ATC170509: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements on petitions, dated 9 May 2017

Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements on petitions, dated 9 May 2017

 

The Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements, having met with petitioners on 7 March 2017, reports as follows:

 

1.         Background

 

• The following petitions were referred to the Committee for consideration and report:
  • Petition from residents of Meadowland Hostel, Zone 11, Soweto, calling for assistance in acquiring social housing and improved service delivery (Mr T W Mhlongo, MP). 
  • Petition from residents of Soweto (Orlando, Diepkloof, Meadowlands, Dube and Mzimhlope), calling for assistance to determine the delay in providing state-subsidised housing in the areas in question and to obtain an update from the Department of Human Settlements on progress with applications made in 1996-97 (Mr T W Mhlongo, MP). 
  • Petition from backyard dwellers of Phomolong Wards 12 and 13, Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (Mr M Waters, MP).
  • Petition from residents of Johannesburg Central (Mr T W Mhlongo, MP).
  • Petition from the community of Villa Liza informal settlements, Ekurhuleni, Ward 99, calling on the National Assembly to address the allocation of RDP houses in ward 99 and the publication of the list of beneficiaries (Mr M Gana, MP).
  • Petition from residents of Struisbult, Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, Gauteng, calling for the eradication of their informal settlements and improved service delivery in respect of housing (Mr M Waters, MP).
  • Petition from residents of Friendship Town calling for an investigation into sale of Komati, Lethabong and Indlovu Flats to private companies (Mr M Waters, MP).

 

• The process for the Committee to process the petitions are regulated in Chapter 14 of the Rules of the National Assembly (9th edition). Rule 337 (d) makes provision for the Speaker to table written instruments including special petitions and other petitions of a general nature.

 

• Part 3 of the Rules makes provision for the following:
  • Rule 334 makes provision for the form of the petition to be prescribed by the Speaker in accordance with the guidelines determined by the Rules Committee;

 

• Rule 345 states that the petition must be in one of the official languages. All the petitions must be signed by the petitioners themselves according to Rule 346 (1);

 

• According to Rule 347 (1), a petition must be lodged by a member with the Secretary for approval and tabling by the Speaker, the Secretary Lodging of the petition and must be signed at the beginning thereof by the member. Rule 347 (2) provides that a member may not lodge a petition on his or her own behalf, but such a petition may be lodged by another member;

 

• Rule 348 makes provision for each petition to be deposited at least one day with the Secretary who must submit it to the Speaker for approval before it is tabled in the Assembly. If the Speaker finds that the petition complies with the guidelines determined by the Rules Committee, The Speaker must approve it and table it in the Assembly without delay in terms of Rule 349.

 

• Rule 350 (b) makes provision that if the petition is of a general nature, refer the petition to the relevant committee.

 

2.         Objectives of the meeting

 

The Chairperson informed the meeting that the Committee was going to deal with the petitions that were referred to it.  She stated that according to National Assembly Rule 350 (b) the Speaker can refer the petition of a general nature to the relevant portfolio committee. As a result, the Committee invited the petitioners’ representatives to brief the Committee about their petitions. Furthermore, the meeting was informed the petitions had been referred to Parliament in September 2015. She also intimated however that the delay to deal with the petitions had to be located within the Parliamentary Programme at the time as it was during preparation for the recent local government elections which explains why there were delays in considering them.

 

 

3.         Attendance

 

The members in attendance were Hon N N Mafu (ANC) Chairperson, Hon L Mnganga-Gcabashe (ANC), Hon HMZ Mmemezi (ANC), Hon LP Khoarai (ANC), Hon S Malatsi, Hon T Baker, Hon KP Sithole (IFP) and Mr M Shelembe (NFP).

 

Committee Support Staff: Ms K Pasiya-Mndende (Committee Secretary); Mr S Mnguni (Content Advisor); Mr S Makeleni (Committee Assistant) and Mr T Makhaye (Researcher). 

 

Officials from the national Department of Human Settlements: Mr M Tshangana, Director-General: Department of Human Settlements (DHS); Mr W Jiyane, Director-General: Stakeholder and Intergovernmental Relations; Mr M Kraba, Director – Director-General’s office (Parliamentary Liaison Officer); Mr J Mokokga, Director: Grants; Ms S Modimola, Deputy Director – Stakeholder and Intergovernmental Relation Coordinator; Mr V Tshose, Director: DHS; Mr X Xundu, Acting Deputy Director-General: DHS; Ms M Gasela, Head of Department: Gauteng Department of Human Settlements; Mr V Mapekula, Director: Gauteng Department of Human Settlements; Mr S Luvhengo, Acting Regional Head: Gauteng Department of Human Settlements;

Representatives of the petitioners

 

Mr T W Mhlongo, DA: Member of Parliament; Mr M Waters, DA: Member of Parliament; Rev N Ngakane, Representative: Jabavu Community; Mr E T Kani, Representative: Mr D Ndubane, Representative: Friendship Town Committee; Mr S Magabuko, Representative: Phomolong Tenants Forum; Mr M Du Toit, Representative: Springs Community Police Forum; Ms B Dludlu, Representative: Diepkloof Community.

 

4.         Overview of the meeting

4.1        Consideration of the following petitions that were referred to Committee for consideration and report:

 

Petition from residents of Meadowland Hostel, Zone 11, Soweto, calling for assistance in acquiring social housing and improved service delivery (Mr T W Mhlongo, MP).  The representative was Ms Eunice Dludlu.

 

4.1.1     Brief summary by the provincial department

 

Ms M Gasela, Head of Department presented the response to the complaints raised in the petition.  She informed the meeting that both the provincial and national departments had undertaken site visits to areas mentioned in the petitions. Following receipt of the petitions, the Member of Mayoral Committee convened a meeting with the petitioners culminating in the allocation of the Fleurhof Project. On the issue of units (former hostels) not having been allocated around Dube-Meadowlands and that former hostel had been relocated to temporary dwellings and that there was a challenge related to affordability. She also stressed the need to integrate communities, that is, former hostel residents with the broader community. She informed the meeting that the Provincial Department was still exploring for ways and means to deal with the problem of affordability through among others conducting means test.

 

The meeting was also informed of a Rapid Response Unit within the Provincial Department for emergency situations. She also intimated that both the Province and the Metros had to deal with impatient communities and that there were approximately 600 000 on the waiting list.

 

The petitioners indicated that there was:

• Lack of Housing and Waiting List that goes back to 1996/97

 

She confirmed the Committee that there were challenges with the waiting list and the department was in the process of cleaning the Demand Database or waiting list. During this process it was observed that some of the beneficiaries in the list were either deceased or missing. It was added that the Database would be used for all the Greenfield and Brownfield Project and was being incorporated to the National Demand Database. 

• No Collection of Rubbish Bins

 

She reported that Pick-it-Up collected refuse on a weekly basis at designated collection points. However, the department was going to facilitate beneficiary education and make sure the collections times were well publicised.

 

• No Water Drainage

There was existing water and sewer infrastructure in the hostel.  As part of the hostel upgrade programme between the City’s and Provincial Government to provide adequate basic level of service. The department had embarked on Hostel Upgrade Programme implementing the Community Residential Unit Programme.

 

•  Hazardous Living Conditions

So as to deal with the sewer spillage in the hostel. First outfall sewer line was upgraded during the 2015/2016 financial year. Second portions planned for the 2017/2018.  Upgrade of the bulk sewer lines, as well as internal water and sewer reticulation.

 

4.2        Petition from residents of Soweto (Orlando, Diepkloof, Meadowlands, Dube and Mzimhlope), calling for assistance to determine the delay in providing state-subsidised housing in the areas in question and to obtain an update from the Department of Human Settlements on progress with applications made in 1996-97 (Mr T W Mhlongo, MP).  The representative was Ms Eunice Dludlu.

 

4.2.1     Brief summary by the provincial department

 

The department through an approved Council resolution embarked on a 1996/97 beneficiary registration programme, which was completed in the 2015/2016 financial year. This following process was followed:

 

• The registration has been completed and infused with the National Demand Database on housing. This information was awaiting the Executive Mayors approval for roll out in partnership with Provincial and National Government.

 

Department to commit to publishing the waiting list on public platform. The following was achieved:

• The information on 1996/97 beneficiaries has been documented and waiting to be rolled in line with the National Demand Database programme;
• As per the National Human Settlement pronouncement the National Database will be made available once the system is ready.

 

4.2.2     Summary by the petitioner

 

            Ms E B Dludlu informed the Committee that she had been on the waiting list since 1996, which was unacceptable.  The faultiness of the waiting list made those who registered later in 2002 to jump the queue.  She further stated that she has been on the list upgrading mentioning C forms and Ziveze.  All these did not assist her as she was still living in a shack.

 

4.3        Petition from backyard dwellers of Phomolong Wards 12 and 13, Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality (Mr M Waters, MP). The representative was Mr Siphelo Magabuko.

 

4.3.1     Brief summary by the provincial department

Calling for assistance in acquiring social housing

 

To qualifying Phomolong backyard dwellers the houses were to be proposes to be delivered in the following projects:

• Proposed Birchleigh North Extension 4 which is a mixed income and various housing typologies (Approval of township application has been delayed because of objections received from the adjacent land owners);
• The project was going to yield 1440 rental housing units. The project in Clayville, Extension 45 phase One where 1 420 rental housing opportunities were to be delivered.

 

4.4        Petition from residents of Johannesburg Central (Mr T W Mhlongo). The representative is Rev Nomsa Mando Ngakane. 

 

            Rev Ngakane, from the Jabavu Community, spoke on behalf of the elderly who were still waiting for the houses. She stated that she received a letter stating that due to her age she was going to be allocated a house in 2011. However, until to date she was still waiting and nothing has been delivered. She pleaded for the change and also for the department to prioritise the elderly when allocating the houses. She also informed the Committee that as an elderly who was in exile for many years she never received her special pension.

 

4.5        Petition from the community of Villa Liza informal settlements, Ekurhuleni, Ward 99, calling on the National Assembly to address the allocation of RDP houses in ward 99 and the publication of the list of beneficiaries (Mr M Gana).  The representative was Mr Themba Elia Kani.

4.5.1     Brief summary by the provincial department

 

Mismanagement on allocation of houses

• The same issues were discussed in a conciliation meeting of the Public Protector that took place on 8 November 2016. The petitioners were also present during this meeting where these allegations were discussed and it was resolved that the matter would be finalized by the Office of the Public Protector. The same petition was also registered with the Office of the Public Protector and the Chairperson of the National Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements.

 

Allegations that foreigners and people outside the area are occupying houses

 

• Allocation of houses was done according to the allocation policy where the rightful approved beneficiaries were allocated.

 

Allegations that Councillor benefitted more than one house

 

• Allocation of houses was done according to the allocation policy where the rightful approved beneficiaries are allocated. As per the policy only approved beneficiaries on the Housing Subsidy System (HSS) were allocated houses. The HSS system allows an individual to benefit only once for a housing subsidy.

 

4.6        Petition from residents of Struisbult, Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality, Gauteng, calling for the eradication of their informal settlements and improved service delivery in respect of housing (Mr M Waters MP). The representative was Mr M Du Toit.

 

4.6.1     Brief summary by the provincial department

 

The Human Settlements Portfolio Committee to investigate why the informal settlements of Struisbult, Ekurhuleni has not received decent housing for all despite a promise that this would be done by 2014.

 

Calling for the eradication of the informal settlements and improved service delivery in respect of housing:

• It was reported that the informal settlement consists of approximately 1649 households. The land portions were partly owned by EMM and private companies (Afrisam and Modderfontein Mines Ltd). The EMM GIS Data sets currently highlight that there is a probability of medium risk dolomite;
• Furthermore there is a slimes dam next to the developments which may have issues like Radon Gas emissions and from other projects a 500M Buffer zone would be applicable;
• With these issues, it is not feasible to upgrade the settlement in situ and the decision was made now to be relocated the community to Brakpan Old Location Ext 13 Mega project that has a total yield of 7488 housing opportunities;
• This project was planned for relocation to the Brakpan old Location Mega project as they cannot be accommodated in situ due to environmental issues;
• Mention was made of the issue of sinkholes due to dolomite conditions and that the Province was not keen to contravene any planning regulations;
• An alternative site was also identified but was not pursued due to unavailability of the site. This information  was  relayed by the MMC  in Mid 2016;
• Another alternative plan for this settlement is currently being driven by the Province and they are currently negotiating with a private land owner to purchase housing opportunities in Edelweiss Extension 3, which was in close proximity to the settlement. The township consisted of over 15 000 housing opportunities and the Municipality has agreed that we would provide services as per municipal mandate should the deal be finalised.

It was reported that designs and installation of all engineering services was underway.

 

4.7        Petition from residents of Friendship Town calling for an investigation into sale of Komati, Lethabong and Indlovu Flats to private companies (Mr M Waters). The representative was Mr Dumisani Ndubane.

 

4.7.1     Brief summary by the provincial department

 

During the investigation it was established that tenants benefited from institutional housing subsidies. It was also established that this scheme was communicated to tenants as the rent to buy after which tenants would be entitled to buy the rented units. The units were sold to some tenants, whilst some did not get the opportunity to benefit. The remaining tenants had to continue renting the rental units. It was this group of tenants who felt aggrieved as some could no longer afford keeping payment of rentals. It was also mentioned that the lease agreements concluded between the tenants and the Lethabong Housing Institution (and subsequent owners) provided for the cession or rights by the landlord, in terms of which the lessor could transfer rights. It was also transpired that some tenants defaulted on rentals and were evicted sometime in 2014. The Gauteng Human Settlements Department became involved in intervening and made certain proposals, as redress but did not action its proposal.

 

It was reported that the matter was still under investigation.

Deliberations and way forward

During the meeting the petitioner’s representatives were given time to summarised the petitions.  Both the provincial and the national department were given time to respond on the issues raised.

 

The Committee raised the following:

 

• On receipt of the Petitions whether the provincial department did meet with the petitioners and whether correct processes were followed as well as communication with the petitioners;
• Whether the petitions had also been submitted to both the metropolitan municipalities and the province (to which Mr Mhlongo confirmed that the petitions had also been submitted to both the City of Johannesburg and the Province during 2015).
• What the role of intergovernmental relations in resolving the issues raised;
• What has been done since the submission of the petitions in September 2015?
• Who was responsible for the Waiting List/Housing Demand Data Base and why it was taking so long to review;
• For the Committee, it was imperative to establish exactly what the allocation to municipalities was, the amounts and what amount was set aside to fund services in hostels;
• With regard to the Waiting List/ Housing Demand Data Base, it was pointed out that the Minister was taking the initiative to centralise the Beneficiary Waiting List, it was still work-in-progress and that there was a need to inform the petitioners of the work being done to deal with the issue as well as the need to monitor progress. Reference was made to a recent meeting of the Committee that dealt with the issue of the National Housing Demand Data Base.
• A related issue was the importance of prioritising those who had been on the list longer.
• Whether there was a common understanding with those affected on the decision to be relocated to temporary accommodation.

 

The Committee deliberated and came-up with resolutions as stated below.  The detailed information is on the report.

 

5.         Observations made by the delegation

Concerns:

• Intergovernmental relations

Most Members were concerned about the process that was followed in administering the referred petitions. Members were convinced that such petitions could have been dealt with by both the provincial department of Human Settlements and the City of Johannesburg.  According to the general feeling, this was an indication that there was lack of intergovernmental collaboration within the human settlements sector;

• Timeframes and collaborative planning

Members were concerned about the “lack of urgency” in dealing with the mentioned petitions. It was concerning, that petitions were received two 2 year ago; and they only receive the attention of the Committee. This, intentionally, gives an impression that issues raised in these petitions were not important. However, it was explained that government processes are often time-consuming. The Chairperson, of the Committee, even added that the timing of these petitions was not optimal because Political Parties in Parliament were focusing on campaigning for elections. That being said, the pace of delivery should be fast tracked; in all aspects of human settlements;

 

• Housing Waiting List

 

Generally, impression was created people were on the waiting list for a long time; some even die without receiving a house. That there is perceived corruption in management of the list and corruption in allocation process. As a result, Members wanted to know the following: who is responsible for the management of the waiting list? How often does the list get updated? Are there challenges in the management of the list? How reliable is data reflected in the waiting list;

 

Responses

• Housing Waiting List

 

The department admitted that administration of the waiting list was tedious process. However, the department reported a strategy to deal with the Housing Demand Database, on the previous Committee meeting. It was envisaged all challenges would be dealt with using this strategy;

 

• Intergovernmental relations

 

The Department indicated that there were intergovernmental meetings, the MMC participate. These meetings happen quarterly and mainly deal with intergovernmental relations;

 

• Timeframes and collaborative planning

 

The Department indicated that often communities get impatient government processes because they often take time.

 

6.         Resolutions

The Committee resolved that:

• The provincial department as well as the all the affected municipalities should report quarterly on the progress made in resolving the issue raised and in turn the national department to report to the Committee;
• The national, provincial department as well as the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality should have working session in an endeavour to resolve to issues raised;
• Relevant Government departments should deal or have control measures for the foreign nationals that were residing in informal settlements;
• Commitment to communicate with Mr Mhlongo, MP who had submitted some of the petitions by both the City of Johannesburg and the Gauteng Provincial Department on progress as well as what was being done in dealing with issues raised;
• Need to have a credible database as well as prioritise the elderly in the allocation process;
• Need to improve and enhance intergovernmental relations by ensuring that all spheres of government play their part through ensuring consistent monitoring of projects together with regular communication and accounting to communities through ward committees.  Subsequently, these ward committees should report to the Speakers Office at the municipal offices;
• Need to set clear timeframes for the resolution of some challenges raised;
• Need to expedite delivery of houses and its allocation process in order to prevent any possible vandalism;
• Need to embark on awareness campaign and education against the sale of government state subsidy issued houses by beneficiaries;
• Need to strive for a transparent process in the allocation of houses as well as to deal with the issue of corruption head-on without necessarily waiting for forensic investigation first to take place;
• Need to investigate reports and allegations of the illegal occupation of houses generally including foreign nationals.

 

7.         Recommendations

 

Based on the meeting held with the petitioners, the provincial and national department, the Committee recommended that the Minister of Human Settlements should:

• Instruct the provincial department as well as the affected municipalities to report quarterly on the progress made in resolving the issue raised and in turn the national department to report to the Committee;

 

• Improve and enhance intergovernmental relations by ensuring that all spheres of government play their part through ensuring consistent monitoring of projects together with regular communication and accounting to communities;

 

• Strive for a transparent process in the allocation of houses as well as deal with the issue of corruption head-on without necessarily waiting for forensic investigations first to take place.

 

Report to be considered.