ATC140408: Legacy Report of the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform 4th Parliament of the Republic of South Africa May 2009 – March 2014

Rural Development and Land Reform

Legacy Report of the Portfolio Committee on

Rural Development and Land Reform

4 th Parliament of the Republic of South Africa

May 2009 – March 2014



Highlights of the report

This report accounts the work of the 4 th Parliament’s Portfolio Committee (the Committee) on Rural Development and Land Reform. Based on its 2009-2014 Strategic Plan, reviewed in 2012, the Committee developed strategic objectives that provided a framework within which it operated.

The objectives were crafted as follows:

- To evaluate; process and monitor implementation of relevant policies, legislation and programmes of the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform and its entities.

- To undertake an effective process of scrutinising and overseeing the exercise of executive authority; including entities under the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.

- To ensure that the public is central in all aspects of legislation formulation, implementation and evaluation through interactive, responsive and meaningful engagements

- To foster conditions and support systems which enhance committee’s capacity and processes for a robust and critical oversight, including guidance over the Executive

- To foster co-operation within the three spheres of government as well as committees in the National Assembly and the National Council Of Provinces on matters of common interest

Table 1 : Key focus areas per year

Year

Key focus

2009/10

- Oversight on realignment of the Department and creation of capacity to implement the new mandate.

- Monitoring conceptualisation and roll out of the CRDP pilot projects

2010/11

- Oversight on implementation of the turnaround strategy for restitution

- Assessment of the effectiveness of the Recapitalisation and Development Programme (to improve productivity of land reform farms)

- Assessment of the CRDP pilots and roll out of the CRDP to rural municipalities

2011/12

- The completion of the National Land Audit

- Policy review and the Green Paper on Land Reform

2012/13

- Follow-up the Green Paper on Land Reform debates and engage in policy review

- Tracking progress in implementation of the recommendations of the Auditor-General

2013/14

- Coordinated oversight on redress of the legacy of the 1913 Natives Land Act.

- Processing of legislation referred to the Committee by the National Assembly

Some of the key achievements

Over the last five years, the Committee managed to achieve the following:

- It oversaw the completion of the state land audit by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform;

- As a result of the Committee’s insistence, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform tabled (in 2010) its first Communal Property Associations (CPAs) Annual Report since the promulgation of the CPA Act in 1996;

- The Committee oversaw the completion of the Comprehensive Rural Development Programme pilot projects and subsequent rolling out the CRDP model to other rural municipalities;

- A number of key pieces of legislation referred to the Committee were processed; that includes the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Bill; the Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill; the Property Valuations Bill. In addition, it also processed other Bills of technical nature such as the Deeds Registries and the Sectional Titles Amendment Bills.

- It created platforms for a coordinated dialogue on the legacy of the 1913 Land Act, and raising debates between public representatives and members of the public on the subject matter; and

- It ensured public participation processes during consideration of legislation and other core businesses of the Committee. For example, stakeholders briefing sessions on the plight of farm dwellers and workers.

Key areas for future work

Having conducted its work under the guidance of its five year strategic plan (2009-2014), revised in 2012 when the Committee conducted its mid-term review; and further having concluded its business by the end of March 2014; there are issues that it recommends that the new Committee should find mechanisms to include them for follow up during the fifth Parliament.

The Committee identified broad areas of work that could be marked for consideration as priority issues for the fifth Parliament’s Portfolio Committee responsible for land reform and rural developed. As illustrated in Table of this report, the key areas have been grouped according to the four categories; namely, restitution; redistribution, tenure reform, development support, and policy development. In addition, critical attention needs to be paid to the entities which reports to the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, mainly the Ingonyama Trust Board and the Agricultural Land Holding Account and the Deeds Trading Account.

Whilst this Committee managed to work with the Department to ensure that an unqualified audit report was achieved, a lot of work was still required to ensure that a clean audit was attained. Therefore critical focus needs to be paid the governance issues. And a focus on the findings of the Auditor-General for this Department would help to improve in both areas of financial and non-financial performance.

Table 2 : Proposed areas for future work

Area

Issues

Restitution

- Progress on state of readiness for the lodgement of claims

- Finalisation of outstanding claims and funding for new land claims

- National Land Restitution Register

Redistribution

- Monitoring the performance of the Agricultural Land Holding Account and the management of leases as per the new lease management policy ;

- Oversight on new land purchases and the role of the Valuer-General as provided for the Property Valuations Bill.

Tenure

- Communal Land Tenure Policy

- Amendment of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act

- Settlement of claims made in terms of the Labour Tenant Act (LTA)

Development Support

- Assessment of the performance of the RADP, especially the strategic partnerships and mentorship programmes

- Support to smallholder farmers

CRDP

- Coordination of government interventions for the CRDP and development support for land reform projects

- Monitor infrastructure development projects, and human capacity development programmes in rural areas

- Implementation of key legislation such as the Spatial and Land Use Management Act

Overarching Policy

- Follow up with the Department on the compilation of the overarching policy framework through the ‘White Paper on Land Reform’; and a separate ‘White Paper on Rural Development’

Entities

- Policy and legislation governing the Ingonyama Trust as well as improving accountability of the Board.

- Land administration on the Ingonyama Land and draw comparisons with other system of administration elsewhere in South Africa

Overview of key challenges during the term of the Committee

Whilst the Committee recorded a number of successes between 2009 and 2014, it also encountered challengers which it had to deal with. These challenges can be grouped in terms of the five strategic focus areas proposed in the strategic plan.

Law-making (policy and legislation)

- The Department could not adhere to its legislative programme; as a result the Committee’s programme was affected. Only towards the end of the term that more legislation was referred to the Committee.

- As a rural development committee, most of the work done targets to better the lives of the rural poor. Therefore, public participation process on some legislation takes longer due to consultation processes in rural areas of South Africa, yet there are limited time and resources to do so.

- The absence of an overarching policy document (a white paper) affects the way in which the Committee could evaluate or monitor policies holistically.

Oversight on exercise of the Executive

- The Department often submitted its briefing documents or reports, either very late or on the day of the meeting. This affected the ability of the Committee to critically engage with the presentations and subject under discussion. Late submission of documents hamstrung the effectiveness of oversight and scrutiny of documents.

- There were constant changes on the Parliamentary programme. This affects the programme of the Committee. In addition, the time allocated to Committees for oversight visits was insufficient, especially for committees focusing on rural development and land reform; they do require more of field-based oversight activities and time for follow-up visits.

Public participation

- Effective processes of public consultation in law-making are expensive. It takes more time to finalise consultation on policy or legislation.

Recommendations

In view of the overall performance of the Committee and the challenges it encountered during its term of office, the following recommendations were made:

The Committee should consider –

- Creating enough space, in its programme, for oversight visits. Such visits should encompass a mix of both remote areas of South Africa and the peri-urban areas in order to enable the Committee to determine if indeed the CRDP is reaching the very rural poor and disadvantaged sectors of our Society;

- Insisting on timeframes for submission of reports or briefing documents to the Committee in order to avoid late submission which affects the Committee’s ability to critically and effectively engage in discussion about the subject matter under consideration.

- Ensuring that oversight visits should be followed by follow-up activities to ensure that the findings of the Committee are dealt with by the Department/entity. Such follow-up activities may include return visits to same sites to ascertain progress made by government.

- Designing mechanisms to track progress in responses to its questions (arising from its meetings and other forms of engagements), and implementation of Committee resolutions as tabled in the House.

- Coordinating efforts of various portfolio committees with overlapping mandates in order provide a comprehensive parliamentary oversight on activities of government departments, as well as dealing with various crosscutting issues of interest to the committees.

- Focussing the oversight efforts on governance systems and structures of the Department to ensure that the Department achieves a clean audit report from the Auditor-General of South Africa.


1. Introduction

This report accounts for the work of the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform, hereafter referred to as the Committee. It is based on performance against is planned activities as per the Strategic Plan (2009-2014), implemented between May 2009 and March 2014.

The functions of parliamentary committees, as stipulated in the rules of the National Assembly, include the following:

- To monitor the financial and non-financial performance of government departments and their entities to ensure that national objectives are met.

- To process and pass legislation.

- To facilitate public participation in Parliament relating to issues of oversight and legislation.

The Committee oversees the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform, hereafter referred to as the Department, and its entities. The entities are the Ingonyama Trust Board, the Agricultural Land Holding Account, and the Deeds Trading Account. In addition, the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights, under the programme of Restitution, reports independently to Parliament.

1.1 Department and entities reporting to the portfolio: rural development and land reform

1.1.1 Department of Rural Development and Land Reform

In 2009, the old Ministry of Agriculture and Land Affairs was split to create a separate ministry and department that would encompasses the mandate of the former Department of Land Affairs, and a new mandate of rural development. The new department was named the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. Its legislative mandate, as documented in the strategic plan of the Department, is “to create and maintain equitable and sustainable land dispensation and to act as a catalyst for rural development that ensures rural livelihoods, decent work and continued social and economic advancement for all South Africans” [1] . Section 25 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa provides a framework within which the legislative mandate for land reform is derived and implemented. In line with the new mandate, the new Department was realigned and defined its new role, being to “initiate, facilitate, coordinate, catalyse and implement an integrated programme of Rural Development”, with a vision “to create vibrant, equitable and sustainable rural communities and food security for all” [2] . This vision derives from the priorities of government as documented in outcome 7 of the 12 outcomes of government. [3]

1.1.2 Entities reporting to the Minister of Rural Development and Land reform

There are three main entities which reports to the Department; namely the Deeds Registration Trading Account, the KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust Board, and the Agricultural Land Holding Account. In addition, the South African Council of Planners and the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights also report to the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform. These entities reports to the Minister, who reports to Parliament, about the funds transferred to them in terms of Section 38(1)(i) of the Public Funds Management Act.

(a) Commission on Restitution of Land Rights

The Commission on Restitution of Land Rights implements the programme of restitution. The purpose of the restitution programme is to provide equitable redress to victims of racially motivated land dispossession, in line with the provisions of the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994 (Act No. 22 of 1994). Its objective is to resolve restitution claims within the target period, through negotiated settlements that restore land rights, or award alternative forms of equitable redress to claimants [4] .

(b) Deeds Registration Trading Account

The Deeds Registration Trading Account is managed in terms of the Deeds Registries Act, No 47 of 1937, as amended. Its main purposes are to finance the operating costs of the various Deeds Registries responsible for the registration of conventional bonds, sectional titles and leaseholds.

(c) KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust Board

The Ingonyama Trust Board is established in terms of the KwaZulu-Natal Ingonyama Trust Act, (Act No.3 of 1994) as amended by the National Act 9 of 1997. It core business is to manage the land for the “material benefit and social wellbeing of the individual members of the tribes”. It is vitally important to note that the Trust Board cannot alienate or burden the land without the written permission of the relevant traditional or community authority.

(d) Agricultural Land Holding Account

This account was established for the land reform purposes in terms of the Provision of Land and Assistance Act, 1993 (Act No 126 of 1993) as amended in 2008. The Act provides that the Minister may, from money appropriated by Parliament, proactively acquire land for land redistribution.

1.2 The Committees approach and methods for conducting its work

1.2.1 Approach

Given the strategic significance of the programme of land reform as an integral part of the strategy for rural development, and a component of mechanisms to redress the colonial and apartheid racially-based and skewed land ownership patterns, the Committee adopted an approach to ensure the centrality of public participation in its approach. Its programme of action ensured that its contribution to the oversight and accountability functions of parliament, especially issues related to how the policies of government were implemented as well as their impact with regard to changing the lives of the people. The Committee adopted an evidence-based law-making and policy assessment; hence it put a lot of emphasis on stakeholder engagements and public hearings in almost all its law-making activities.

Illustration 1: Framework for Oversight by the Portfolio Committee


Illustration 1 (above) shows how the Committee conceptualised the work it carried out over the last five years. The Committee took into consideration the context within which rural development and land reform were implemented. Poverty, unemployment and inequalities are the three critical challenges that can be directly linked landlessness – a legacy of the colonial and apartheid land dispossessions. However, the post-apartheid land reform programme has also been criticised for poor post settlement support which leads to underutilisation of land. It has also been criticized for its lack of effective institutional support to the new land owning entities, the Communal Properties Associations (CPAs) and Trusts. Therefore, the focus of the Committee was on policies and processes that could unlock the potential, in both rural development and land reform, to undo the legacy of the racially-based land divisions. The focus of the committee was on secure land access in terms of the redistributive programmes of land reform (restitution and redistribution) as well as tenure reform; increased productivity of land reform farms through the Recapitalisation and Development Programme (RADP); improvement of the livelihoods of the rural poor through the CRDP, and audit of state land.

The oversight strategies were underpinned by commitment to public participation in all aspects of oversight and policy or law-making, scrutiny of reports of the Department and relevant entities, supported by reports from other government entities such as the public service commission, Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, and the Auditor-General. These oversight underpinnings were translated into methods as detailed subsection 1.2.2 (below).

The Committee identified three strategic outcomes which it focussed on, i.e. development of policies and legislation, pursue oversight to ensure clean audit for the department, and to ensure that the Department was accountable for a range of interventions that would alter the context [5] . The key achievements (outlined in this report) are directly linked to the key strategic outcomes identified in this report but also broadened in the strategic plan of the Committee.

The approach of the Committee hinged on the following essential considerations:

- The reversal of the legacy of the Natives Land Act requires integrated and coordinated interventions by all section of the society. The Committee adopted a holistic approach which viewed the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform as a coordinator of government interventions;

- An emphasis on public participation in its activities to create platform for critical engagement between citizens and public representations in Parliament. Involvement of citizens, as consumers of services, in matters of service delivery is important in a democratic society;

- The capacity of the state to make interventions that would result in better delivery of development services to the rural poor, a particular focus was on the delivery of land to the landless, provision complementary comprehensive development support, tenure security;

- The key policy questions that could resolve the challenges confronting beneficiaries of the programme of land reform, and contributing to the daunting task of the reversal of 100 years of land divisions.

- The legacy of the Natives Land Act was deeply entrenched; therefore a radical approach was required to resolve landlessness, tenure insecurity, poverty and under-development.

1.2.2 Methods [6]

- Review of various policies and identification of key gaps in policy and how the Department has addressed them, or plans to address the policy gaps: This process was linked to the engagements between the Committee and the Department around the Green Paper on Land Reform. The Committee drew on a range of reports from relevant government departments; for example, reports of the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation, the National Planning Commission and the Public Service Commission.

- Briefings by the Departments and its entities : Over the last five years the Committee received briefings on the following: strategic plans and budget allocations for the Department and entities, quarterly performance reports including spending patterns, annual reports culminating in the development of the Budget Review Recommendations Reports. Specific briefings were received from other departments such as National Treasury on particular issues affecting aspects of the programmes of the Department.

- Engagement with members of the public, civil society organisations and academic/research institutions : The Committee hosted stakeholder meetings and workshops for conversations about particular issues affecting programmes of the Department. The two specific issues related to the tenure security on commercial farms, the national workshop that focussed on the legacy of the Natives Act to mark the centenary of the natives land Act, and a policy workshop for a review of emerging policies from the processes linked to the Green Paper on Land Reform.

- Oversight visits to particular sites where the Department implemented certain specific programmes. The Committee visited sites for restitution, LRAD, PLAS, RADP, revitalisation of irrigation schemes, CRDP pilot projects. The project tours and the interactions with beneficiaries as members of the Trusts and CPAs enhanced an understanding of the depth of challenges of land reform and by extension implementation of policy mechanisms to undo the injustices of the past.

- Interaction with institutions established to support democracy, or the Chapter 9 institutions. In its course of business, the Committee conducted hearings and briefing sessions with the Office of the Auditor-General of South Africa, and the Public Service Commission. These institutions provided useful information and insights into the performance of the Department, both in terms of financial performance and performance of the pre-determined objectives.

1.3 Structure of the report

Following this detailed introductory part, the report proceeds as follows:

- It provides statistical data about the number of meetings held, oversight trips undertaken, legislation processed, petitions processed and other key variables;

- It lists the stake holders and their significance to the work of the Committee

- Narratives about the briefings and the public hearings conducted by the Committee in relation to processing of particular legislation

- The next sections are details about legislation, oversight visits and the international tours.

- It summarises the key issues to follow-up and concludes with recommendations to strengthen operational and procedural processes to enhance the committee’s oversight and legislative roles in future.

2. Key statistics

Table 1 (below) provides an overview of the number of meetings held, legislation and international agreements processed and the number of oversight trips and study tours undertaken by the committee during the 4 th Parliament. As illustrated in the Table, no international agreements were processed by the Committee whilst the Committee has not obligation to conduct statutory appointments and interventions.

Table 3: Statistical overview of activities of the Committee

Activity

2009/10

2010/11

2011/12

2012/13

2013/14

Total

Meetings held

15

28

25

40

31

139

Legislation processed

2

1

3

2

8

Oversight trips undertaken

1

4

None

None

(3) [7]

8

Study tours undertaken

None

None

1

None

1

International agreements

None

None

None

None

None

N/A

Statutory appointments made

None

None

None

None

None

N/A

Interventions considered

None

None

None

None

None

N/A

Petitions considered

None

None

1

None

None

1

Apart from the five oversight visits conducted by the Committee on its own, further visits to three provinces were undertaken under the banner of the ad hoc Committee to exercise coordinated oversight on the reversal of the legacy of the Natives Land Act (1913). The Committee was the lead and coordinating committee.

3. Stakeholders

The Committee has engaged with a range of stakeholders during the course of its work. As outlined in Table 2 (below), the stakeholders came from a range of sectors that have an interest in this portfolio; those included NGOs and CBOs, organised agriculture, organised labour, research and academic institutions, and public law interest organisations. The contribution of these stakeholders is highly valued by the Committee because it enriched the deliberations and certain decisions arrived at by the Committee. Of strategic importance was that through the engagements, the Committee as an extension of the House remained accessible to the members of the public.

Table 4: List of Stakeholders

Sector

Name

Area of interest

NGOs/CBOs

Land Access Movement of South Africa

Nkuzi Development Association

Association for Rural Advancement

TCOE

Surplus People

Women on Farms Project

Vulamasango singene/ Border Rural Committee

Land rights and development; food sovereignty; Farm worker rights; restitution, redistribution

Organised agriculture

AgriSA

Tau-SA

NERPO

AFASA

Commercial agricultural organisations; agricultural associations; and Commodity organisations;

Research and Academic Institutions

UCT: History Department

SU: Sociology Department

UWC: Institute for Poverty Land and Agrarian Studies

UCT: Community Law and Society

Human Rights Watch

Land dispossessions and transformation of property relations; Land and agrarian reform; food regimes; NRM and Fisheries

Land rights and customary law

Organised Labour

COSATU

FAWU

Conditions of employment and agrarian transformation on farms

Public Law Interest organisations

Legal Resources Centre

Lawyers for Human Rights

Rural Legal Trust

Human rights, land and property rights and customary law

4. Special project(s) [8] coordinated by this Committee

The Committee conceptualised and coordinated the events to mark the centenary of the Natives Land Act (1913). This matter was highlighted by the President on the occasion of the 2013 State of the Nation Address, when he reminded South Africans that the year 2013 marked a centenary of Natives Land Act of 1913. Its promulgation “ turned black people into wanderers, labourers and pariahs in their own land ”. The National Assembly passed a resolution to constitute an ad hoc Committee to exercise coordinated oversight on the reversal of the legacy of the Natives Land Act of 1913. The resolution provided a comprehensible mandate through the terms of reference that guided the Committee conduct its business. The ad hoc Committee was mandated the Committee to exercise its powers in terms of Rule 138 (Rules of the National Assembly, 7 th ).

The particular terms of reference mandated the ad hoc Committee to –

- assess the extent to which the programmes of land reform and rural development have addressed the legacy of the Native Land Act of 1913, especially with regard to the committee’s mandate in respect of land divisions and agricultural development;

- assess the success, or otherwise, of the land restitution programme (this particular point had a particular significance; i.e. to allow the Committee to conduct assessment of restitution prior to engagement with the processes of the Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill.

- enquire about the systems put in place for, and to monitor processes towards, the re-opening of the lodgement of land claims so that the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights can implement a programme that is fair and transparent to all South Africans; and

- make recommendations on the removal of blockages obstructing the restitution of land rights.

The ad hoc Committee, in accordance with the resolution of the National Assembly, consisted of 12 members of the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform; and representatives for the following Portfolio Committees: Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries; Arts and Culture; Public Works; Human Settlements; and Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, in accordance with the following proportions: African National Congress (11), Democratic Alliance (4), Cope (3), Inkatha Freedom Party (1), and other Parties (1). Mr. JD Thibedi, the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform, was the Chairperson of the ad hoc Committee.

5. Briefings and/or public hearings

This section addresses the briefing sessions with stakeholders and public hearings on particular area of work in this portfolio and/or the legislation before the Committee. The following paragraphs describe the kinds of hearing or briefings conducted by the Committee.

5.1 Briefings/public hearings with stakeholders

Over the term of this Committee, issue-based public conversations with stakeholders and interest groups were held. The committee identified tenure on commercial farms as a critical component for discussion. The reason was that research reports were pointing to the abuse of farm workers and the poor living conditions on farms. From these two public hearings, the Committee undertook to strengthen its oversight on this area, and the primary issue being to follow up on the amendment of the Extension of Security of Tenure Act, 1997 and explore possible research on the extent of evictions since 1994. Partnership with the International Labour Organisation was explored. However, the project could not take off due to lack of adequate resources from the Committee.

During the processes of the ad hoc Committee established to exercise coordinated oversight on the reversal of the legacy of the Natives Land Act of 1913, the Committee was assigned a coordination role. During the term of its office, the ad hoc Committee created opportunities for various stakeholders to brief it on various aspects of the history of land dispossession in South Africa, progress made to transform the property relations

5.2 Public hearings on legislation

The Committee conducted public hearings on all the pieces of legislation referred to it for consideration and reporting. Some of the public hearings were conducted in Parliament with civil society organisations and members of the public as witnesses. This is mainly in legislation tagged section 75.

However, with regard to the legislation that could largely affect many rural poor people, the Committee decided to conduct hearings in different localities in the districts. The only Bill which was initially tagged as 75 but later changed to 76, the Restitution of Land Rights Act Amendment Bill, it was decided that the Committee should conduct public hearings in different rural parts of South Africa during this process, the Committee engaged with over 10 000 people, of which 1300 submitted written complaints and submissions. These complaints were forwarded to the Department and the Commission for response and further engagement with the relevant communities and individuals. The Committee has requested the Department to submit full and comprehensive responses to the queries raised by the members of the public.

The following public hearings were held in Parliament.

5.2.1 Property Valuation Bill [B54-2013]: It ties in very much to the Restitution of Land Rights Act, Provision of Certain Land, and the Expropriation Bill

5.2.2 Restitution of Land Rights Bill [B35-2013]: This Bill was widely supported. However, other pieces of legislation or policies that are likely to affect the right to restitution were the Communal Land Policy, the Communal Property Associations, and the RADP.

5.2.3 Deeds Registries Amendment Bill [B10-2013]: It amended the Deeds Registries Act, 1937, so as to substitute certain obsolete expressions; to delete the reference to a registrar of mining titles or a mining commissioner acting as a registration officer; to provide for the extension of the duties of a registrar. It further dealt with the appointment of alternate members to the deeds registries regulations board and others.

5.2.4 Sectional Titles Amendment Bill [B11-2013]: The Bill amended the Sectional Titles Act, 1986, so as to amend certain definitions; to redefine the boundaries between certain sections and common property; to regulate the substitution of bonds registered in respect of different pieces of land shown on the sectional plan; to provide for the issuing of certificates of real rights of extension and certificates of real rights of exclusive use areas at the opening of a sectional title register; to provide for the issuing of more than one certificate of real rights of extension and more than one certificate of real rights of exclusive use areas

5.2.5 Geomatics Profession Bill [B4-2013]: The public hearings created a platform for dialogue between the members of the public and Parliament in relation to the transformation of the geomatics profession. The Bill was widely supported.

5.2.6 Spatial Land Use Management Bill [B14-2012]: The hearings reaffirmed the need for spatial justice. However, they raised the need to ensure that this Bill complements rather than competes with the Municipal Systems Act.

5.2.7 Black Authorities Act Repeal Bill [B9-2010]: The public supported the Bill. However, there were concerns that the provisions of this Bill were entrenched in other pieces of legislation such as the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act. The Traditional Courts Bill was also identified as one of the Bills that could potentially entrench the legacy of this Bill.

5.2.8 Rural Development General Amendment Bill [B33-2010]: Although t his Bill affects almost every piece of legislation administered by the Department, it has not substantive impact because it mainly addresses the name change from the Department of Land Affairs to the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform.


6. Legislation

This sec tion provides an overview of the pieces of legislation referred to the committee during the 4 th Parliament. As illustrated in Table 3 (below), the Committee processed seven pieces of legislation over the five year period.

Table 5: Legislation referred to the Committee

Year

Name of Legislation

Tagging

Objectives

Completed/Not Completed

2009/10

None

N/A

N/A

N/A

2010/11

Black Authorities Act Repeal Bill [B9-2010]

75

The Black Authorities Act had remained a symbol of past racial divisions and discrimination and was entirely repugnant to the values and human rights enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, especially the equality clause in Section 9. Therefore, the Black Authorities Act Repeal Bill [B 9 – 2010] sought to repeal the Act, i.e. remove the Act from the statute book.

This Bill was completed and report published in the ATC on 1 September 2010

Rural Development and Land Reform General Amendment Bill [B33-2010]

75

To amend various laws under the administration of the Minister of Rural Development and Land Reform, so as to substitute certain obsolete definitions to ensure legal certainty; to effect certain consequential amendments in this regard; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

The Bill was completed and published in the ATC

Sectional Titles Amendment Bill [B 14 – 2010]

75

To amend the Sectional Titles Act, 1986, so as to amend certain definitions; to redefine the boundaries between certain sections and common property; to regulate the substitution of bonds registered in respect of different pieces of land shown on the sectional plan; to provide for the issuing of certificates of real rights of extension and certificates of real rights of exclusive use areas at the opening of a sectional title register; to provide for the issuing of more than one certificate of real rights of extension and more than one certificate of real rights of exclusive use areas; to further regulate the cancellation of registered sectional plans; to provide for the issuing of a certificate of registered sectional title in respect of a fraction of an undivided share in a section; to provide for a notice to a mortgagee for consent to proposed extensions to a section in a scheme; to provide for the extension of a scheme by the addition of rights to exclusive use areas only; to provide for a right of extension of a scheme in respect of a building or buildings that already exist; to provide for the deletion of a provision pertaining to certain administrative expenses payable by a developer; to provide for the deletion of a superfluous reference to urban immovable property; to provide for the production of a certificate by a conveyancer regarding the payment of moneys in respect of the cession of real rights; to provide for a cession of real rights to exclusive use areas within a specific time for the benefit of owners of sections; to further provide for the vesting of rights to exclusive use areas where an owner ceases to be a member of a body corporate; to provide for the cancellation of exclusive use area rights with the written consent of the mortgagee and holder of a registered real right; to further provide for the regulation of consent of bondholders for the registration of servitudes; to provide for the payment of certain contributions by a developer towards the defrayal of certain rates and taxes and the maintenance of common property; to further provide for liability for payment of contributions where ownership in units changes; to provide for the levying of special contributions by the trustees of a body corporate; to provide for the use of exclusive use areas for purposes depicted on the registered sectional plan only; to substitute obsolete references; to delete and amend certain incompatible provisions no longer applicable; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

It was completed and published in the ATC on 19 August 2010

Deed’s Registries Amendment Bill [B 13 – 2010]

To amend the Deeds Registries Act, 1937, so as to substitute certain obsolete expressions; to delete the reference to a registrar of mining titles or a mining commissioner acting as a registration officer; to provide for the extension of the duties of a registrar; to provide for the appointment of alternate members to the deeds registries regulations board; to provide for the disclosure of the full names and marital status of persons in all deeds and documents to be executed or lodged for registration or record in a deeds registry; to provide for the issuing of a certificate of registered title in respect of a fraction of an undivided share in land; and to amend certain definitions; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

It was completed and published in the ATC on 19 August 2010

Sectional Titles Amendment Bill [B14-2010]

75

To amend the Sectional Titles Act, 1986, so as to amend certain definitions; to further regulate notification of the intended establishment of schemes and the sale of units to lessees; to provide for the cancellation of registered sectional plans in a prescribed manner; to regulate the issuing of a certificate of registered sectional title in respect of a fraction of an undivided share in a section; to provide for the deletion of an obsolete reference; to provide for the registration of a transfer of a part of the common property with the consent of the owners of the sections and the holders of registered real rights; to provide for the endorsing of title deeds to reflect amended participation quota schedules; to regulate the alienation of a portion of land over which a real right of extension or part thereof is registered; to provide for the consent of holders of registered real rights over exclusive use areas to the alienation of common property; to provide for the cession of a mortgage real right of extension and a mortgage real right of exclusive use area; to provide for the cancellation of part of a section pursuant to an expropriation; to further provide for the consent of bondholders with the registration of a sectional plan of extension; to provide for the issuing of more than one certificate of real right of extension and more than one certificate of real right of exclusive use area; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

It was completed and the report was published in the ATC on 11 November 2010

Deeds Registries Amendment Bill [B13-2010]

75

To amend the Deeds Registries Act, 1937, so as to provide discretion in respect of the rectification of errors in the name of a person or the description of property mentioned in deeds and other documents; to provide for the issuing of certificates of registered title taking the place of deeds that have become incomplete or unserviceable; to substitute an obsolete reference; to substitute an outdated heading; to delete reference to the repealed Agricultural Credit Act, 1966; to further regulate the updating of deeds in respect of the change of names of companies, close corporations and the surnames of women; to amend a definition; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

It was completed and the report was publish in the ATC on 11 November 2010

2011/12

None

NA

NA

NA

2012/13

Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Bill [B 14 – 2012]

76

This Bill provides for a framework for spatial planning and land use management in the Republic. It seeks to address the fragmented, unequal and incoherent spatial planning system which reflects the old planning system. This Bill will contribute to spatial justice.

Completed and the report was published in the ATC on 21 March 2013

Geomatics Professions Amendment Bill

[B4-2013]

75

The Bill seeks to provide for the transformation of the geomatics profession; to provide for the establishment of the South African Geomatics Council as a juristic person; to provide for the facilitation and accessibility to the geomatics profession; to provide for different categories of registered persons and branches in the geomatics profession; to provide for the identification of areas of work to be performed by the different categories of registered persons; to provide for the recognition of certain voluntary associations by the Council; to provide for measures designed to protect the public from unethical geomatics practices; to provide for measures in order to maintain a high standard of professional conduct and integrity; to provide for the establishment of disciplinary mechanisms; to provide for the establishment of an Appeal Board; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

Completed and the report was published in the ATC on 14 June 2013

Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill [B35-2013]

76

To amend the Restitution of Land Rights Act, 1994, so as to amend the cut-off date for lodging a claim for restitution; to further regulate the appointment, tenure of office, remuneration and the terms and conditions of service of judges of the Land Claims Court; to make further provision for the advertisement of claims; to create certain offences; to extend the Minister’s powers of delegation; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

The Bill was completed and the report was published in the ATC on 5 February 2014

Property Valuations Bill

75

The Bill seeks to provide for the establishment, functions and powers of the office of the Valuer–General; to provide for the appointment and responsibilities of the Valuer – General; to provide for the regulation of the valuation of property that has been identified for land reform as well as property that has been identified for acquisition or disposal by a department; and to provide for maters connected therewith

The Bill was completed on 19 March 2014, and published in the ATC on 11 March 2014.


6.1 Challenges emerging from processing of legislation

During the processing of the Black Authorities Repeal Bill, regarded as a legislative cornerstone of apartheid by means of which Black people were controlled and dehumanized; reminiscent of past division and discrimination. Its provisions have become both obsolete and repugnant to the values and human rights enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996.

The Committee noted that the concerns raised by the members of the public, arguing that the distorted legacy of the Bantu Authorities Act lives on, and was in fact, entrenched in other laws recently passed by Parliament. One of the laws cited was the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act (Framework Act) of 2003. Section 28 of the TLGFA states that any traditional leader, tribe and tribal authority that was previously established and still recognized in law is deemed to be recognised by the Framework Act as an official traditional leader, traditional community, or traditional council of the future. It was argued that the Framework Act entrenches apartheid-created structures and boundaries into the future and opens the door (in section 20) for other laws to give these structures specific and wide-ranging powers. This matter remains unresolved and the Committee would have liked to convene engagements with its counterpart dealing with local governance and traditional affairs issues. This is considered to be an essential matter for transformation and reversal of the legacy of apartheid regime.

Secondly, the issue related to the reopening of the land claims for the people whose rights in land were dispossessed after 191 June 1913 poses a critical challenge because the constitution addressed the matter of restitution of a right in land and prescribed the 19 June 1913 as a date from which lost land rights could be claimed. The Committee noted that this matter excluded many traditional communities and authorities whose land rights were dispossessed prior to 1913, including the Khoi and San people. The Committee notes that other programmes of land reform could be used to address landlessness but the victims of forced removal seek social justice by restitution of land rights, and therefore restitution programme is the only vehicle through which opportunities to claim original land is possible and not any other land available. It is vitally important because land, for many African people, is more than just a property. It has social, cultural and religious connotations.

Thirdly, the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act processed by the Committee in 2012 give planning powers to the local municipalities. However, the Committee was aware at that time that there was lack of capacity. The extent to which municipalities have embraced the new mandate derived from this legislation needs further attention. Due to the absence of a planning legislation since the parts of the DFA were declared unconstitutional in the Constitutional Courts, planning backlogs in some municipalities were huge.

6.2 Overview of strategic issues for follow-up by the Committee in the fifth Parliament

The following issues are vitally important to follow up on:

- Development of the White Paper on South African Land Reform, and that of Rural Development.

- Policy on the exceptions to the 1913 cut off date for lodgement of restitution claims, target the Khoi.

- Funding for new land claims (and strategic plan for finalisation of land claims).

- Oversight related to the implementation of the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Act, and the Geomatics Profession Bill.

- Priority legislation: Communal Property Association Amendments; Extension of Security Act Amendment; Establishment of the Land Management Commission.

- Oversight on the establishment of the Office of the Valuer-General; and the functioning of the office.

7. Oversight trips undertaken

Over the last five years, the Committee managed to conduct oversight visits in Limpopo, Northern Cape, Free State, and Eastern Cape. In addition, two other visits to the Launch of the CRDP project and to the Ingonyama Trust Board offices. The strategic thrust for these visits were to monitor the progression of CRDP pilot sites and assess whether the model was replicable or not; the implementation of the RADP policy and restitution policies.


Table 6 : Overview of oversight trips

Date

Area Visited

Objective

Recommendations

Follow-up Issues

Status of Report

28 February

–

01 March 2011

Northern Cape

To understand the extent of the challenge of rural development and how CRDP interventions address the challenge of rural development;

To explore the challenge of post settlement for land reform projects and how the recapitalization and development programme assisted in their revitalization.

To improve on capacity building for NARYSEC to ensure that at the end of the term, they youth have gained the skills and knowledge they require.

The DRDLR should put in place mechanisms that clarify the role of STRIF in post settlement support for land restitution, LRAD and PLAS projects. Support mechanisms should transcend the narrow focus on profiling and training of beneficiaries but extend towards coordination of extension support from the DAFF/DARD, Municipalities and any other government or non-government agencies involved in agriculture and rural development.

NARYSEC and how it works with local municipalities, the accounting systems in place.

Coordination between among government departments.

The assessment of the RADP policy and impact of interventions made, i.e. mentorships and strategic partnerships in the Northern Cape

Adopted

02–04 March 2011

Limpopo

To understand the extent of the challenge of rural development and how CRDP interventions address the challenge of rural development

To explore the challenge of post settlement for land reform projects and how the recapitalization and development programme assist in their revitalization.

To enhance the capacity of the Council of Stakeholders.

There is a need to assist the LRAD beneficiaries struggling to repay their Land Bank loans. However, the means of assistance should be sought in consultation with the beneficiaries. Therefore, the DRDLR should facilitate support mechanisms from DAFF and the Land Bank in order to ensure that the gains attained through enabling access to land by the black farmers are not undermined.

The functionality of councils of stakeholders under the CRDP framework.

Strategic Partnership in Hoedspruit. Follow up visits to check if they are prospering.

Follow-up on interventions to root out corruption in land restitution projects and the entire programme/commission

Adopted

25 -29 July 2011

Free State

To understand the extent of the challenges of land restitution.

To understand the extent of challenges of rural development

and how CRDP interventions

To explore the challenge of post settlement for land reform projects and how the recapitalization and development programme assist in their revitalization.

The DRDLR together with the CRLR should report to Parliament about progress in settlement and finalization of all land claims lodged by 31 December 1998. The report should outline the verifiable number of outstanding land claims yet to be finalised, the estimated amount of funding required for settlement and finalisation of all claims, and by when all those land claims would be settled.

The DRDLR should enter into performance agreement with the NARYSEC youth and detail the responsibilities. The DRDLR should report to Parliament within three months after adoption of this report.

The DRDLR should include in the monitoring and evaluation of programmes indicators that illustrate whether developmental initiatives are improving the livelihoods of beneficiaries. Success of land reform projects, especially joint ventures (strategic partnerships and equity schemes) should not only be judged by increase in productivity and maximisation of profits only. Changes in socio-economic conditions of the beneficiary households should be accorded even greater attention.

Follow-up on interventions to root out corruption in land restitution projects and the entire programme/commission

None

Visits to Diyatalawa and Makgolokoeng. The performance of the NARYSEC and monitor the training programme.

The extension to which the M&E has responded to the call to develop a rigorous system of M&E for the land reform programme and CRDP.

Adopted

02- 05 August 2011

Mpumalanga

To engquire about the challenges of land restitution and how they can be resolved.

To explore the challenge of post settlement for land reform and how the RADP assist in their revitalization.

The DRDRL should investigate allegations of corruption and fraud at Tenbosch CPA and Giba CPA report to Parliament within three months after the adoption of this report.

The DRDLR and DAFF should enhance their capacity for coordination of land reform and agricultural support programmes, integrated as a broader strategy for rural development.

Follow-up on interventions to root out corruption in land restitution projects and the entire programme/commission

Coordination of interventions by DRDLR and DAFF

Adopted

18 – 20 June 2012

Ingonyama Trust Board Offices in Pietermaritzburg

Meeting with the Ingonyama Trust Board to discuss the challenges confronted by the ITB in land administration, observation on its operations, its newly built office space and seek solutions to the challenges it confronts

That the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform should have constant engagements to bridge the gap in the communication strategies which affect the compliance in terms of the ITB mandate.

Explore the complexity and the challenges of administration of land rights and tenure in communal land

Adopted


7.1 Challenges identified and emerging issues for follow-up

7.1.1 Challenges emerging

This section highlights some of the challenges that were identified by the Portfolio Committee.

- Integration of rural development and land reform requires greater efforts by government to coordinate interventions. To date, coordination of services to land reform beneficiaries seems to still pose a greater challenge. Greater synergies of interventions between Departments of Rural Development and Land Reform, Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries, Water and Environment, Economic Development are required.

- Most of the land owning legal entities suffers the challenge of lack of capacity to manage their own affairs, and it is as a result of almost absent support from the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. Its own report on the affairs of the CPAs shows that greater attention must be given to capacity development to support the CPAs. In addition, the collapse of relationships between the institutions of traditional leadership and the CPAs has stalled development in some land reform projects.

- Lack of training for beneficiaries

- Some private sector companies acting as strategic partners have failed to transfer skills to land reform beneficiaries; used public funds to run the land reform projects

- Tenure insecurity on farm still continues, and there has been delay in amendment of the relevant legislation (ESTA). Equally important is the issue about the livelihood security for people living and working on commercial farms.

- The Committee has passed the Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Bill, the Restitution of Land Rights Bill, and the Property Valuation Bill. These Bills require creation of additional capacity to the Department. Furthermore, additional funding would be required.

- Some of the institutions set up to assist in coordination of rural development interventions, especially the Councils of Stakeholders, were dysfunctional. Whilst in-depth study on these institutions is required, evidence emerging from the oversight visits shows that there was poor coordination, local municipalities were not actively involved, and participation of local people was not satisfactory. If indeed rural development is about the people themselves, greater attention of these institutions is important.

7.1.2 Issues for follow-up

Through the oversight visits by the Committee, the following issues have been identified as crucial areas of focus for the new Committee.

- Pre and post settlement support for land reform beneficiaries (Special attention should be paid to the RADP policy);

- Conflicts within land reform groups, and that affects the productivity on some of the farms. A central feature in these conflicts is the relations between traditional leadership and CPA leadership elected in terms of the CPA Act.

- CRDP in all rural municipalities, assessing the extent to which the infrastructure development projects have altered the lives of the poor;

- Capacity of the rural municipalities to develop Land Use Schemes and Plans in terms of the Spatial Land Use Management Act.

- Insecurity of tenure on commercial farm lands;

- National Land Register and the National Land Restitution Register monitored closely;

- Land claims in terms of the Restitution of Land Rights Act and the claims lodged in Labour Tenants (Land Reform) Act;

- The functioning of NARYSEC and the Councils of Stakeholders in the CRDP sites across the country; and

- Allegations of fraud and corruption in the Regional Offices of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights


8. Study tours undertaken

The following study tours were undertaken:

Table 7: Study Tours undertaken

Date

Places Visited

Objective

Lessons Learned

Status of Report

18 – 22 October 2010

Malawi

· To look into different approaches adopted for integrated rural development by Malawi and draw lessons for the CRDP;

· To understand the pilot of Community Based Rural Land Development Programme (CBRLDP) and challenges facing Malawi with regards to the scaling up of land redistribution; and

· To understand government’s strategies for intervention in poverty alleviation and curbing food insecurity, and agricultural input support programme.

· To explore a range of initiatives and programmes that addresses youth development

· The committee require strengthening its oversight functions, especially with regards to the department’s support for self-sufficiency in food production for the rural households who live on communal areas under customary arrangements. Such oversight can be linked to the ongoing work on monitoring and oversight of the implementation of the CRDP pilot projects across the country.

· Land administration for the communal areas (those under customary tenure) has not yet been resolved. The implications of CLARA judgement on provision of tenure security for rural dwellers require further attention.

· Continued monitoring of the implementation of the programmes of restitution and land redistribution to ensure that government fulfils its promises for redistribution of agricultural to the previously disadvantaged communities and individuals

· Rural development is integrally part of other line functions of government departments, for example, health, education, water, agriculture, labour, social development, and trade and industry and other sectors. The committee therefore needs to develop mechanisms to oversee the department, especially with regards to its strategy to act as a catalyst for rural development at a municipal level.

Adopted


8.1 Challenges and key issues for follow up

8.1.1 Challenges

The findings from the study tour showed that Malawi implemented a programme of One Village One Product (OVOP) which was adapted from the programme run in Japan, Malaysia and China. The intention of the Committee was to visit one or two of these countries outside the continent of Africa to further explore the model and how it is implemented. In addition, it was going to compare with the Malawian model. The Committee was however not approved to conduct such a study tour.

The challenge with regard to this study tour, the Committee could not complete its study because of failure to conduct a comparative analysis of the OVOP, a key project which it was interested in, the introduction of special economic zones, as well as linkages of products to markets.

8.1.2 Issues for follow-up

It is therefore recommended that the new Committee could look into the concept of the special economic zone with a rural focus, and establish how these could integrate land reform and CRDP as implemented in rural areas. The Countries of Malaysia, Japan and China as learned during the visit to Malawi provide a case for study into the OVOP as a component of the special economic zones.

9. International Agreements

This Committee did not consider any international agreement during its term of office

10. Statutory appointments

This Committee did not conduct any statutory appointments during its term

11. Interventions

Interventions are not applicable to this Committee

12. Petitions

Table 5 of this report presents petitions from the members of the public. The Committee only dealt with one petition from various claimants organised as the Western Cape Land Claimants. It included both urban and rural land claimants as well as the members of the Khoi and San communities.

The process to deal with this petitions involved the consideration of witnesses on issues the petition raised, briefing by the Office of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner for the Western Cape. The end result was a report to the National Assembly, including steps, and commitments, to be taken.

Table 8 : Petitions considered

Title

Date referred

Current status

Western Cape Land Restitution Claimants

06/07/2010

Considered and reported to the National Assembly with recommendations to the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. The report was adopted by the National Assembly, but the Committee has not received any response from the Department on the recommendations from the Committee. However, it should be noted that the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights had provided responses on the specific issues on land claims as referred to the Committee.

12.1 Challenges and issues for follow up

12.1.1 Challenges emerging

The following challenges were experienced during the processing of petitions:

(a) Technical/operational challenges

- Information to assist the Committee to conclude its investigation was not readily available from the Western Cape Office of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner.

- Land claims on the state land took too long to finalise due to delays in transfer of state land. The Committee could not find any convincing argument why it was difficult to transfer land from the state to the beneficiaries of restitution.

- One of the challenges was with regards to the state land disposal processes in the Western Cape. It was found that no disposal was taking place in the province, yet land reform would require disposal of state land.

(b) Content-related challenges

- The Committee would work with information made available to it. The Committee remained concerned about the inaccuracy of the statistics in the restitution programme. For example, the number of outstanding claims against the number of finalised land claims.

- Many of the grievances in the petition were based on allegations which were not supported with evidence, thus making it difficult for the Committee to come to conclusions about the allegations. The only thing the Committee could do, especially with the allegations of fraud and corruption, is to bring that to the attention of the Minister for investigation.

- In most instances Departments submit documents or reports on the day of the meeting, thus limiting the extent to which the Committee could engage in the subject being discussed.

12.1.2 Issues for follow-up

The 5 th Parliament should consider following up on the following concerns that arose:

- Report in response to the recommendations of the Committee in relation to dealing with the grievances lodged by the Western Cape Land Claimants;

- Investigations into the allegations of fraud and corruption in the Western Cape Office of the Regional Land Claims Commissioner;

- Consider how the issues and responses to the Petition apply to other parts of the country; for instance, lack of communication to the land claimants and how the Commission is improving on all of the aspects raised in the Petition. The approach could be linked to follow up on the recommendations of the Committee emanating from the public hearings on the Restitution of Land Rights Amendment Bill.

13. Obligations conferred on committee by legislation

Since the promulgation of the Money Bills Amendment Procedures and Related Matters Act, 2009 (Act No.9 of 2009) which requires that the National Assembly, through its Committees, conducts annual assessment of the performance of each national Department with regard to the medium term estimates of expenditure; and tabling the Budget Review Recommendations Report (BRRR), the Committee has noted progress made by the Department to address the challenges that confronted land reform in the last 15 years. However, the Committee also raised concerns on the funding of programme, such are:

- Shifting of funds from the programmes of restitution and reform, yet the programme was struggling to reach the then target set at redistribution of 30% of agricultural land by 2014.

- Commitments which exposed government to be liable to amount over R40m, thus resulting in backlogs in the restitution programme.

- Capacity of the Department to coordinate government interventions in the CRDP sites

13.1 Challenges emerging

The following challenges are recorded:

- Backlog land claims affect the capacity of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights to settle as many new land claims as possible.

- Capacity of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights to conduct proper research and settle many of the outstanding complex land claims.

- Coordination on government interventions on CRDP sites and land reform projects remains a critical challenge, hence a need for a comprehensive support mechanisms.

- Spatial Planning and Land Use Management Bill places planning responsibilities at a municipal level, and rural municipalities lack capacity to implement this Bill.

14. Summary of outstanding issues

The following key issues are outstanding from the committee’s activities during the 4 th Parliament:

Table 9 : Some of the outstanding issues

Responsibility

Issue(s)

Commission on Restitution of Land Rights

- Plans regarding prioritisation and finalisation of outstanding land claims

- Policy on exceptions to the 1913 cut off date

- Track the funding for restitution, especially the new claims

- Track progress in preparations for the reopening of the land claims. Proposed visits to some of the lodgement sites

- Filling the vacancies for the lodgement of claims

Ingonyama Trust Board

- Disbursement of funds to deserving traditional communities

- Satellite offices and the History Book

-

Department

- Legislation: CPA Act amendment, Land Tenure legislation, ESTA amendments, possible white paper on Land Reform

- Evaluation of the RADP and other development support mechanisms

- Responses to the Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations and the Oversight visit recommendations

15. Recommendations

The following recommendations are proposed in order to assist the Committee for the 5 th Parliament to resolve operational and/or procedural concerns encountered during the 4 th Parliament.

15.1 Coordinate efforts for various committees with overlapping mandates in order provide a comprehensive parliamentary oversight on activities of government departments, as well as dealing with various crosscutting issues of interest to the committees.

15.2 The Committee should consider creating enough space, in its programme, for oversight visits. Such visits should encompass a mix of both far flung and remote areas of South Africa and those areas next to the urban centres in order to enable the Committee to determine if indeed the CRDP is reaching the very rural poor and disadvantaged sectors of our Society;

15.3 Oversight visits should be followed by follow-up activities to ensure that the findings of the Committee are dealt with by the Department/entity. Such follow-up activities may include return visits to same sites to ascertain progress made by government.

15.4 The Committee should consider designing a mechanism to track progress in responses to its questions (arising from the meeting), implementation of Committee resolutions from reports tabled in the House.

15.5 The Committee should further consider an agreement with the Department/entities about the timeframes for submission of reports in order to avoid late submission which affects the Committee’s ability to critically and effectively engage in the subject matter under discussion.

15.6 The Committee should focus its oversight efforts on governance systems and structures of the Department to ensure that the Department achieves a clean audit report from the Auditor-General of South Africa.

15.7 Greater attention should be given to the accountability of the Ingonyama Trust, especially as it relates to disbursement of funds, land administration, and general governance related issues.



[1] DRDLR (2012) Annual Report 2011-2012.

[2] DRDLR (2012) Annual Report 2011-2012 p.13

[3] The Presidency (2010) Outcomes of Government, Outcome 7

[4] CRLR (2012) Annual Report of the Commission on Restitution of Land Rights

[5] The revised Strategic Plan of the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform (2005-2014).

[6] The discussion in this section is not exhaustive. The Members of the Committee as individuals also used other avenues to raise questions to the Minister in the House, separate from queries they made to the department in relation to specific issues arising from their constituency work.

[7] Note that the three oversight visits recorded here were carried out as part of the ad hoc Committee established to conduct coordinated oversight on the reversal of the legacy of the Natives Land Act (1913)

[8] In this case, the special project undertaken relates to a particular intervention that required participation of members of other Portfolio Committees; This Committee therefore conceptualised a programme which it canvassed to the National Assembly so that it is adopted by a resolution of the House.

Documents

No related documents