Report of the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements on the Oversight Visit to Limpopo Province, dated 10 March 2015

Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements on the Oversight Visit to Limpopo Province, dated 10 March 2015
 

The Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements conducted an oversight visit to the Limpopo province on 24 to 28 November 2014 and 2 to 6 February 2015. The fundamental purpose of the oversight visit was to assess policy, legislative compliance, the implementation of the human settlements strategic plans, projects and programmes. The reports is structured according to the following thematic considerations:

 

1.         Background

 

In terms of the South African Constitution of 1996 and Parliamentary Rules, the Committee has an obligation to conduct oversight over any executive organ of State that falls within its portfolio. In line with this mandate, the Strategic Plan of the Committee mandates it to conduct provincial visits to oversee the implementation of project plans and programmes. The Committee also seeks to evaluate progress in relation to the implementation of housing programmes and identify any challenges encountered during process. Furthermore, the Committee seeks to promote and enhance cooperative governance embedded in the intergovernmental principles of sustainable human settlements. In order to fulfil its strategic plan objectives the Committee conducted an oversight visit to the Limpopo province which took place on the 24 to 28 November 2014 and from the 2 to 6 February 2015.

 

1. Objectives of the visit

 

The objectives of the oversight visit were to receive a briefing from the MEC and the provincial department responsible for human settlements. Consequently, the Department of Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs presented to the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements the following:

• Implementation of a comprehensive, integrated human settlements strategy in the province;
• Progress made towards the achievement of Outcome 8 outputs and targets set for 2014/15;
• Budget expenditure and performance in meeting service delivery targets set for 2014/5;
• Role of the public and private sectors in service delivery;
• Progress in supporting  disaster-affected communities;
• Rural and farm worker assistance, cooperatives assistance programme as well as the People’s Housing Process;
• Progress on the implementation of the Rural Household Infrastructure Grant;
• Coordination and management of the beneficiary list and the incorporation of backyard dwellers into the provincial housing database;
• The use of alternative technologies in housing construction.

 

1. Delegation

 

The multiparty delegation consisted of Ms NN Mafu (ANC), Chairperson of the Committee and leader of the delegation; Ms L Mnganga-Gcabashe (ANC); Ms V Bam-Mugwanya (ANC); Mr N Capa (ANC); Mr HMZ Mmemezi (ANC); Mr LP Khoarai (ANC); Mr M Gana (DA); Ms T Gqada (DA); Ms P Ntobongwana (EFF);  Mr M Shelembe (NFP) and Mr KP Sithole (IFP).

 

Support staff accompanied the delegation Ms K Pasiya, Committee Secretary; Mr S Makeleni, Committee Assistant; Mr L Tsoai, Committee Researcher; and Mr S Mnguni, Content Advisor.

 

1. Members of the Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs - Provincial Parliament and provincial department

 

Mr TD Sebabi, Chairperson of Committees; Ms MJ Aphri, Committee Chairperson; Ms RR Molapo, Mr M Machaka (EFF); Mr M Mashiane, Committee Coordinator; Ms F Maseko, Researcher; Ms T Boshomane, Manager, Protocol Services, Mr M Mashele, Parliamentary Liaison Officer.

 

The delegation was also accompanied by the following provincial department staff: Mr G Makoko, Mr Mokoena, Mr Mokgala; Mr B Langa, Chief Director Planning; Ms M Mdluli, Communication and Events; Ms L Masegela, Ms M Peter, Community  Municipal Support.

 

1. Officials from the national Department of Human Settlements

 

The delegation was accompanied by Mr B Nkonyana, Director: Parliamentary Committee Management Services (PCMS); Ms M Pine, Office Manager: Transformation; Mr S Solomon, Director: Operational Compliance; Ms S Molimela, Deputy Director: PCMS; Mr R Ratshikhopa, Assistant Director: Policy; Mr R Buckton, Officer, Office of the Director-General, Mr M Shezi, Officer, Office of the Director-General; Mr O Makhonxa, Assistant Director: Project Implementation; Ms N Mjwara, Deputy Director: Monitoring and Evaluation; Mr S Musandiwa, Admin Officer: PCMS.

 

1. Executive summary of the oversight visit

 

The Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements conducted an oversight visit on the 24 to the 28 of November 2014. The oversight visit mainly consisted of briefing by provincial leadership and project visits. The briefing by the MEC responsible for human settlements, meetings with mayors and the site visits to different housing projects provided the delegation with a clear picture of the state of housing delivery in the province. The briefing was then followed by “project visit” to Tzaneen villages and Polokwane housing projects. However, the oversight visit was cut short due to the sitting of the National Assembly which was called for 27 November 2014. The delegation was convinced that there was a need to further investigate housing delivery issues and implementation experiences in the Limpopo province. As a result, the continuation of the oversight visit was scheduled for the 2 to 6 February 2015. At this stage, the Committee continued with its’ oversight visit to three district municipalities; Mopani, Vhembe, and Waterberg.

 

 

During this oversight, the delegation observed that the delivery of houses in the areas visited was at “snail pace”. Phalaborwa Municipality strongly felt that mining housing projects was not their priority because they were pursuing tourism programmes. This was because the province had several tourist attraction such as Marula festival, Kruger National Park Gate, and rich cultural artistry.  However, the delegations strongly suggested the balance between mining and tourism. This was because mining still presents an advantage for local economy development.

 

In addition, there were challenges with regards to the human settlements database (allocation list) and allocation of houses. This was evident in a new practice of people occupying governments provided houses illegally. There were also allegations suggesting that some government officials were involved in unlawfully allocating houses to their families, friends and those who are prepared to pay.

 

The other challenge was that Bela-Bela municipality had no funds allocated in the consecutive three years for human settlements. According to the provincial Department of Human Settlements, this was due to lack of planning and multi-year project by the municipality. Furthermore, there was no bulk infrastructure to support housing construction. In order for funds to be released, the municipality had to submit a confirmation of commitment that infrastructure were to be completed before 10 February 2015. The delegation contact the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency to assist the municipality infrastructure development.     

                                  

4.         Overview by the MEC of Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs (CoGHSTA), and presentation by officials

4.1.       Overview by the MEC

 

The MEC, Ms M Makhurupetje, briefed the joint delegation from Portfolio Committees on Human Settlements and Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs.  She informed the delegation that they should feel free to discharge their duties in the province. In a broad context, the MEC was concerned about urbanisation, the growth of middle class (resulting high demand of social housing), insufficient infrastructure, and fiscal constraints. In relation to human settlements development, she was concerned with the high rate of unemployment, high crime rate, homelessness and poverty in the province. In relation to slow housing delivery, the MEC explained that in 2011/12 a forensic audit was conducted which revealed some irregularities in tender processes. It was uncovered that contractors/service providers that were appointed without following tender processes; resulting in construction of houses being later cancelled.  Furthermore, some senior officials were accused of being involved in corruption which resulted in their expulsion; this included the Head of Department. Due to the sensitivity of the matter, it was handled by the Premier’s Office and the National Treasury. During this process, other service providers were appointed and construction of houses resumed. 

4.2.       Presentation by the provincial department on Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs (CoGHSTA) officials

 

The report was on the progress made in relation to the implementation of Outcome 8 targets for 2014/15. It broadly covered four issues: informal settlements, rental housing opportunities, land release and acquisition, and mining towns.  These themes are discussed in the following section:

 

4.2.1.    Informal settlements

 

It was reported that in 2014/15 financial year, the target was to provide 3000 serviced sites as part of informal settlements upgrading programme. The process for the appointment of engineers to under-take designs was ongoing. There were four informal settlements that were to be formalised in the 2014/15 financial year. The process for formalisation of six informal settlements in Modimolle (Vaalwater), Elias Motswaledi and Tubatse (Matshifane) was ongoing. There were approximately 4 300 households that were to benefit from the project.

 

4.2.2.    Rental housing opportunities

 

For the 2014/15 financial year, the target in terms of the approved Business Plan was for the construction of 250 units. Unit designs were completed. The process for the installation of basic services at Marapong CRU was reported as ongoing.  An amount of R11 million was allocated. The relocation of residents from Marapong to a new site at Altoostyd was reported as ongoing. An amount of R6 000 000 was allocated for installation of interim services. An engineer was appointed to undertake drawing designs. In Bendor Ext.100, there were 198 rental units and the contractor was going to be on site and commence with construction of houses on 1 December 2014.

 

4.2.3.    Land release and land acquisition

 

The National Department of Human Settlements Medium Term Strategic Framework (MTSF) indicated that approximately 10 000 hectares of well-located land was rezoned for human settlements and released for new developments. These developments would be targeting the poor and the lower middle income households. The province reported that in the next five years, it plans to acquire 132.5 hectares of land.  In addition, the process of acquiring four properties (measuring 1 200 hectares) in the mining towns and growth points were at evaluation stage. It was envisaged that the transfer of these land parcels to municipalities would be concluded before the end of the 2014/15 financial year. Negotiations with other custodian departments for land acquisition were also under way. However, there were challenges relating to delays in obtaining required approvals from custodian departments.

 

4.2.4.    Mining towns

 

A total of 16 informal settlements were identified in the mining areas around the Limpopo province. Rapid assessments and technical feasibilities were completed in 15 of these informal settlements. It was projected that a total capital funding of R259 700 000 was needed for the provision of basic services and tenure upgrading. Moreover, a total of 21 projects were identified in the urban complexes within the mining towns with the capital funding requirement of R992 425 965. Lastly, a total of 9 141 hectares of land were identified for human settlements projects. Pre-acquisition feasibilities were completed to determine the suitability of the land for sustainable human settlements.

 

4.3.       Progress on the implementation of Human Settlements programmes

4.3.1.    Budget expenditure and performance target for 2014/15 financial year

 

Performance indicator	Annual target 2014/15	Actual output to date	Gaps or challenges	Strategic interventions	Expenditure per target
Number of new housing units completed in the province across all housing programmes being utilised by the province	10 500	704	Late appointment of contractors for 2014/15     Contractors behind schedule.	Under performing contractors referred to Legal Services.   Site handover was done.	R27 328 753
Number of Housing stock/ RDP rectified	700	56	Late appointment of contractors for 2014/15 Contractors behind schedule.	Under performing contractors referred to Legal Services. Site handover was done.	R1 824 233
Number of households connected to basic services as part of the informal Settlements Upgrading Programme	3000	0	Late appointment of contractors for 2014/15	Site handover was done	R1 119 178
Number of Enhanced Peoples Housing Process units completed	150	0	No appointment of contractors	Appointment of contractors in process	R0.00
Number of planned human settlement (housing) developments based on IDPs’, National and Provincial Priorities approved	10 500	10 204	None	None	R47 633 000
Number of capacity building workshops conducted	35	29	Lack of commitment by some municipalities Due to heavy rains and poor terrains some areas cannot be accessed Poor attendance by municipality officials.	Re-scheduling of dates with municipalities. Interaction with municipalities to resolve the problem of lack of commitments	R0

 

 

4.3.2.    Role played by the public and private sectors in service delivery

 

The provincial department reported that it has concluded an agreement with Rustenburg Platinum Mines Limited.  The purpose of this agreement was to facilitate the implementation of Finance Linked Individual Subsidy Programme (FLISP).  In terms of the agreement, the provincial department and the Platinum Mines Limited agreed on the following:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rustenburg Platinum

CoGHSTA

To initiate and manage programmes aimed at encouraging and promoting increased engagement of the banking sector in the target market;        Initiate partnerships with government to facilitate a partnership within the human settlements sector for development of integrated sustainable human settlement; Providing innovative and affordable housing solutions to the low income housing market; Facilitating housing finance accessible for lower to middle income households in South Africa; and Facilitating innovating and affordable housing finance solutions to the low income housing market.

Make provision for and deposit an amount equivalent to the beneficiaries approved by both the lenders and the Department; Pay the amount as agreed on FLISP programme within thirty (30) days of such receipt of such list of confirmed qualifying beneficiaries as approved by the department and the lenders; Make available to Rustenburg Platinum Mines Limited, a resource person(s) for the purpose of ensuring that FLISP applications processed by Rustenburg Platinum Mines Limited on the Provincial Housing Subsidy System are processed for final approval.

 

4.3.3.    Housing Cooperatives

 

The province has recently completed a study to which aimed to determine potential and nature of cooperatives available to be incorporated to the housing delivery process. The intention of this research initiative was to generate information on three cooperatives which are currently existing in the province. Information gathered was to assist in assessing the viability, success and sustainability of such cooperatives. It would also enable the Department to launch a pilot programme of allocating housing construction to cooperatives as a way of implementing the Extended People’s Housing Programme (EPHP). The study made the following findings:   

• The cooperatives cannot adequately compete with big construction companies for construction of housing units due to lack of experience in the sector;
• Some cooperatives do not have the capacity to build either RDP houses or toilets while others have the full financial and management capacity.

 

4.3.4.    Beneficiary management and incorporation of backyard dwellers in the list

 

Then, the provincial department was in the process of developing a beneficiary allocation policy. The objectives of this policy were to facilitate a fair, equitable, transparent and inclusive selection and housing subsidy application approval processes for all housing development projects. In consultation with Municipalities, the Provincial Housing Needs Register (PHNR) /Demand Database were to be established. This Provincial Housing Needs Register were to be the only official database from which prospective beneficiaries were drawn and invited to complete housing subsidy application forms for approval.  Verified registrations were made available to municipalities for the administration of subsidy application processes. The information was available on specific areas within the province.

 

4.3.5.    Deliberations - concerns, comments and questions for clarity

 

The delegation welcomed the presentation and requested the MEC to further explain challenges that led to the cancelation of tenders. In addition, she needed to explain her plans on taking improving the department’s performance with the financial year (2014/15).  Furthermore, the MEC was requested to her three year plan human settlements project in the pipeline. The MEC also needed to provide timeframes for the establishment and finalization of the beneficiary database. An amount of R500 million was returned to the National Treasury while projects were not completed and funding was highlighted as not being enough.  In light of this, the delegation was not convinced about the financial constraints argument. As a result, convincing arguments were needed to be provided on why the departmental mandate was not implemented.

 

5.         Site visits

5.1.       Site visit to Seshego Community Residential Units (CRUs)

 

The Committee was informed that the project was awarded the Govan Mbeki Award for best design. The project was a portion 6 of Erf 8148 as a community residential units. It involved the demolishing of the existing dilapidated hostels in order to construct 189 CRU units. These units were the combination of 176 double storey units, four disabled units and nine free-standing units. There were also 78 parking sites, two shops, one clinic, one recreation centre and six play areas. It was reported that skills were transferred to 245 labourers that were appointed. Of this number 144 were men, 59 women, 40 youth and two persons with disabilities. The contractor was requested to ensure that the demolition was conducted in two phases to allow the residents to be provided with alternative accommodation with water and ablution facilities during the construction process. 

 

The Committee was further informed that the project was the first of its kind in the province. This is because it is a rental project and targeted beneficiaries who earned up to R3 500 per month. The rental was expected to be R400 for a single room and R800 for a two-bedroomed unit.  It was reported that some of the existing hostel dwellers would need to be accommodated in state subsidy houses, which necessitated a need for existing residents to be considered and consulted. 

 

As a result, extensive consultation and surveys were conducted with the relevant stakeholders on the nature and design of the new housing project.  Therefore the design included urban agriculture, access points linking to the surrounding community, a traditional games area, and informal trading facilities.  The concept of medium density was critical to ensure access to infrastructure and land preservation. Densities were in the form of double storey two-bedroomed units which also allows for sharing communal areas while allowing for family living.  With the approved design each units got a garden for urban agriculture and recreation.  With the demolition of the existing hostel and higher density construction the space was maximised for housing.

 

Challenges reported were related to project planning and management. Challenges included the re-housing of existing residents and delays in construction due to planning approval issues.  In order to resolve these challenges the provincial department appointed TM Africa Engineering Services CC to assist with project management and housing construction.  In addition, a Steering Committee was assembled to ensure beneficiary management and post-contraction management.

 

The delegation visited the Seshego Community Residential Units. During this visit, the delegation was informed that the beneficiaries would occupy the units by December 2014. The delegation observed that there was a community clinic which was not fully furnished. There were also informal trading facilities which were fully functional. The delegation further observed that all the units were fitted with showers.

 

During the project visit, there were people who were picketing outside. The delegation managed to engage with the picketers in order to understand their demands. The leader of the picketers informed the delegation that they were settled in Ga-Rena housing units on a rent-to-buy arrangement. This arrangement should allow beneficiaries to buy a rented unit after four years of occupation, which was in line with rental housing policy. However, this was not adhered to. He indicated that the rental contracts also indicated the rent-to-buy clause. He also lamented that the built show-house was not the same as the constructed housing units. He also alleged that their contracts stated that they would rent-to-buy for four years. He regarded this practice as beneficiary deception.  He indicated that some beneficiaries refused to pay monthly rentals which resulted in basic services being cut by the municipality.

 

The delegation responded and advised the picketers that the Committee would engage with the three spheres of government to get the background and the relevant information regarding these complaints.  In response to this, the Mayor reported that a full diagnostic report would be forwarded to the Committee within seven days. The delegation promised to respond in writing within three months to the picketers’ complaints.

 

5.2.       Site visit to Polokwane Ext 44

 

The delegation was informed that the project for 1 625 units was implemented during the 2009/2010 financial year. An amount of R62 million was set aside for this project. All planned units were completed and occupied. 

 

5.3.       Site visit to Bendor Ext 100

 

The delegation was informed that the serviced land with installed infrastructure was acquired in 2008.  The project was intended to deliver 661 units for the inclusionary housing project.  The main objective of the project was to integrate people from different income and race categories.  The project was divided into five housing typologies: 198 rental units, 180 free-standing cluster units, 119 free-standing units, 74 economy townhouse units and 90 luxury townhouse units. The Finance Linked Individual Subsidy Programme (FLISP) was used to target the “gap-market” group. The provincial department would subsidise the rental and FLISP. The provincial department reported that the contractor (Mabone) should have started with the top structure by 1 December 2014. An amount of R20 366 million was budgeted for this project.

 

The delegation was concerned about the late implementation of the project in light of the fact that bulk infrastructure was installed long ago. This is because the provincial department reported that the roads were certified in 2013 and that water and sanitation were installed in 2010.

 

During the second phase of the oversight visit, the provincial department reported on progress, namely that the contractor completed the show-house, four house foundations were completed and brickwork was in progress. It was also reported that there were four contractors, four sub-contractors and 25 labourers on site.   

 

 

 

6.         Meeting at Tzaneen Municipal office

 

The Executive Mayor of Mopani District welcomed the delegation on 25 November 2014.  She briefly reported that the district was a rural district.  The visit by Parliament would assist in challenges encountered by the district. She strongly suggested that the delegation be exposed to excellent and failing projects around the district. She believed that this would assist the municipality to know their strengths and weaknesses. As a result the Committee would provide assistance where it was required. 

 

The Municipal Manager followed with a presentation on the overview of Mopani District which was based on the Integrated Development Plan (IDP).  He informed the delegation about the challenges faced by the municipality that hindered progress and delivery.  The municipality had a 15.3% backlog of basic services and a housing backlog of 15%. The dilapidated infrastructure which included potholes, bridges that need to connect to other developing areas, and old water pipes.  The other challenge was the non-payment of municipal services such as refuse removal, water and sanitation. This was partly due to high levels of unemployment in the province. Some people resorted to illegal connections of electricity which further complicates the voltage system of the municipality.

 

These challenges were further compounded by land administration in the rural parts of the district.  According to technocrats, rural land is administered by tribal authorities who often do not want to follow housing processes. The delegation suggested that the provincial department should seek assistance from the Housing Development Agency (HDA) to negotiate for land managed by tribal authorities.

 

The delegation was concerned about the exclusion of housing for military veterans, mine workers and farm workers. There was also a concern about blocked projects; the delegation wanted to know when blocked project would be unblocked. The municipal plans and presentations were quiet in this regard. In response to the concerns articulated by the delegation, the municipality reported that it will include military veterans on its database.

 

6.1.       Site visit to Nkowa-nkowa D

 

The delegation visited the informal settlements upgrade programme in Nkowa-nkowa D.  There were 500 units that were intended to be built during the 2008/09 financial year. The houses were 50m², with two bedrooms and an inside or outside toilet. Out of the intended 500 units, only 323 houses were built.  The other 177 houses were regarded as blocked. 

 

The municipality informed the delegation that the beneficiaries were unable to get their title deeds due to the fact that the traditional chief had a dispute. According to Tribal Ordinances, an individual family was not allowed to own a title deed on tribal land. 

 

6.2.       Site visit to Shimpungu

 

The delegation visited a disaster relief project in Shimpungu.  The houses were struck by disaster (floods) and government assisted affected community members with 45m² houses.  Electricity was installed but there was no water. In this case, the delegation was mainly concerned about the use of the rectification housing programme in response to disaster situations.

 

6.3.       Site visit to Marima Thema

 

The delegation visited a project which was formalised from being an informal settlement where 75 units were constructed. All the houses were 45m². There were communal taps, electricity and outside toilets. The delegation saw that this was an old project and expressed the need to see more recently built projects.

 

7.         Continuation of the oversight visit took place on 2 to 6 February 2015

 

As it had been reported in section one of this report, the oversight activity was cut short due to a parliamentary sitting which was held on 27 November 2014. As a result, the oversight visit continued on 2 to 6 February 2015. This section reports on this period: 

 

7.1.       Meeting in Mopani District with the Ba-Phalaborwa Municipality

 

In this meeting which took place on 2 February 2015, the Chief Whip and the Mayor of the Ba-Phalaborwa Municipality welcomed the delegation. The Chairperson of the parliamentary Committee and the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee from the Provincial Legislature explained the purpose of the oversight visit.

 

This was followed by the Municipal Manager who presented the status of human settlements within the municipality. He indicated that the municipality does not have the mandate to construct houses but could assist the provincial department with facilitation.  He further indicated that the municipality had spent 100% of its allocated Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG).

 

 

7.2.       Deliberations - concerns, comments and questions for clarity

The delegation welcomed the presentation by the Municipal Manager but requested him to explain why there were no projects in the mining area. In addition, the Municipal Manager was asked to reflect on the nature of informal settlements around mining towns, the waiting list, and municipal plans on unblocking blocked projects. In response to these concerns, the Municipal Manager indicated that the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC) was appointed to unblock 10 projects. Service providers were appointed to upgrade some informal settlements around Mopani District.

 

The Municipal Manager further indicated that there was a project which intended to deliver 300 units of which 200 units were expected to be finalised at the end of the financial year.  He also indicated that 92 of the stands were at foundation phase. The municipality was confident that houses would be completed because they appointed well-capacitated contractors. With regard to the waiting list, it was indicated that the responsibility of maintaining and managing the list lay with the municipality.

 

8.         Site visits

8.1.       Site visit to Lulekani village

 

On 2 February 2015, the delegation proceeded with a site visit that started at Lulekani village and proceeded to a housing project which was under construction. The show-house was still on a wall plate. The delegation was informed that there were 92 foundations in the area.  The house size was 50m² with two bedrooms, a lounge, a kitchen and an outside toilet. The community was sourcing water from a communal stand pipe on the street. Electricity had been installed. The project was responding to dilapidated units in the area. 

 

The delegation noted that the contractor was not using lintels above the doors and windows. The project manager indicated that they were using an alternative material (glisco material) that did not require lintels.

 

8.2.       Site visit to Mohale Village rural project

 

On 2 February 2015, the delegation continued with an oversight visit to Mohale village where 45 units were completed during the 2013/14 financial year. The houses were 50m² which included two bedrooms, a lounge, a kitchen and an outside pit latrine toilet. Even though electricity was installed, the village had water challenges; residents had to travel long distances to fetch water. However, provincial officials informed the delegation that there was a dam which had the potential to support the village.  Water connection was envisaged to be completed by the end of February 2015.

 

9.         Meeting at Lephalale Municipal office in Waterberg District

 

On 4 February 2015, the delegation visited the Waterberg District. The day commenced with the Mayor’s welcome to the delegation. This included the introduction and welcome by Members of the Mayoral Committee. In his welcoming remarks, the Mayor informed the delegation that the municipality was leading in petrol chemicals. He was confident that Lephalale municipality would be the first to build a city.  The municipality recorded population growth, which resulted in a higher demand for rental and social housing. Consequently, additional land would be required for human settlements development.  

 

The acting Municipal Manager presented the status of the Lephalale local municipality. He indicated that projected growth in population, due to economic diversification, would be a challenge for the municipality. The municipality was also concerned about aging infrastructure. Intertwined with this growth was the emergence of informal settlements and backyard dwellings which were often unaudited. The delegation suggested that the municipality must project population growth in their plans. There was also a concern about poor spending on the Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG) and the municipal disaster fund. The municipality indicated that the HDA was appointed to conduct an audit on backyard dwellers and to quantify informal settlements. The provincial department secured 500 hectares of land for Lephalale municipality to ensure the delivery of human settlements.

 

9.1.       Public meeting with the community of Thabo Mbeki Settlement

 

On 4 February 2015, the delegation met with community members of Thabo Mbeki Settlement to ascertain challenges pertaining to human settlements. The delegation was accompanied by the Mayor, provincial officials and municipal officials. The settlement was affected by floods for the first time in 2008 and the assessment was done by both the municipality and the provincial department to determine the level of damage to houses.  Subsequently, a service provider was appointed to conduct a geo-technical study of the area. It was discovered that a sizable amount of houses was built on the flood line. The report found that 300 houses and the hospital were built on the flood line. The report recommended the relocation of affected families. This was then followed by the establishment of a Relocation Task Team which was responsible for facilitating the implementation of the recommendations contained in the report.

 

Due to disaster considerations, a decision was taken by the MEC for CoGHSTA and the Lephalale municipality that a new township would be necessary to accommodate the population affected by floods in close proximity to the existing Thabo Mbeki Township. It was agreed that CoGHSTA would assist with the planning of a new town for residential units which would include economic drivers such as public and commercial spaces. The provincial department involved the HDA to assist with the identification of land and pre-planning activities.  It was reported that the identification of alternative land for relocation was resolved and both feasibility and geo-technical studies were completed. The provincial department and the HDA were managing the process of township establishment which was anticipated to be completed by February 2015. It was reported that the budget for houses would only be made available when the General Plan was approved and the Record of Decision (ROD) was granted.

 

The community members raised the following issues during the mass meeting:

• Most people in the settlement were unemployed and could not maintain their houses;
• There were concerns about  the lack of water provision in the area;
• There was corruption in the allocation of state subsidised houses;
• There was large-scale migration which results in backyard rental;
• Foreign nationals were accused of renting houses provided by government;
• Some people complained about being on the housing waiting list for too long; some said that they had been waiting for a house for more than 10 years;
• There was also a concern about title deeds;
• There were health concerns in relation to living conditions in informal settlements. For instance, it was said that rain results in a lack of hygiene and the spread of tuberculosis.

 

In response to these issues, it was suggested that the provincial department prioritise older people in the allocation of housing. Younger people were encouraged to get educated in order to afford houses of their choice.  The Mayor promised to assemble a team of experts to assess community problems.

 

The delegation visited the vacant land to which people from Thabo Mbeki Township would be relocated. According to officials, the Department of Environmental Affairs was not moving with speed in concluding the geo-technical study of the land.

 

9.2.       Site visits

9.2.1.    Site visit to bulk water infrastructure project in Lephalale

 

On 4 February 2015, the delegation visited the bulk water project which was meant to support Lephalale and its surrounding areas. An amount of R277 million was set aside for the construction of the bulk water infrastructure project. With regard to employment opportunities, the contractor was given a target of 6% for local content and labour support. However, the contractor exceeded the target by 30, 7%. An amount of R43 million was used to buy local material and empower local people. The main challenge was the limited access to farms where servitudes were running, due to protracted delays in finalising the servitudes sales. There were also delays in the payment of claims due to key provincial departments being put under administration, which subsequently caused the contract to be terminated. After some interventions by the provincial department the contract was reinstated, payments were made, and the project was successfully completed. The delegation accepted the progress made.

 

9.2.2.    Site visit to Marapong Community Residential Units (CRUs)

 

The project was intended to yield 514 units which would comprise the following housing typologies: 329 two-bedroomed units, 79 one-bedroomed units, 99 single-roomed units, and 8 units for persons with disabilities. Some sections were reserved for parking, a recreation centre, and a play area. An amount of R270 million was set aside for the construction of the project.

 

It was reported that hostel dwellers would be relocated to a piece of vacant land in Altooystyd which was acquired by the municipality. The relocation process was planned to take place in March 2015, while the municipality was in the process of clearing the Altooystyd land. The verification of beneficiaries was conducted to determine rental affordability. Those who could not afford to pay rent would be allocated a state-subsidised house. It was reported that the consultation process was completed. As a result of this consultation, a Hostel Committee and a Relocation Committee were established to assist with the relocation process.  

 

The relocation process was partly hampered by residents who were sceptical to move. It was also reported that the project commenced late due to pre-planning approval and “bureaucratic bottlenecks”. There were limited skilled individuals to ensure the proper implementation of the project. In an endeavour to fast-track the implementation of the project, a Project Management Unit was established to assist with all aspects of project management.

 

The delegation was concerned about the timing of the relocation of hostel dwellers because it would take time to clear the Altooystyd land.  This was partly due to the lack of capacity. To assist with capacity, the delegation contacted the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency (MISA) to assist in the capacitation of district and municipal personnel. The MISA chairperson agreed to assist with the capacitating of the municipal personnel.

 

10.        Meeting in Bela-Bela Local Municipality

 

On 5 February 2015, the delegation was welcomed by the Mayor in the Bela-Bela Local Municipality. The Mayor made a presentation on the following:

• Municipal profile;
• Infrastructure projects implemented in 2013/14;
• Ward priorities/Issues raised during door-to-door campaigns;
• Infrastructure projects for 2014/15.

 

10.1.     Deliberations - concerns, comments and questions for clarity

 

The delegation learnt that there was no budget allocation towards human settlements for the past three financial years. Part of the problem was that the municipality did not have human settlements plans. In addition, the municipality had not acquired land suitable for human settlements. The delegation proposed an urgent intervention which would ensure that funding would be allocated to the municipality in the 2015/16 financial year. As part of the intervention, the municipality was requested to put an appropriate infrastructure for human settlements in place which would be a pre-condition for funding.   

 

The delegation also discovered that there was a huge housing backlog of 4 034 units, illegal occupation of houses, and land invasions. At times, government officials were accused of assisting people with the illegal occupation of government houses while there were seven informal settlements which were due for upgrading. The delegation strongly suggested the upgrading of these informal settlements to partly contribute to reducing the backlog.

 

10.2.     Site Visits

10.2.1.  Site visit to Ext 9

 

On 5 February 2015, the delegation proceeded with a visit to a serviced land which was earmarked to accommodate relocated people from informal settlements. 

 

10.2.2.  Site visit to bulk water infrastructure project in Bela-Bela

 

The delegation visited the bulk water infrastructure project which was an attempt to provide sustainable water supply to the Ext 9 community. The visit was informed by the municipal needs analysis which suggested that water was a major service delivery challenge.

 

11.        Observations made by the Committee

 

This section provides a summary of observations made by the Committee. These observations were as follows:

• The delegation observed that there was serious underspending of the budget, particularly in the 2011/12 financial year. The underspending was partly due to a lack of planning and a lack of accountability in spending. For example, an amount of R5 000 million was sent back to Treasury as it was not spent;
• The provincial department was unable to implement new projects as it was focusing on the projects approved in previous years. This was often due to housing processes not being followed, which resulted in projects being considered blocked;
• There was a lack of vertical and horizontal coordination in the planning and implementation of human settlements projects;
• There were some irregularities in the allocation of tenders;
• There was misapplication of housing policy programmes. For instance, the province used the rectification programme to address emergency or disaster situations;
• The increased housing demand forced people to occupy houses illegally and invade  government land;
• Government officials and politicians had different ideas in relation to human settlements. These ideas often clashed in public.

 

12.        Committee recommendations

 

Based on the observations made, the Committee requests the Minister of Human Settlements to consider the following recommendations to attain the Outcome 8 and National Development Plan objectives. The Minister was requested to ensure that the national Department of Human Settlements adhere to the following:

• Put strict measures in place to assist the provincial department to appropriately spend budget allocations and efficiently deliver houses;
• Monitor the performance of the Limpopo Human Settlements Department;
• Ensure coherent and consistent implementation of housing programme; this because it was uncovered during the oversight visit that rectification programme and emergency housing programme were used interchangeably;
• Ensure the provision of sustainable houses in the mining town, this was due to fact the that  there was minimal appetite to provide houses  in Ba-Phalaborwa municipality;
• Assist the provincial department to manage its housing backlog;
• Assist the provincial department acquire land that was suitable for human settlements development;
• Assist the provincial development to have a long-term human settlements vision;
• Strengthen cooperation between government officials and politicians;
• Ensure close monitoring of tender processes;
• Ensure coordination in human settlements planning;
• Put measures in place to prevent land invasion and illegal occupation of government houses.

 

Report to be considered.