ATC240220: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education concerning the Petition from Nguvu Change Leader calling for the Department of Basic Education, and National Government to eradicate pit-latrines in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, and Limpopo Rural Schools, referred to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education by the Speaker of the National Assembly on 24 July 2023 for consideration, dated 20 February 2024

Basic Education

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education concerning the Petition from Nguvu Change Leader calling for the Department of Basic Education, and National Government to eradicate pit-latrines in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, and Limpopo Rural Schools, referred to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education by the Speaker of the National Assembly on 24 July 2023 for consideration, dated 20 February 2024.

 

The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, having considered the Petition from Nguvu Changeleader calling for the Department of Basic Education, and National Government to eradicate pit-latrines in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, and Limpopo Rural Schools, referred to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education by the Speaker of the National Assembly on 24 July 2023 for consideration, reports as follows:

 

The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education received the following referrals from the Speaker of the National Assembly for consideration and report:

 

“Consideration of Petition - Petition delivery for the Department of Basic Education, and National Government to eradicate pit-latrines in Eastern Cape, KZN and Limpopo rural schools. Referred on 24 July 2023”

 

On Tuesday, 7 November 2023, the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education convened a meeting to consider the Petition from Nguvu Changeleader calling for the Department of Basic Education, and National Government to eradicate pit-latrines in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, and Limpopo Rural Schools. The Portfolio Committee initiated the meeting to receive a briefing and engage on the Petition by the following stakeholders:

• Nguvu Changeleader (Petitioner).
• National Department of Basic Education (DBE).
• KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education (KZNDOE).
• Eastern Cape Department of Education (ECDOE); and
• Limpopo Department of Education (LDOE).

 

1. Address by Deputy Minister Dr M R Mhaule – Dr Mhaule thanked the Committee for the opportunity to present on the matter of the petition. She acknowledged that the petition had been received by the Department and three provincial departments on the eradication of pit latrines. As a department, they were accountable to the Portfolio Committee as well as the public of South Africa. She mentioned that the Department operated in a country with limited resources – where the needs and demands exceeded such limited government resources. The Education Sector had a huge chunk of the fiscus – but the majority went to salaries with the remainder having to be spent on school infrastructure and resources. The Department and PEDs had various programmes for addressing challenges with school infrastructure, in particular school sanitation and ablution facilities. Work remained ongoing with much having been completed with a few projects yet to be completed. Provincial Education Departments also had their respective programmes and projects within the system to address ablution challenges. It has to be noted that infrastructure remained a moving target.

 

1. Submission from Nguvu Changeleader – Mr Yongama Zigebe

 

The Petitioners had collected over 5 000 signatures calling for the Minister of Education to eradicate pit latrines and protect the human rights of children in South African rural schools. The petitioner from Nguvu Changeleader visited a rural school in the Eastern Cape and was appalled by what he witnessed. Education had become life-threatening for learners in South African rural schools. Beyond that it has become a human rights violation. It was saddening to see 30 years into democracy that children and teachers relieved themselves in the death traps that are pit latrines or even worse resorting to open defecation.

Eradication of these horrendous death traps would be in line with the South African Constitution which guarantees the right to life, dignity, safety, health, proper sanitation, and conducive environment to education. The Polokwane High Court’s ruling on 17 September 2021 called for the eradication of pit toilets across South Africa - and not just in Limpopo. Judge Gerrit Muller said that “the replacement of pit toilets is a national emergency and must be treated accordingly” and expressed his disappointment at the lack of urgency to dealing with this issue. Regardless of this the DBE still drags its feet at the expense of human life.

The Petitioner started the petition through Change.org platform to safeguard and promote the rights and well-being of children in rural schools who would normally not have a voice and no one to stand up for them. With more than 5 000 people having signed already, the Petitioner was of the firm view that the people have spoken in numbers. And that the clarion call that was made years ago should be listened to by the government.

It has been 9 years since little Michael Komape and 5 years since Lumka Mthethwa died a horrific death after falling into a pit latrine toilet and drowning in a public school in Limpopo and Eastern Cape respectively. Yet the Department of Basic Education has moved at a devastatingly slow pace in eradicating pit latrine toilets in public schools, infringing heavily on the right to life, human dignity, and basic education. In March 2023, we watched in horror as, yet another four-year-old girl was found dead in a school pit toilet in the Eastern Cape province. The Petitioner needed to find out what the DBE has done since then.

In 2018, President Ramaphosa and the Minister of Basic Education Angie Motshekga made a rosy presentation about how millions of rands were raised and claimed to be “paying a dividend of democracy through education infrastructure”.  The Petitioner asked these questions: What happened to the money? Why are we still discussing eradication of pit latrines? Since 2018 how many pit latrines has the DBE demolished and replaced with proper toilets?

On 28 February 2023, the Dispatch Live reported that the Eastern Cape province forfeited R100 million of the Education Infrastructure Grant meant for public school infrastructure. The money was simply not spent by the end of the last financial year while the state of school infrastructure in the Eastern Cape was devastating. Of the over 5 000 schools in the Eastern Cape, over 1 000 of those schools still used pit latrine toilets. The question is why was the money not spent on eradicating them?

The Department of Basic Education has committed to eradicating pit latrine toilets in public schools by 2025. In March 2023, Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga shared that the Department had identified 3 398 schools countrywide with pit latrine toilets. For the 2025 commitment, there was hardly 15 months left. There are more than 3 000 schools that still have illegal pit latrines that needed to be demolished and replaced. There was a need-to-know what progress had been made since March 2023.

In conclusion, the Petitioner demanded from the Minister the following:

• Reports on budget allocations for eradication of pit latrines.
• Reports on progress to start   form March 2023 up to November 2023
• Quarterly progress reports from each affected province in the lead up to the 2025 deadline.
• Eradication of all pit latrines in public schools nationwide by November 2024 (1 year from

now).

 

 

 

 

1. Presentation: Progreess Update on ASIDI + SAFE (Department of Basic Education)

The Department gave detail on its responsibility for the planning and implementation of ASIDI and SAFE infrastructure programmes – and an explanation of the different categories of pit toilets i.e., inappropriate basic pit toilets and appropriate ventilated improved pit toilets. In 2011, the Department of Basic Education launched the Accelerated School Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI-2011).This programme focused on the following:

• Appropriate building for schools made entirely of inappropriate materials.
• Appropriate water supply to schools with no water.
• Appropriate sanitation at schools with no toilets.
• Appropriate electricity supply to schools with no electricity supply.

In 2018, the Department of Basic Education launched the Sanitation Appropriate for Education (SAFE-2018) initiative.  This programme focused on the following:

•   Appropriate sanitation at schools dependent on basic pit toilets.

Both the ASIDI & SAFE programmes were funded from the School Infrastructure Backlog Grant.  The Department submits weekly progress reports on the ASIDI & SAFE programmes to the Minister (DBE-2023).

In 2011, there were initially 701 schools on the ASIDI programme and in 2018 there were initially 3 898 schools on the SAFE programme. A budget of R26.3 billion was allocated for the ASIDI & SAFE through SIBG. The plan was to implement the SAFE programme through:

• Provincial EIG projects
• Partnerships/Donation projects
• DBE SAFE Initiative Allocation

 

The Department gave a detailed overview of the SIBG budget and expenditure as well as details pertaining to the location of schools on the SAFE programme. The Department further alluded to the context in respect of the constraints as well as remedial measures by the Department. In respect of the total SAFE programme the original baseline was 3 898 schools – and there were several changes to the list since the start of the programme. This was mostly due to rationalisation of schools and site assessments that confirmed appropriate sanitation. The current number of schools on this programme was 3 380. SAFE schools supported under donors and EIG was 1 150 and SAFE schools supported by DBE through Implementing Agents was 2 230. A total of 2 950 of these schools had already progressed to practical completion, resulting in a gap of 430 outstanding projects. The Department also gave a summary of the overall status per provinces of the SAFE programme – as well as the overall status per Implementing Agent. Further to this, the Department gave a summary of the planned practical completion on SAFE programme/projects in 2023/24.

 

On the ASIDI Programme for sanitation, the Department indicated that the original baseline was 701 schools. There were several changes to the list since the start of the programme due to rationalisation of schools and site assessments that confirmed appropriate sanitation. The current number of schools on this programme was 1 087. A total of 1 087 of these schools have already progressed to practical completion. The Department further gave a detailed summary of the status of the ASIDI programme. The Committee was briefed on the contributions of donors and partners in various provinces.

 

With monitoring, the Department detailed monitoring at a contractual level and monitoring through weekly meetings The Department further gave some detail to the salient points of focus during the meetings. The Committee also received a detailed overview of the construction site visits in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo and Free State. The Department has been able to improve its Audit profile from Qualified to Unqualified Audit Opinion. Implementing Agents have been made to sign work plans with clear targets and milestones which were contractually binding. The delivery of projects had been accelerated towards meeting the practical completion schedule (e.g., water, electricity, and inappropriate structures targets in the APP were met and even exceeded). Poor quality of work has been uncovered and responsible contractors, project managers, Professional Service Providers (PSPs) and Implementing Agents dealt with accordingly. Several blockages which delayed the delivery of projects have been unblocked and Implementing Agents, project managers, PSPs and contractors have been held liable (imposition of penalties) for failure to meet their contractual obligations. Suppliers have been able to increase the capacity to shorten their turnaround for delivery as well as address defects in the design of the equipment and materials. Delays in the payment of contractors, PSPs, and Manufacturers (Suppliers) have been addressed. Instances where communities rejected the ABT to build schools and delays caused by business forums have been dealt with. School principals, SGBs, Districts, Provincial officials, and Local Government Councillors got involved in the value chain of monitoring the delivery of projects.

 

 

1. Portfolio Committee Observations and Questions

• Members queried when the Department will ensure the dignity of the black child and queried why such structures were still being built. Why was money not being utilised for its intended purpose – and was there any consequence management for those who abused such funds.
• Although the petitioners raised many points in a positive approach, there were key observations the Committee must take into consideration. Since 2019, the challenges with pit latrines recorded by schools had declined to date.
• Members queried the actions taken against implementing agents and contractors for any delays in projects. What incentives could be introduced to close infrastructure gaps. What other innovative solutions were being explored to improve sanitation for schools.
• With challenges posed by business forums, Members queried any practical ways of addressing such challenges where projects may be disrupted – and what concessions were agreed to. With the delays in projects, Members queried the action taken against Implementing Agents (IAs) for such delays.
• Members also queried the district development model planning in place to ensure these were articulated regarding sanitation for schools.
• Regarding the payment of IAs and contractors, it was also noted that contracts were given to those with little experience. Contractors were being paid for their invoices without the necessary inspections by qualified persons before projects are signed-off. Members queried who signed-off on contracts.
• Members sought clarity on the meaning of “dealt with accordingly” in reference to errand contractors. Members queried the number of contractors blacklisted by the Department.
• Members also queried the monitoring of school infrastructure maintenance.
• Members acknowledged the limited progress made by the Department in respect of eradication of pit latrines. The petitioner’s presentation centred on specific issues e.g. budget allocations, budget roll-overs and budgets returned to National Treasury. Members queried how the Department could ensure this did not happen – and deadlines were met.
• Members did not believe in blacklisting contractors but agreed that they received further training, development, and capacity building. There was a need to ensure that accountability was built into the system.
• Members noted the use of Ventilated Improved Pits (VIP) toilets and queried how the Department was able to classify pit latrines that meet minimum standards – and whether they could be differently classified.
• In respect of the limited resources, it was noted that there was a possible further cut in budgets. Members queried how the Department would be impacted and where they would make budget adjustments.
• A Member reported a specific case regarding the non-payment of a sub-contractor for work on three schools for building of toilets. Correspondence had been forwarded to the Office of the Director-General and Acting Deputy Director-General in this regard with no further feedback. He requested assistance from the Department to address the matter urgently.
• In KZN, the 3 898 school referred to, Members queried whether this total included Eastern Cape and Limpopo. Of the 1 377 schools mentioned, Members queried whether these were only schools with pit toilets or where there more schools with pit toilets - and the 1 377 identified schools formed part of a specific project. If there were more schools in KZN with pit toilets that did not form part of the project, how many were there – and when would these be eradicated. Of the schools in the completed/handover phase, how many were in use. How many of the projects used VIP toilets. Similarly, how many of sanitation projects completed/handover phase were in use. When would sanitation and borehole projects under construction be completed. After completion of all the projects, how many schools in KZN would still have pit toilets, inadequate sanitation and unsafe drinking water. Were any of the projects affected by floods -what has been the impact on these projects.
• In Limpopo, of the 481 completed projects, how many had been handed over and in use. How often did the Department do oversight to ensure maintenance and use of projects. Also how often does Department do oversight to in-progress projects. How many of the new projects consisted of VIP toilets – and the reasons for installing VIP toilets.
• In Eastern Cape, Members queried how many schools still had pit toilets. How many school projects have been handed over and in use. How often did the Department do oversight and monitoring of handover projects. What was the reasons for cancelled projects. How many of the upgraded projects consisted of VIP toilets -and reasons for choosing VIP toilets. Why did the province fail to spend R 100 million of the infrastructure grant.
• Members also noted the presentation received from the Financial and Fiscal Commission (FFC) on issues of Infrastructure and grants spending. Members queried the engagements by the Petitioners with the relevant provincial education departments and DBE in respect of the issues raised in their petition – what were the responses from these departments.
• With the local councillors, Members also queried the support being received from councillors on matters raised – and the extent of the support and capacity afforded the councillors to address infrastructure matters. Members queried the plans in place to complete all outstanding projects. What were the consequence management put in place for not meeting contractual agreements.

 

1. Responses to Committee Observations and Questions
   1. Deputy Minister of Basic Education (DBE) – Dr Mhaule agreed that the petitioner also opted to contact and communicate with the DBE on their matters as the Department remained accountable to the Committee and all citizens of the country. Besides the National Department, the relevant Provincial Education Departments also had their own projects dealing with ablution matters and challenges. It needed to be noted that the country was a water-scarce country and the utilization of water-borne systems for school ablutions may not be viable option. There were, however, alternate ablution solutions for schools with water challenges being considered.

The matter of solutions to ablution facilities for schools remained a complex matter for the Department and acknowledged the guidance of the Committee on matters pertaining to infrastructure maintenance. The Department further acknowledged the specific concerns/case reported by a member and undertook to address the matter urgently and report back to the Member on progress. Further to this, the Department has been engaged with the KZNDOE on the matter. In respect of action taken against IAs, the Department mentioned that there were penalties that were imposed where projects were delayed, including recovery of money and terminations of contracts. The Department had developmental programmes in place to assist contractors who needed further training and development. Such penalties varied depending on what was stated in the contracts. The Department also terminated contracts/projects where they were left with no alternative – and must return to procurement processes. There were continuous engagements with contractors/IAs to find amicable solutions to challenges faced. On the issue of incentives, the Department also considered incentive in the form of tax breaks to companies. Other appropriate sanitation solutions included innovative solutions with alternatives to brick and mortar – but there needed to be improved advocacy for acceptance of such new solutions. Contractors do need training to correctly install some of the new alternatives. Where schools have no water – the Department looked to bringing technology to the school to ensure flushing toilets for schools. Once the Department has provided sanitation solutions, there were challenges with maintenance and there was a need to collaborate with municipalities to assist with the emptying of toilets. The principal agent signed off on projects and allowed payment to be affected. The Department needed to engage with principal agents who sign off on sub-standard work completed with punitive measures put in place.

 

The Department continuously built capacity to ensure allocation and planning of projects on time to avoid roll-overs or returning of budgets to National Treasury. Some IAs had training and development in place for contractors. Regarding the classification of improved pit latrines, the Department had classified them as appropriate Ventilated Improved Pit Toilets (VIPs) – a different classification. These VIPs too require the necessary maintenance with collaboration with municipalities for emptying of these toilets.

 

The Department also alluded to challenges after providing appropriate sanitation - and school refused the demolishing of old pit latrines. The Department engaged with such schools on the danger posed by these structures. The Department also received assistance from local councilors in this regard. The work on ASIDI sanitation projects had been completed and what remained were projects of the SAFE programme that needed completion.

 

With maintenance, PEDs were funding their own infrastructure programmes from the EIG which was governed through the grant framework which indicate a certain percentage to be allocated for maintenance. Schools also received funding from the Norms and Standards allocation for maintenance. PEDs need to advise their SGBs on the proper utilization of budgets for maintenance – with guidelines issued on maintenance. The Department also had a 10-point plan to improve provisioning of infrastructure with maintenance being one of the points.

 

1. The ECDOE would make available a detailed report on their programmes and projects for eradication of pit latrines. From the initial schools identified for the ECDOE, the Department was able to deal with 1 131 schools in the context of pit latrines identified. Critically, the concept of eradication where there was no bulk infrastructure, that could be challenging. The SAFE programme and sanitation programme were key programmes for the ECDOE. With the SAFE programme a total of 433 schools have been dealt with and 44 are currently under way via Mvula Trust processes. The Department mentioned that the schooling system in the province was being restructured – with 547 schools taken out of the SAFE programme due to rationalization and realignment of the schooling system. For the sanitations programme context, some were at Stage 5 finishing level while others were at Stage 6 practical completion. The Department would have been able to deal with backlogs of pit latrines by 2025 – but question still arise around improved pit-latrines and classification of such improved pit-latrines. The Department may need a comprehensive infrastructure plan that does not isolate schools, in villages and rural areas. On roll-over of budgets, the Department acknowledged this to be a challenging fact borne from the skewed infrastructure planning which was now being unbundled. The Department agreed that the performance of IA and contractors needed to be addressed. There was a need to harvest value for money for the public purse being utilised – this could not be compromised.

 

1. KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education (KZNDOE) – The MEC indicated the deep regret for still having schools with pit latrines. The KZNDOE has seen much progress in eradication of pit latrines which currently stood at 95 percent -with completion by the end of 2024. The Department was committed to ongoing monitoring of progress - and addressing all outstanding projects.

 

Regarding the specific issue/case raised by a Member, the Department has done some investigation on the matter. The Department explained that the Implementing Agent was the DBSA with a main contractor appointed. The main contractor had been paid for work done – but had not paid the subcontractor. With this situation, the Department was considering the termination of the project with the main contractor. The Department has engaged with the main contractor to address the matter – and requested DBSA to fast-track a replacement contractor. The Department requested that the subcontractor and employees must be paid by the end of November 2023. In the meantime, the Department was providing interim ablution facilities for the school involved. The Department reported seeing a decrease of disruption by business forums due to the Department engaging business forums as early as possible to avoid disruption during construction. The Department also engaged them at all levels of building project steps. In the Province, the current model was working well with participation in the integrated planning in all districts to take advantage of what could be provided. The KZNDOE has never underspent on the infrastructure budget.

 

1. Limpopo Department of Education (LDOE) – The MEC agreed that there was a need to move with speed on the matter of eradication of pit latrines. The Department was re-evaluating their current programmes and projects to address backlogs on pit latrines and focus on fast tracking of all infrastructure projects for the financial year. On the issues pertaining to business forums, the Department’s view was that these needed to be encouraged – with an approach of being a societal issue with all stakeholders involved. The business forums also assisted the Department with implementation of projects and programmes. The Department has considered the issue of incentives and taking advice and council from all relevant role-players. The Department submitted programmes through their Annual Performance Plans and Annual Reports – there may be a need to intensify and improve reporting to the Department and the Committee. It needed to be noted that many of the schools in the provinces was community-built – and the Department needed to take stock of what has been achieved in improving school infrastructure. Where there were challenges with the water supply, the Department opted for improved pit latrines and other alternative methods for ablutions.

The Department further alluded to the court judgement and interdict for the Department to submit a plan to address eradication of pit latrines. The Department needed to do assessment of schools and plans for all the schools – and after assessment, the Department was able to identify all school with pit latrines. The Department had a plan based on the following three priorities:

1. Priority 1 – Inappropriate Sanitation.
2. Priority 2 – Inadequate Sanitation; and
3. Priority 3 – Compliant Sanitation.

Further to this, the LDOE gave a detailed list of all school with inappropriate, inadequate, and compliant sanitation – together with a budget estimation as well as budget provisioning for addressing the challenges. The Portfolio Committee was further briefed on the implementation arrangements in respect of funding sources and implementing agents appointed – with management system details. The Department further gave a detailed progress report on the identified Priority 1 schools in Limpopo as well as a consolidated priority progress report. The Department also touched on the infrastructure budget allocation and expenditure. The Department further shared their action plan for the completion of outstanding Priority 1 projects. On the demolition of pit toilets (Priority2 + 3), the Department indicated the demolition of pit toilets was in progress using the LDOE Maintenance Contractors from the LDOE panel of contractors with planned completion in December 2023. Eight contractors have been appointed for the demolition of pit toilets at 1837 schools. Appointed contractors were reported to be   on site. The Department shared a table with the number of schools per education district with pits for Priority 2 + 3. The Department was eager to ensure adequate and ongoing monitoring of projects and programmes. LDOE also touched on issues of risk with business forums, and this is being addressed through engagement with local leaders and open projects for local participation.

5.5   Nguvu Change Leader Petitioners (Mr Y Zigebe + Ms N Mfocwa) – The petitioners requested more clarity on the specific matters raised in the petition as the information provided during the engagements did not give clear indication of the current status of the challenges with pit latrines. The Petitioners remained wary of adjourning the meeting without knowing the actual figures and progress in respect of pit latrines eradication.

It was worrying that the departments were still discussing plans and deadlines when there were new challenges being raised every year - with deadlines being extended. The petitioners remained disappointed by unfulfilled promises and undertakings by the departments. There was a need to ensure adequate and ongoing monitoring and maintenance of projects. There were conflicting figures being reported on by the Department and the Minister – this needed to be corrected.

This petition was started in February 2023 with further subsequent incidents at schools. The petitioners had submitted correspondence to the National Department and relevant PEDs with no response’s forthcoming. The petitioners sought the alternative route of petitioning the Speaker of Parliament for referral to the relevant Portfolio Committee at National Parliament.

The discussion highlights the urgent need for practical solutions when addressing the challenges posed by pit latrines. To illustrate the practicalities, consider the sheer number of pit latrines – being (Ventilated Improved Pits) VIPs and two million standards and others. Replacing all of these with waterborne sanitation is simply unfeasible in the short term as this would require an additional one billion litres of water daily for flushing alone. This is currently an insurmountable obstacle in terms of water supply and treatment, considering the condition of existing waste treatment plants. The South African private sector has sought to find the most practical and effective way to address the critical issues of safety, environmental impact, and serviceability of these facilities. To make a tangible difference, it is necessary first to acknowledge that an immediate conversion to waterborne solutions is not practical – in the short and medium term.

A safer alternative to pit latrines has been developed and tested extensively and is ready for implementation in communities. It is a cost-effective, dry sanitation unit that addresses health and safety shortfalls, installation difficulties and servicing problems with pit latrines while ensuring that environmental and underground water contamination cannot occur. The waste containment unit has a 1 500-litre bladder with a 3–5-year guaranteed life cycle, which can be removed without disabling the unit. The units are mobile, and no pit must be dug, which reduces installation costs and limits the abandonment of land. The unit itself is shaped in an ellipse to maximise space utilisation and waste containment, using a rotating bowl to dispose of waste, which prevents contact with faecal matter. The unit uses environmentally friendly products to treat waste, all of which address environmental concerns.

The need to eliminate pit latrines in South Africa is clear, given the multitude of risks they pose to the health, safety and environment of communities. While an immediate conversion to waterborne sanitation may not be practical due to water supply and treatment limitations, the development of safer alternatives, such as the dry sanitation unit, offers promising possibilities. By prioritising the implementation of such practical and effective solutions, South Africa can significantly enhance the well-being and quality of life of its communities, making strides towards a future where pit latrines are replaced with safe, sustainable and healthier sanitation options for all citizens.

5.6   Portfolio Committee Recommendations

The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, having considered the Petition from Nguvu Change Leader calling for the Department of Basic Education, and National Government to eradicate pit-latrines in the Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal, and Limpopo Rural Schools, referred to the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education by the Speaker of the National Assembly on 24 July 2023 for consideration, recommends that the Minister of Basic Education and the Department of Basic Education (DBE), in collaboration with the KZNDOE, ECDOE and LDOE: 

• Continue engagements and communication with Nguvu Change Leader on the status and progress with eradication of pit latrines with verifiable figures and data.
• Submit a detailed report on timelines and dates for completion and finalisation of pit latrine eradication in the relevant Provincial Education Departments, 60 days after adoption of this report.
• Ensure that alternative solutions for ablution facilities are explored and implemented for schools with water scarcity. Ensure proper advocacy of alternative solutions with affected communities for buy-in.
• Where new ablution facilities are completed, ensure these are immediately available for use.
• Engage with school principals to impress upon them about the danger of pit latrines not being demolished – after new ablution facilities are constructed.
• Ensure the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education is furnished with details of ongoing developments and progress reports submitted to the Committee Secretariat for sharing with petitioners.
• Ensure PEDs are actively and regularly monitored on developments and progress with the eradication of pit latrines programmes and projects.
• Ensure PEDs are able to respond timeously to the general public/citizens of South Africa on matter to be dealt with at a provincial level - and not have such matters having to be elevated to National Parliament to address.

1. Appreciation

The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education thanked the Nguvu Change Leader Petitioners, the National Department of Basic Education, KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education, Eastern Cape Department of Education and Limpopo Department of Education for the fruitful engagements on the Petition submitted.

 

Report to be considered.