Committee’s Annual Report, Oversight Reports & Programme: deliberations

HOUSING PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
1 November 2006
COMMITTEE’S ANNUAL REPORT, OVERSIGHT REPORTS & PROGRAMME: DELIBERATIONS

Chairperson: Ms Z Kota (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Annual Report of the Portfolio Committee on Housing: January – December 2006
Report on the Oversight Visit to Alfred Nzo District Municipality on 8 – 11 October 2006
Draft Report on Oversight Study Tour to the Northern Cape: 9 – 11 October 2006
Draft Report on Oversight Study Tour to the Free State Province: 16 – 18 October 2006
Draft Report on Oversight Study Tour to the North West Province: 16 – 18 October 2006
Draft Minutes of Meeting held on 13 September 2006
Minutes of Meeting held on 24 October 2006
Programme for Portfolio Committee on Housing: Fourth Term
[Reports available once tabled at Committee Reports]

SUMMARY
The Chairperson tabled the draft Annual Report of the Committee, and indicated that she would prefer a more detailed report. She summarised the mission and vision of the Committee. Other members felt that the report was not user-friendly and that it should include more detail on the budget, and should also double-check the figures, which did not seem to add up. Members agreed that these issues must be clarified before the Annual Report could be approved, but this should be done before the end of the term.

The Committee had held public hearings public hearings on 9 and 10 May 2006 to discuss the National Department of Housing’s budget and expenditure for the financial year 2004/05, and briefings were received from all nine provinces. The oversight visits resulted from concerns expressed. The Committee considered, but did not adopt, the report on the Oversight visit to the Eastern Cape from 8 – 11 October. In its current form it was not a true reflection of the visit. The Committee considered the report on the oversight study tour to the Northern Cape from 9 to 11 October. The report needed to be amended in several respects. Further recommendations needed to be included, and some events that were not mentioned needed to be included. It was agreed that the report must be amended. The Committee considered the report on the oversight study tour to the Free State from 16 to 18 October. Members requested that this report must clarify that some members were not present as they were visiting other provinces at the time. Certain problems with defective housing needed to be clearly highlighted. The Committee needed to include specific recommendations in the report relating to upgrading of hostels, the assistance given by housing institutions, and the need for inspections before occupation. The report would need to be considered more fully and Members were asked to make recommendations before they voted on the adoption of the report.

The Minutes of meetings held on 13 September 2006 and 24 October 2006 were approved. The fourth term programme was approved, with an amendment reflecting that Kwazulu Natal would be included also in the forthcoming oversight visit to Limpopo and Mpumulanga.

MINUTES
Portfolio Committee’s Annual Report
The Chairperson tabled the report and indicated that she was concerned about the new format of the report. She would prefer a more detailed report, with this one attached as an addendum. She said that the mission of the committee was to ensure that Parliament got value for money spent on building houses. The committee would continue to encourage visible housing delivery and adherence to better quality housing units. The vision of the committee was to work with all relevant stakeholders willing to participate in the building of houses and assist the Department of Housing (DOH) in its constitutional imperative and mandate of providing everyone with access to adequate housing.

Mr A Steyn (DA) concurred that the new format was not very reader friendly. He felt that there was a need for more information in terms of the Committee’s budget this particular year. The budget was R500 000. The workshop and public hearings left a balance of R179 000, and the figures did not seem to add up. He had a similar concern with the figures in the 2005 report.

The Chairperson asked members to agree to pass the Annual Report before the end of the term but it was clear that these issues must first be clarified, so that were satisfied that there was a more user-friendly version, with this report to be attached as an addendum. The Annual Report helped the Committee to see where the gaps were and what it must work on next year.

Committee Study Tour / Oversight Reports
The Chairperson stated that the Committee’s main aims were to check the progress, pace of housing delivery, and challenges experienced by the provinces and to ensure that government got value for the funds voted in the provinces. Public hearings were held on 9 and 10 May 2006, to discuss the National Department of Housing’s budget and expenditure for the financial year 2004/05. All nine provincial housing departments briefed the committee on their financial statements and progress. It was clear from the hearings that the Committee should undertake oversight visits to the provinces. A number of problems were seen relating to size, quality, incomplete projects and lack of sanitation. The Committee had therefore undertaken to go back again to check progress.

Committee Report on Oversight visit to Eastern Cape: 8–11 October 2006
The Chairperson explained that the Eastern Cape report was not a true reflection of the visit. The person who recorded it had to get in touch with members from the Eastern Cape to see what could be added to that report.

Committee Report on Oversight Study Tour to the Northern Cape: 9–11 October 2006
Mr Steyn remarked that there were no page numbers, which made it difficult to follow and refer to the report.
.
The terms of reference referred to the public hearings. He knew that the Committee had done the oversight visits as it was in any event holding public hearings, but he stated that there was a need to go on oversight trips irrespective of public hearings.

The Chairperson clarified that the oversight visits were rather an initiative that had come from the Committee’s business plan. These visits and hearings were not accidental; they had been planned that way.

Mr Steyn referred to the remark, under Day 1 of the report, that ‘Cross boundary processes went smoothly, but the province would fully take over responsibility of projects in the 2007/08 financial year’. He did not think this was correct. The current problem with those cross boundary projects still under way was that the North West still had to fund one or two of the projects, and the way in which the report was phrased did not correctly reflect that.

He also said that the last long paragraph referred to the fact that the Department built houses of 36 to 40 square metres, over and above the national norm of 30 square metres. The national norm was in fact 32 square metres. The report should clarify that the size was additional to the national norm; in other 30m² plus another 36 to 40 m².

Mr Steyn further commented that the report should be more specific about reference to alternative sanitation in the Hull Street Social Housing Project, and should mention that the entire project, which was built on rock, had alternative sanitation (no waterborne sewerage).

The Chairperson said that she did not know where people got water for the toilets.

Mr Steyn referred her to the bullet point, under the Greenpoint housing project, stating that there was ‘no drinking water inside or outside the house’. He suggested that be amended to read that there was no water supply in the kitchen or outside the house.

Mr Steyn then referred to the section of the report for Day 2, which stated that ‘Funds were transferred to the contractor in advance but the building was stopped due to the material used not being compliant’. That was not correct.

The Chairperson agreed that this must be amended
.
Mr Steyn stated that he could not accept that the North West government was not in a position to top-up funding for the completion of the project. This again referred to problems of underperformance contractors and could not continue.

The Chairperson clarified that there was an investigation into this matter.

Mr Steyn then referred to the section of the report dealing with the Committee’s recommendations. The Chairperson had specifically mentioned that there seemed to be different norms from project to project, and he had expressed the concern that the projects were not following the minimum standards. He stressed that it should be stated that the minimum standards must be adhered to. In addition, he noted that the Committee expressed dissatisfaction in the quality and size of some houses built and the number of incomplete projects.
The Committee had undertaken to go back and check on the progress of the challenges.

The Chairperson was unhappy that a lot of events that took place were not even mentioned in the report.

It was agreed to amend the report where necessary.

Committee Report on Oversight Study Tour to the Free State Province: 16 – 18 October 2006
The Chairperson reported that Members had made the suggestion that it should be indicated clearly in the reports that half the committee were not present because they were visiting other provinces at the same time.

She referred to the section on day 2 of the visit. She stressed that apparently about 22 of the municipalities in the Free State had Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) housing. The Committee had seen many problems, including defective houses that should be demolished, and the report should reflect that the situation was quite critical. The President had also visited this particular area.

Mr Steyn referred to the Theunissen 200 project, the examples of energy efficient houses built in 2004, and the fact that the project could not be rolled out to other areas due to cost implications. He proposed that the Committee’s report should specifically make recommendations that the municipality concerned must report on progress, to give the Committee more information. There had been some activity in 2004 but nothing else was rolled out since then.

The Chairperson stated that she would also like to know what had stopped the project, and, if it was energy efficient, what were the savings that had been achieved.

The Committee had also expressed concern with the number of houses built without proper sanitation installed.

The Committee therefore wished to include the following recommendations in the report:
- In the upgrading of hostels, the Breaking New Ground in Housing (BNG) requirements should be seriously considered.
- The province strongly consider the involvement and assistance provided by housing institutions, especially the National Home Builder’s Registration Council (NHBRC
- All completed projects should be inspected before occupation and reports of such inspections prepared.

The Chairperson suggested that the Committee should revisit the report on the Free State, and for that purpose asked Members to study it, and come back with recommendations before giving approval on the final content..

Adoption of Minutes of meetings: 13 September and 24 October 2006
The Minutes of meetings held on 13 September 2006 and 24 October 2006 were approved and adopted.

Programme for Fourth Term
The Chairperson reported that the visit to Cuba was still outstanding.

She stated that the Committee had not held an oversight visit to KwaZulu-Natal since 2004. It was agreed to include this province at the same time the Committee visited Limpopo and Mpumalanga.

The programme was adopted as amended.

The meeting was adjourned.