Provincial Visit Reports and Committee Programme: adoption

Meeting report

PUBLIC WORKS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
22 June 2005
PROVINCIAL VISIT REPORTS AND COMMITTEE PROGRAMME: ADOPTION

Chairperson: Mr F Bhengu (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Committee Programme for Third Quarter 2005

SUMMARY
Members highlighted issues and challenges they had encountered on their visits to the Mpumalanga, Northern Cape and North West provinces.

The Committee had been particularly impressed with progress made on the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWD) and the quality of projects in Mpumalanga. It was an all-inclusive programme and projects showed prospects of sustainability. Learnerships and skills programmes were evident. The biggest challenge was with asset management.

In the Northern Cape, they had observed that various departments were working closely together but programmes had not been properly planned. Projects were labour intensive. However concerns were expressed about the use of child labour. The provincial asset register was a major challenge and there was no element of skills development and ownership. Members felt that the Northern Cape was faced with unique challenges and needed particular attention and more EPWP projects to boost economic activity.

In the North West, the Committee had observed many shortcomings. Of particular concern were the human relations problems in the provincial department, which they felt had to be dealt with by the National Department. The province had developed an impressive asset management system. However beyond that, the source and whereabouts of asset could not be established.

The Committee then made some adjustment to its programme for the third quarter of 2005. Additional matters were accommodated. The Committee could only undertake an overseas study tour if it was able to secure additional funding. The draft programme was unanimously adopted.

MINUTES
The Chairperson asked Members to highlight issues and challenges observed during their visits to the Mpumalanga, Northern Cape and North West provinces, as an outline for their report to be finalised in August 2005. It would be the final report after they had undertaken their last visits to Limpopo and the Western Cape.

Discussion

Mpumalanga
Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana (ANC) expressed her satisfaction with the turnout of events in Mpumalanga. It was evident that the Standing Committee, Councillors and Members of the Executive Council (MEC) were involved. They articulated issues on every project. A lot of work had been accomplished. No concerns were raised by the Members regarding the progress made in terms of the Extended Public Works Programme (EPWP). The major challenge was asset management and they were not forthcoming with information, and were unable to identify problematic areas. They wanted assistance with the issue of Section 28 (1) of the Alienation of Land Act 68 of 1981, which she felt should be taken up with the National Department and the Portfolio Committee on Land Affairs. A number of properties had been looted. There were incidents of corruption but some culprits had been apprehended.

Mr S Opperman (DA) added that the EPWP was being steered in the right direction and the quality of projects had been impressive.

Ms M Ntuli (ANC) also added that the projects were being used as a way of alleviating poverty in the province, for instance the removal of alien vegetation. Some women had been given contracts on tender for road projects.

Ms C Ramotsamai (ANC) commented that perhaps it was necessary to ascertain what projects were driven by Integrated Development Plans (IDP) and which ones by the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP).

The Chairperson responded that the IDP team had met with the Committee, although at short notice and indicated they wanted to be involved. There was no proper liaison with the Department. He proposed engagement with the Department to get the IDP team to brief them on their projects.

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana said that the length of time to complete a project in Mpumalanga was between a year and three years and felt it was sustainable. The private sector seemed to be on board and it appeared to be an all-inclusive process.

The Chairperson said that on subsequent trips they should insist on "Imbizo", rather than being just led by the Department. He felt it was important that projects remained sustainable and cited as an example a waste management project in the Eastern Cape that the municipality had assisted with and upon completion took over and absorbed the workers. It had created stable jobs for them and at the same time integrated them into the various programmes of the municipality. He wanted to know if learnerships and skills programmes were available.

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana responded that there were learnerships and they had also suggested a
first-aid learnership to train people to administer medicine since most of the workers on the projects worked in the bush. The Chairperson asked if the learnerships related to the construction industry. Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana replied in the affirmative.

Mr S Opperman remarked that Councillors had to be involved in the financial management of projects and assistance with research before projects were expanded.

Mr H Maluleka (ANC) said there were other groupings and sectors that were involved in various projects and as such it was important that before Members embarked on a visit they identified those persons they would interact with. They should check with the Provincial Department who their partners were and formalise a link with them. Ms C Ramtsamai agreed and said it would help to know in advance what to expect on their visits.

Mr L Maduma (ANC) commended Mpumalanga on their progress. He was of the opinion that a clear understanding of the regional structures of Government was important, and the kind of work being done. He linked it to the Business Incubator Programme and wanted to know if the EPWP formed part of it. Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana could not provide an answer.

The Chairperson responded that he had noted duplication in the Northern Cape and the NW. The Regional Department was not hands on, so it created problems in identifying programmes that were driven by the National Department of Public Works and those driven by the provincial government. For instance, in Kwazulu-Natal they had received complaints about non-cooperation from Councillors. It was imperative to improve intergovernmental relations.

Northern Cape
Mr M Likotsi (PACA) felt the programmes and projects had not been planned properly. In Upington they met with the MEC who gave them an overview of projects. Other Departments were working closely with them on the EPWP. Challenges were being managed.

Mr J Blanche (ANC) said he was impressed with their projects, which should be duplicated elsewhere. For instance, a delay feature had been built into roads to slow traffic. Labour intensive methods were used. He however was not happy with the use of children to do some of these jobs.

Mr G Anthony (ANC) said in terms of the EPWP vision, it was being steered in the right direction. However they had not been exposed to the realities of the province. He felt a lot of projects were being done in Kimberly that they did not visit. The problem of an inadequate asset register was not being managed. For instance, machines that were given to some farmers had not been located for the past 10 years.

Mr S Siboza (ANC) felt some projects had been organised because of their visit. He was of the opinion it was not so much a case of using children for the projects, but they were youth projects. Moreover, poverty played a crucial role in youth involvement. Projects took six months to a year to complete. There was no learnerships, skills development or ownership. The Department had been solely responsible for the projects.

The Chairperson added that most of the youths involved in the projects lived about 60km away; as a result one could not link them to a particular locality. They were only interested in how their working conditions affected their health and were not concerned about anything else. However they needed to question what was happening with their education.

Mr L Maduma commented that perhaps child labour had to do with the way the Department was driving the programmes. Why bring people from different areas to work on EPWP programmes? Was it that perhaps there was no interest from the relevant community or was malpractice involved? Were people outside the community benefiting? Sometimes, the way the projects were managed posed questions. Learnerships were to be informed by the understanding of EPWP programmes.

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana added that the Northern Cape was unique in terms of challenges and probably needed more EPWP projects. The Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) had to be more involved in the development of the youth. The trend in the Northern Cape was that of a decreasing population; coming down from a million people in 1994 to just above 700 000 currently. Those outside Kimberly were worse off and need more EPWP projects to stimulate economic activity.

Mr M Likotsi said the report from Upington suggested that Councillors had not been involved and expressed their dissatisfaction with the Department for not involving them in the development of the local municipality.

A Member said the machines that had disappeared went back to the issue of the incomplete asset register and was of the opinion that those involved at the Department should be called to account.

The Chairperson responded that they would find out from the Department what had they done about the missing assets.

Mr J Blanche said there were opportunities for spin-off industries from agricultural projects in the NC, and perhaps the Committee could make a recommendation on how to add value to a province. They could persuade companies such as SASOL to get involved in installing machines and pipes or irrigation projects and selling at a cheaper cost to farmers. The Chairperson agreed it was a valuable suggestion.

North West
Mr M Likotsi said they had made a presentation to the Department. They had visited a road project, food gardens and chicken farming. There were some disparities in estimated costs and expenditure; however they were made to understand that the road project was spread over a period of three years. They had found out later that they had visited the wrong project. Another issue was that local Councillors were being manipulated.

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana added that the Chairperson of the Standing Committee and the MEC had been involved in the visit, but they did not receive proper feedback from the Department.

The Chairperson added that their asset management system was impressive; however they could not ascertain the source of some assets or their whereabouts.

Mr H Maluleka added the experience with the Department was rather unfriendly, and this should inform the Committee on how to improve their work.

Mr G Anthony added that they should act on some of these shortcomings, and that the core project should be given to the Committee. The National Department was to be called upon to deal with the human relations issues of the Northern Cape Department.

Mr S Siboza said the Committee needed support groups that would visit the provinces and advise them on which areas to visit. "Imbizo" was a useful exercise but the problem was with targets and therefore the co-ordinator had to be involved with the organisers.

Ms M Ntuli added that the Committee was to map out an action plan on what they had observed. She felt they had to address the working relations between the different spheres of government.

Mr G Anthony felt that perhaps the Committee had been undermined because the province had already met with the National Council of Provinces.

The Chairperson agreed and further said the Committee had to make recommendations to the NCOP on their observations during their visits. It was necessary to engage with the NCOP on how to steer the process in the right direction. However, the Provincial Department was to respond to the Committee on matters arising during their visit.

Mr L Maduma was of the opinion that infrastructure development should be in the domain of the local municipality because the IDP was implemented there. Councillors had to play a pivotal role in ensuring that funds were used for the programmes implemented by the Department of Public Works (DPW). He expressed concern about the lack of synergy between the spheres of government and a general lack of understanding between the Heads of Department and Councillors. The Committee would have to develop a clear understanding of the role of the various spheres of government for oversight purposes.

The Chairperson agreed and added that some Members of the Executive Council (MEC) had been reluctant to meet with the Committee in a previous meeting because of a constitutional clause, which gave them autonomy over the Committee. He also felt that their experiences in some provinces suggested deliberate action to preclude a probe into the situation and the problems in the province.

Mr N Magubane (ANC) added that the problem could be that the EPWP were never put out to tender. He suggested they should have an "Imbizo" on the last day of every visit as part of an expanded community strategy.

Mr L Maduma agreed that "Imbizo" was a good idea; however it was important to firstly inform the MECs about their observation during the visits.

Mr S Siboza added that they should follow up on what they had observed and get a written submission.

Mr J Blanche (DA) said they should identify projects to visit, which would help them monitor their progress and success better. The Department had to appoint project managers to oversee projects. Also there was a need to develop new projects however small, and expand them since that was the essence of the EPWP.

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana said that what they had observed would help the Committee to improve its work, and as such it was important for the call on the MECs to be structured in that way. It was key to ask all the provinces to send the Committee a list of projects under the EPWP, and not to access them in terms of monitoring but to make the Standing Committee accountable.

Mr S Siboza commented that he had observed that the EPWP was seen as just road and building construction and it was necessary to indicate what other projects formed part of the EPWP.

The Chairperson agreed and said in other clusters they had concentrated solely on the Department. The Committee was not familiar with the National Department’s own projects in the EPWP. He felt the Committee had always focused on co-ordination. Similarly other Departments had their own projects in the provinces that the Committee was not aware of.

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana was impressed with the structure of the EPWP in Mpumalanga. She felt it was well co-ordinated at all the different levels. Recently, they had added Economic Affairs, which was anticipated to bring about long-term employment.

Mr N Magubane agreed and said Mpumalanga was steering the EPWP to alleviate poverty.

Committee Programme
The Chairperson highlighted that in a meeting of the Chairpersons of Committees, it had been agreed that study visits should not be undertaken unless pressing and if the visit had a direct impact on the Committee. The Committee was constrained in terms of its budget and they were going to need additional funding to go on a tour to China or Canada.

Additional matters that had to be accommodated in the programme including a briefing by the Council for the Built Environment, which was to be linked up to the Workshop on the Construction Charter. (See Programme) This was because the Council had made some input, for instance on the question of registration. Again there had been complaints of not being serviced properly by the Department. There was no relationship with the Department, and they had not been invited to the construction "indaba"

Ms T Nwamitwa-Shilubana felt overseas visits were a form of exposure for the Committee. The Committee needed to be equipped to carry out its mandate. For instance, they needed exposure to asset register problems which the Committee was expected to oversee.

The Chairperson wanted clarity on the last time the Committee had gone on a study tour. Members responded that it was in 2000.

Mr Blanche wanted Members to discuss logistics for the overseas visit. The Chairperson responded that the targeted month was August and logistics would be attended to later. The draft programme was unanimously adopted.

The meeting was adjourned.