municipality to settle the matter. Regarding the expropriation of land, she confirmed that engagements with private landowners were expected within the month.

Mr David Alli, Chief Town and Regional Planner: Human Settlements, Western Cape Department of Infrastructure, outlined the two main components of the project -- constructing houses for beneficiaries, and upgrading informal settlements. Approximately 500 housing opportunities had been planned for the region. He provided details of budget allocations, noting that over the past two years, R500 million had been spent via the Human Settlements Development Grant (HSDG) to address informal settlement challenges. However, for the current fiscal year, only R382 million was available.

The project’s budget had been reduced to R109 million, leaving the Department with only 20% of the previously allocated funds to address informal settlement issues in the Western Cape. As a result, securing additional funding had become a critical priority.

Mr Alli emphasised the need for resource mobilisation, and said that land acquired for human settlement must undergo spatial suitability assessments to assess its viability for housing development. He also mentioned the Department’s consideration of a reblocking and super-blocking strategy to optimise land use and accommodate as many households as possible. The reblocking exercise in Emagwaleni would involve relocating households while providing essential services at their new locations.

The Chairperson inquired about the issue of three families resisting relocation, and whether their concerns had been addressed adequately.

Mr Alli clarified that the matter was not one of outright refusal but a dispute over ownership. Multiple families currently occupied the contested plots, leading to conflicts regarding rightful ownership.

 He explained that the Department was engaging with the affected families, referring to the original allocation list from the municipality and involving the local councillor to mediate the dispute. He emphasised that any delays due to these disputes could impact the project timeline. Therefore, collaboration with the municipality and affected residents was essential for a smooth relocation process.

Mr Simphiwe Mayeki, Manager: Human Settlements and Community Development, Breede Valley Municipality, echoed Mr Alli’s comments and emphasised the presence of a dispute resolution mechanism involving the municipality and Committee. He acknowledged the issue of private land negotiations, noting that the reblocking of private land was part of the broader intervention strategy. He assured the Committee that updates would be provided on the progress of these negotiations in the next Portfolio Committee meeting.

Dr Moemi addressed budget constraints, explaining that both the current and previous budgets were affected by cuts, primarily due to reductions in grants allocated to provinces and municipalities by the National Treasury. He said that when these cuts occur, the Department implements proportional reductions across all provinces and metros.

Despite these challenges, he emphasised the importance of prioritising high-impact projects and allocating resources based on national priorities. He commended the collaborative efforts of provincial and municipal authorities, particularly in response to the petition that had led to the prioritisation and fast-tracking of the project. While resource limitations remained, progress had been made in conducting feasibility studies and preparing for further implementation.

He said the Human Settlements Development Grant (HSDG) would eventually support the construction of permanent top structures, but stressed that beneficiary verification processes must be completed first. He also acknowledged the importance of resolving land allocation disputes to ensure the success of the housing initiative.

He clarified that the project’s budget planning would follow a multi-year financing approach, spanning two to four years. Aerial imagery showed a slow rate of informal settlement expansion, which remained a concern but was not growing exponentially.

Dr Moemi concluded by reiterating the importance of careful urban planning to ensure the effective allocation of available resources.

The Chairperson made closing remarks, and acknowledged that while progress may have been small, it represented a positive step forward from previous discussions.

The meeting was adjourned.