Madam Chairperson, hon members I very much appreciate the honour of introducing to the House this important Bill, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill. Together with the Local Government: Municipal Structures Amendment Bill, this Bill was recently adopted by the National Assembly. Should it receive the concurrence of the NCOP, then we shall firmly get on to the road to modernising the way our local communities are governed.
The two Bills I have referred to seek to shape the new local government dispensation and to influence its efficacy. The process of modernising local government itself predates the formal adoption of our country's Constitution. The step we are taking today concludes the trajectory of local government reforms which has been unfolding under the aegis of the Local Government Transition Act.
More importantly, it also consolidates the role of local government as a full partner in the governance and transformation of the country. Since its promulgation, the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act has provided us with the legislative base for democratising the structure of government and the substance of local democracy. As we have said before, successive colonial and apartheid regimes introduced systems of local government which marginalised urban black communities as well as traditional rural communities. Our people in these communities have for many years felt the downdraught of this exclusion. The persisting conditions of underdevelopment in these black areas speak to the urgency with which we must be seen to be moving forward towards establishing new municipal entities. The establishment of new municipal entities, which will come by way of elections, will put to an end the decades-old marginalisation of black people.
This is the context within which we should look at the recently concluded demarcation of municipal boundaries. Whereas traditional rural communities were condemned to remain islands of poverty with no meaningful prospects of development, the demarcation process allows them to form part of larger municipalities and to more effectively achieve the economies of scale. Only in this way can the population densities be better managed and the need for services such as markets and transport nodes be adequately addressed.
When traditional leaders indicated to the Government that they were not happy with some of the proposed boundaries which affect areas under their jurisdiction, President Mbeki asked the Municipal Demarcation Board to once more apply its mind to the concerns of traditional leaders. I wish to take this opportunity to express my heartfelt thanks both to the Municipal Demarcation Board and to individual traditional leaders who co-operated in order to find an amicable way of resolving this matter. In the process the board changed the outer boundaries of more than 20 municipalities to ensure that traditional leaders' areas are aligned and fall within a single jurisdiction. Thanks to this co-operation, the issue of the redemarcation of municipal boundaries before the forthcoming elections has been brought to a close.
The marginalisation we talk about had a political as well as a socioeconomic base. Given this, it is inevitable that there will be a battle between new and old visions of local government. The Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill seeks to provide a framework for bringing the citizens into an active relationship with government. If we are to succeed in re-engaging the public, then we must understand the extent to which they were excluded and alienated. We must also understand the methods and mechanisms which were used to achieve that exclusion and alienation. When we reflect on this history of the institution in governance, we cannot ignore the fact that some amongst our traditional leaders took positions which merited unpopularity. We point this out not as a basis to deny them a role in the continuing democratisation of our country, but with a view to inviting them to co-operate with the project of transforming our country.
Government, as hon members know, has said time without number that our disposition is towards enhancing the role of the institution of traditional leadership in matters of governance. We have created the National House of Traditional Leaders and provincial houses of traditional leaders, and levels of traditional leaders' representation in structures of local government have been increased. All these steps bear testimony to our intention to enhance the status of the institution of traditional leadership, a status denied them by successive colonial and apartheid regimes.
The National Assembly, as well as the NCOP, have also passed legislation which empowers provinces to fashion their own policies in ways which facilitate co-operation between local government and the institution of traditional leadership. This much was pointed out both in eyeball-to- eyeball discussions with traditional leaders and in the President's letter to traditional leaders. It bears emphasising that whilst some of these matters can be discussed and resolved between Government and the traditional leaders, others are matters which do not lend themselves to being dealt with by way of executive discretion. The legislative bodies of our country will have to be given the opportunity to pronounce themselves on some of these issues.
It will therefore be understood why Government is unfolding a White Paper process and a legislative process which go to the heart of this question of the role, powers and functions of traditional leaders. In this regard we put forward a timeframe which is eminently reasonable, given the immensity of the task involved in rationalising more than 1 500 pieces of old-order legislation which bear on the institution of traditional leaders. Looking at it this way, it ought to be easy for anyone who cares to listen to understand that it would be wrong to insist on making full and final resolution of these matters a condition for holding the forthcoming local government elections.
Even as we agreed to postpone the announcement of the election date, we did emphasise that the fact that we were postponing the announcement of the election date should not be read to mean that we were unmindful of the urgency involved in the matter. From the point of view of Government, we have done everything we need to do in order to create the necessary conditions for the holding of the elections. The Municipal Demarcation Board and the Independent Electoral Commission have also done a commendable job in this regard.
The elections themselves represent a moment of hope which our people have fought for. Nobody has the right to postpone that moment of hope. We concur with the overwhelming call for the need to urgently proclaim the date of the elections, and we promise to do so soon enough. As a matter of fact, we are ready to announce the election date this week. The technical committee established by Government and traditional leaders must understand that it does not have the luxury of time. They must put us in a position to announce this election date and announce it this week, because that is our intention. [Applause.]
Madam Chair, hon Minister, members, I would have thought it was the Government that had it in its power to decide when the election should take place, and not that they were the hostage of any other faction. I want to tell the hon the Minister that the local government portfolio committee reported to Parliament that the ability of a municipality to appropriately implement the provisions of this Bill would depend crucially on issues of capacity, resources and funding, as well as on the political will of public representatives in all three spheres of government.
These are issues which were extremely problematic during the period of transition, as can be deduced from the precarious state in which municipalities now find themselves. Some of these issues can be resolved by legislation, but capacity and political will, which have been glaringly absent during the transitional phase of local government, remain the challenge on which this legislation may flourish or flounder.
The DP believes in small government, but government that delivers. The ANC, on the other hand, has chosen to create bigger municipalities, centralising decisions in the hands of political functionaries, some of whom, it is said, may even be deployed from Cabinet. It is quite clear, as in the case of appointed premiers, that the ANC does not trust the ordinary local communities, whom they claim to champion in this Bill. Their basic reasoning is flawed. Local government should be run by local leaders who are elected by a local community. While so much emphasis in the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill is on the idea of community participation, even to the extent of considering it central to the Bill, this would immediately be contradicted by the imposition of outsiders as councillors. Why should a community be involved in municipal affairs if merely to give credence to an imposed leadership? So much for community participation!
Another precept of this Bill which enforces the centralist tendency is the multitude of Ministerial guidelines and regulations, something which is becoming a frighteningly regular feature of ANC legislation, which gives sweeping powers to the Minister to interfere in the day-to-day affairs of municipalities. Added to this is the new power division developing between district councillors and provincial government, with funds and services finding direct routes to district councils and by-passing provinces, as well as the increasing role of Salga. This was alluded to by the present Minister in a previous appearance in this House, and is seemingly part of a grand scheme not yet fully revealed to this Council but perhaps linked to the report commissioned on intergovernmental relations.
The Bill proposes that organised local government must seek to develop common approaches for local government as a distinct sphere, while the Constitution states that national and provincial governments must support and strengthen the capacity of municipalities to manage their own affairs. This provision of the Municipal Systems Bill does not empower local government, but prescribes and inhibits its role. Chapter 8, which deals with municipal service providers, illustrates a clear trade-off of competing interests. On the one hand, we have the Minister's dilemma. He is convinced that adequate municipal services cannot be supplied to the majority of citizens unless agreements are negotiated with the private sector, CBOs and NGOs.
Cosatu knows that if privatisation gains momentum its membership will fall. It takes no genius to see who had the final say in the drafting of chapter 8, if we look at the stringent conditions which municipalities have to consider before they can look at private-sector partnerships. One must contrast this with the rebuffed submissions of traditional leaders, reputedly the preferred form of representation of at least 15 million South Africans. The Demarcation Board decimated the boundaries of traditional rural communities without so much as a by-your-leave. Now the whole country is being held to ransom because the Government could not coerce the traditional leaders into line with the 10% additional council seat allocation. So much for community participation!
While the DP truly admires the broad sweep of good intentions underlying the Bill, the philosophy of developmental government, public participation, integrated development plans, performance management, service delivery, and all those good things, it cannot support the way in which they are supposed to be brought about. The authority and control are suspect. Sadly, the poor and disadvantaged may once again become the victims of another transitional failure, probably to the tune of more billions of rand if we do not let common sense and good clean government take control of delivery. The DP cannot support this Bill. [Applause.]
Chairperson, Chairperson of the NCOP Madam Naledi Pandor in absentia, Deputy Chairperson of the NCOP Lawrence Mushwana in absentia, Minister for Provincial and Local Government Mr Sydney Mufamadi, members of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, I greet you all. This is a significant plenary meeting for local government. It signifies the closure of the local government interim phase and opens a new chapter for a permanent feature of local government in South Africa.
We planned together in the preinterim phase, we implemented together in the interim phase, and we shall consolidate together in the final phase of local government. I must also indicate that this has not been without challenges for both politicians and officials within local government. The Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill defines a municipality as consisting of ``the political structures and administration of the municipality; and the community of the municipality.'' The emphasis here is on the community of the municipality.
The emphasis throughout this Bill is on community participation, that is, government with the people. It therefore changes the classic definition of democracy to ``government of the people by the people and with the people,'' and no more, ``for the people''. To us this is the fulfilment of one of the historic documents in South Africa, the Freedom Charter, which states that the people shall govern.
While local government in South Africa is a creature of the South African Constitution, the Municipal Systems Bill provides the legal nature, rights and duties of municipalities. Read together with the Municipal Structures Act, the Municipal Systems Bill provides clarity on municipal powers and functions. It encourages community participation as part of the developmental role of local government. The proposed integrated development planning programmes bear testimony to this.
The Municipal Systems Bill requires municipalities to set up their own performance management system, to provide for alternative delivery mechanisms and to form municipal services partnerships. Municipalities will be obliged to apply credit control measures to communities who do not pay for services rendered. The plight of indigent residents will, of course, be considered favourably, but indigent residents will still have to pay for services consumed.
Finally, the Bill deals with the codes of conduct for councillors and for municipal staff members. It also provides for provincial interventions when all is said and done, eg when municipal assistance and capacity is provided, but a municipality still fails to execute its duties in terms of section 156 of the South African Constitution.
Public administration at local government level will be simplified by this legislation, the South African Constitution, and other pieces of legislation such as the Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act, the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, the Municipal Finance Management Bill, the Promotion of Access to Information Act, the Administration of Justice Act, etc.
Extensive consultation in the process of formulating this legislation took place with various stakeholders submitting inputs. We could, without doubt, say that we, as organised local government, have complied with the provisions of section 154(2) of the Constitution. In this regard we want to thank the chairpersons of the portfolio committee and the select committee, Mr Carrim and Mr Bhabha respectively.
Salga supports the present version of the Bill and that it be enacted and promulgated.
Referring to what the DP has said regarding Salga, I recommend that they read their Constitution very carefully, especially section 163, which deals with the manner in which Salga has to be consulted on matters regarding local government. This is also emphasised in section 154(2) of the Constitution. I will not elaborate on these points. [Applause.]
Chairperson, this new law will ensure that one's vote is one's voice, something which the majority of the people of our country were prepared to die for.
The apartheid government made sure that participation at local level was for a certain few communities. One of the main rallying cries of the struggle against apartheid was for the people to have a say in decisions that affected their daily lives.
Whilst I will be speaking on public participation, one cannot divorce that from accountability. For a change things will be simplified to a language that all will understand. Linking this to the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, councillors have a constitutional duty to inform and work with their constituencies.
Notice of ordinary or special council meetings should be put in all newsletters or communications of the council. The simplified meaning of the entire Bill is that a municipality is accountable to the public it serves. The transformation process in the local government sphere since the dawn of freedom has addressed the challenge to enhance and deepen democracy at the level closest to the people.
In preparing for the final phase of local government transition, the new vision of developmental government has been developed and largely implemented through legislation such as the Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act and the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act.
Also included in this Bill will be the municipalities' role in service delivery, poverty eradication and the improvement of social and economic conditions of our public, especially the disadvantaged communities. Because of this ANC Government, accountability and transparency now exist. One now even hears from parties who, in the past, said nothing. Now they have the guts to say this Bill is unacceptable.
The Constitution recognises that participation, among other things, is critical for ensuring sustainable democratic and developmental local government. Section 152 of the Constitution states the objectives of local governments. As this is also covered in Chapter 4 of this Bill, it is a non- negotiable mandate of municipalities. It compels municipalities to develop a culture of formal representative government with a system of participatory governance.
This Bill, through community participation, will ensure and instil responsibility in the citizenry as communities will be actively involved in the budget preparation processes that will take their needs and priorities on board. Communities will be engaged through the process of integrated development plans and will also be involved in monitoring municipalities through the process of performance management systems. There will also be strategic decision-makers who need to become involved in service delivery. No other party can be more democratic than the ANC. Those who say that this will be an extra burden on the cash-strapped municipalities are not telling the truth. They have to consider that municipalities will be reduced and clustered to become financially viable.
We all know that communities are not homogeneous. They are made up of different groups, some of which are more organised and have better access to resources than others. It is therefore important to note that the poor and disadvantaged are not excluded.
Most municipal councils throughout the country do experience serious financial constraints due to nonpayment for services and poor administration. If communities are active participants in the affairs of the municipalities, this problem will be easily dealt with and the municipalities will thus be able to effectively implement credit control and collection policies.
The Bill also introduces the concept of customer care and management with regard to credit control and debt collection. This system aims to create positive and reciprocal relationships between persons liable for these payments and the municipality.
It further directs municipal councils to adopt, maintain and implement credit control and debt collection. This will correct the practice currently employed of introducing credit control and debt collection haphazardly and without proper policies.
Municipal councils will also be able to identify those people who can afford to pay, but do not pay, for services rendered by making provision for indigent debtors and also be able to differentiate between different categories of ratepayers or users of services.
In conclusion, the White Paper on Local Government states that local government has a critical role to play in consolidating our new democracy, and it is up to each councillor, each official and each citizen to make their contribution in the area where they live and work. The Bill is one of the most important and critical building blocks that facilitate and promote democratic and developmental local governments.
Finally, on behalf of the ANC in the Western Cape, I want to say that we have been waiting for this kind of governance and that we therefore support the Bill. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Chairperson, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill is a testimony to our Government's commitment to improve the quality of life in all communities by promoting strong, effective and accountable local government.
It is the culmination of a long process which started in 1993 with the establishment of the Local Government Negotiating Forum. The mission of this forum was to contribute to the bringing about of a democratic, nonracial, nonsexist and financially viable local government system.
In July 1993 the forum resolved that the transition to nonracial local government would be implemented in three phases. The first was the preinterim phase, in which all existing local authorities would be replaced by nominated transitional, local and metropolitan councils. The second phase was the interim phase in which elections would be held for transitional councils. In the third and final phase, a final constitutional model for local government would be implemented.
The Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill represents the final phase in this process. It builds on the strong foundation that has already been laid by the White Paper on Local Government as well as the Local Government Transition Act, the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, the Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act and other legislation dealing with the transformation of local government.
Municipal government is all about the delivery of service. As the tier of government that is closest to our people, the municipalities have the responsibility of putting into practice the Government's development plans. While municipal councils in some areas have made significant progress in addressing backlogs and extending services, we continue to be confronted with infrastructural disparities and inequalities in many others, caused by a variety of factors including competition among different municipalities.
An example of this is the tussle between the Cape Town City Council and the Cape Metropolitan Council over the spending of funds designated for infrastructural development in the poor areas.
As much as a third of these funds remain unused because of a lack of consensus on where they should be spent. Without proper guidelines on municipal planning and intermunicipal co-operation, situations like this will continue to arise. This clearly indicates the inadequacy of the existing municipal institutional framework.
This is why the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill is such an important piece of legislation. It will require municipalities to adopt integrated development plans, which must be aligned with, and complement the development plans and strategies of other affected municipalities.
A municipality's integrated development plan must set out the overall strategy for achieving its developmental objectives and include the municipality's strategies for mobilising resources and capacity and for transforming its service delivery mechanisms. As part of its integrated development planning process, a municipality should consider which services could best be provided directly by itself, and which services could best be provided by forming partnerships with the public sector, private sector or NGOs.
It is these municipal service partnerships that I now want to address. The Department of Provincial and Local Government has estimated our municipal infrastructure and service backlog to be about R50 billion. Furthermore, it is feared that if we are to address these backlogs through public-sector resources alone, many communities may only receive services in the year 2065.
In addition, we are also confronted with the reality that many municipalities lack the necessary capacity and finances to improve and extend the delivery of services to the communities they serve. This is particularly true of municipalities in rural areas. These things are happening at a time when the demand for basic services continues to outpace the available Government finances.
All of these factors point to one very important issue, and that is that municipalities will have to look for innovative ways of providing and accelerating the delivery of basic services. Public-private partnerships are one such innovation. This combination brings together the respective talents of each to deliver what has traditionally been considered a Government activity. Public-private partnerships will enable municipal governments to meet the demands for public services, while using less of their own scarce resources and still maintaining, or even improving, the quality of services offered.
Although I accept that there are many benefits to be gained from public- private partnerships, I still believe that Government should retain the responsibility of ensuring that the wider public interest is safeguarded. This can be done by setting and monitoring safety, quality and performance standards for privatised services, and by enforcing those standards. [Applause.]
Mevrou die Voorsitter, agb Minister en lede van die Huis, graag wil ek 'n paar aspekte en implikasies van die betrokke wetgewing bespreek. In die eerste plek dien dit vermeld te word dat dit die portefeuljekomitee van die Nasionale Vergadering weke geneem het om di wetgewing deur te werk, maar die gekose komitee van di Huis het slegs een uur daarvoor gekry. Alhoewel dit artikel 75-wetgewing is, ontstaan die vraag op sigself of dit die Huis se funksie is om maar net kennis te neem en daarna 'n stempel op te sit ter bekragtiging. Dit sal jammer wees as die NRP slegs 'n nabootser en 'n slaafse meeloper is van die Nasionale Vergadering. [Tussenwerpsels.] [Applous.] Die uiteinde daarvan sal wees dat die NRP dan gesien kan word as 'n administratiewe liggaam wat slegs dien as 'n rubberstempel, of ``a bloody nuisance'', soos beskryf in 'n artikel oor die NRP in 'n naweekkoerant verlede week.
In die tweede plek gee die Grondwet in artikels 40 en 41 volwaardige status aan plaaslike regering as 'n sfeer van regering. Tog is hierdie wetgewing nie juis 'n erkenning van daardie grondwetlike status nie, soos blyk uit die voorskriftelikheid met die skep van meganismes om plaaslike regering te reguleer. Agt hoofstukke van die wetsontwerp gee magte aan die Minister. Die verlede het egter bewys dat diktatoriale magte diktators skep.
Die wetsontwerp l sterk klem op gemeenskapsbetrokkenheid, en dit word verwelkom dat die gemeenskap aan boord geneem word, gesien in die lig van deelnemende regering. Wanneer die gemeenskap egter dieselfde status kry as 'n politieke struktuur, maar uitgesluit word van regsaanspreeklikheid, ontstaan daar vrae wat roep om beantwoord te word.
Ten slotte, alles is darem nie negatief nie. Daar is baie goeie dinge in die betrokke wetgewing wat dividende kan lewer indien dit reg bestuur word, soos die privatisering van dienste waar dit moontlik is, asook gentegreerde ontwikkelingsbeplanning wat langtermynvoordele kan inhou.
Ook die verskaffing van basiese dienste en die betaling daarvoor is 'n stap in die regte rigting, maar dit sal 'n proses wees om hierdie wetgewing beslag te laat kry.
In die lig daarvan kan die Nuwe NP nie daarvoor stem nie. (Translation of Afrikaans speech follows.)
[Mr J HORNE: Madam Chair, hon Minister and members of the Council, I would like to discuss a few aspects and implications of the relevant legislation. Firstly, it should be mentioned that it took the portfolio committee of the National Assembly weeks to work through this legislation, whereas the select committee of this Council was given only one hour to do so.
Although we are dealing with section 75 legislation, the question arises as to whether it is the function of the Council simply to take cognisance of legislation and then to rubber-stamp it. It would be a pity if the NCOP were merely to copy and follow slavishly in the footsteps of the National Assembly. [Interjections.] This would result in the NCOP's being seen as an administrative body which merely serves as a rubber stamp, or a ``bloody nuisance'', as described in an article on the NCOP in a weekend newspaper last week.
Secondly, sections 40 and 41 of the Constitution accord full status to local government as a sphere of government. Even so, this legislation is not actually an acknowledgement of that constitutional status, as is apparent from the prescriptiveness in the creation of mechanisms to regulate local government. Eight chapters of the Bill grant powers to the Minister. However, the past has proved that dictatorial powers create dictators.
The Bill places strong emphasis on community involvement, and we welcome the fact that the community is being taken on board in view of participatory governance. However, when the community is accorded the same status as a political structure, but is excluded from legal accountability, questions arise which need to be answered.
In conclusion, not everything is negative. There are many good things in the relevant legislation which could yield good returns if correctly managed, such as the privatisation of services where possible, as well as integrated development planning which could have long-term benefits.
The provision of basic services and payment for such services are also a step in the right direction, but it will involve an entire process to give substance to this legislation.
In view of this, the New NP cannot vote for this legislation.]
Madam Chair, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill is the third piece of legislation to give effect to the White Paper on Local Government, the first two being the Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act and the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act. While the first two Acts deal with the institutional and jurisdictional aspects of the local government transformation process, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill seeks to establish the basic principles and mechanisms to give effect to our collective vision of development government through the notion of performance management. Its focus is therefore primarily on the internal system and administration of the municipalities.
This Bill has been drafted on the basis of a detailed investigation into the current capacity problems of local government, and the analysis of existing approaches and innovations to service delivery in local government. This Bill describes the core processes or elements that are essential to realising a truly developmental government system. These include performance management and reporting, resource allocation and organisational change.
This Bill is mandatory only to the extent that fundamental elements of public-sector reform, socioeconomic development, delivery of basic services and public reporting, and monitoring and accountability need to be applied uniformly on a countrywide basis. The system of uniformity on a countrywide basis with regard to performance management, amongst other things, will promote municipalities to operate within the framework which the Government draws up and will allow all citizens in our country to be treated in the same way.
There has been some contrary views by the opposition parties with regard to the performance management system. They allege that this system is like any other tool, and that the municipality may wish to use another tool. This Bill is trying to provide a uniform system so as to establish which municipalities are experiencing problems, and to offer help if the need arises.
The apartheid policies of forced removals and the Group Areas Act left a big scar in the way our towns are divided and unintegrated. Facilities were for many years provided in a way that disadvantaged black people in our townships and benefited whites in the suburbs. The Local Government: Municipal Structures Amendment Bill is going to change those environmental injustices of the past.
For instance, we have a huge dairy farm near Soweto. Senior citizens in my area always ask me questions about that dairy. They want to know who benefits from the milk that is produced at that dairy; they want to know who gets the milk; they want to know who feeds those fat cows - it is Soweto. The cows are in Soweto, but we do not get the milk. All that is going to change. We do not have a single dairy in Soweto. The people who have been, and still are, benefiting from that dairy are the whites in the white suburbs. This is going to change.
This system is to clarify the nature ... [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Chairperson, the more things change, the more they remain the same. This is true about parties such as the DP and the New NP, which daily profess to have shed and relinquished their old and discredited discriminatory practices, but reveal their true colours whenever transformatory legislation, which seeks to redress the injustices and inequality of the past, comes before this House.
The White Paper on Local Government identifies integrated development planning as a key tool for promoting and realising developmental local government. Fundamentally, an integrated development plan represents a process through which municipalities establish strategic frameworks and development plans for the short, medium and long term. This planning system is a new and radical departure from the racially based planning programmes of the past dispensation, which were imposed on our communities without consultation, and at times with force, such as the discredited black local authorities which were forced upon our people during the 1980s.
Unlike in the past, the new approach encourages democracy, transparency and accountability by forcing municipalities to subject their development plans to public participation and evaluation. The prevailing problem has always been the uncertainty as to the precise status of integrated development plans at local government level.
At the moment there are various planning-related processes and documents that have some legal status and meaning at the local government level. These include structure plans, town planning schemes and land development objectives. Therefore, if integrated development plans are meant to be the most important output of the integrated development planning process, then it needs to be given an unambiguous status in law.
The relationship between integrated development plans and other existing documents then needs to be clarified. This is precisely what is intended by the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill in regard to this subject.
In terms of the Bill, municipalities are legally required to adopt a single, inclusive and strategic plan for the development of the municipality. Integrated development plans are therefore elevated to the status of the principal strategic plan of a municipality. An integrated development planning approach has many benefits. The following are some of the important benefits.
It enables municipalities to align and direct their financial and institutional resources towards agreed policy objectives and programmes. It is a vital tool to ensure the integration of local government activities with other spheres of development planning at provincial and national levels by serving as a basis for communication and interaction.
It serves as a basis for engagement between local government and citizens at local level, and with various stakeholders and interested groups. When I say ``citizens at local level'', I am also a citizen at local level, as opposed to what Ms Botha has said here, namely that we are not citizens at local level - that we take decisions and therefore are not at local level.
It enables municipalities to weigh up their obligations and systematically prioritise programmes and resource allocations. In the context of great inequalities, an integrated development plan serves as a framework for municipalities to prioritise their actions around meeting urgent needs, while maintaining the overall economic municipal and social infrastructure already in place.
It assists local government to focus on the environmental sustainability of their delivery and development strategies, because sustainable development is development that delivers basic social and economic services to all, without threatening the viability of the ecological and community systems upon which these services depend. Therefore, integrated development planning will assist local government to develop a holistic strategy for poverty alleviation. [Applause.]
Chairperson, the Minister for Provincial and Local Government, hon members, despite the political changes ushered in by the 1995 local elections, the legacy of apartheid remains embedded in many municipalities. Many are still traditional, rule-driven bureaucracies which are not used to servicing the public in a responsible manner.
Financial management systems are often weak in many municipalities. Apartheid employment regulations are often still in place, creating a degree of inflexibility in the system. Many municipalities remain untransformed and locked in old, inefficient ways of working.
It is the White Paper on Local Government which aims to establish a system of local governance in which municipalities play an increasingly important role in service delivery, eradicating poverty and improving the social and economic conditions of our people.
We see this Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill as a very important piece of legislation in that it seeks to establish the basic principles and mechanisms to give effect to a collectivisation of developmental government. It focuses primarily on the establishment of internal systems and the administration of municipalities. This legislation will put in place new processes and will create new institutions with new principles and support mechanisms that will enable local government transformation to take place.
Clause 4(2) of the Bill should be amended to include the following addition:
(k) treat communities, residents and ratepayers with dignity and respect.
Item 2 of Schedule 2, the Code of Conduct for Municipal Staff Members, should be amended to include the following addition:
(f) treat communities, residents and ratepayers with dignity and respect.
In Gauteng we expressed concerns regarding the incorrect tagging of the Bill as a section 75 Bill, instead of a section 76 Bill. The correct tagging of the Bill would have afforded us an opportunity to conduct proper consultation and a process of public hearings with local governments in the province in order to determine the practicality of the systems that are being put in place.
Our opinion is that the crucial provincial oversight role as reflected in Chapter 7 of the Constitution, particularly section 155(6), was overlooked in the tagging process. Although the Bill was classified as important at provincial level, we only deliberated and gave input on the basis of section 75 legislation, which was unsatisfactory. We support the principle of the Bill and the detail of the proposed amendments. [Applause.]
Chairperson, after having heard the speakers both from my party and from the opposition benches, I believe that it would be appropriate to give an historical perspective to the course we are now embarking upon. But, before I attempt to do that, I wish to commence on a personal note. The very political and administrative regime that the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill now seeks to replace has had a very real and profound effect on every individual sitting here today.
While some amongst us so articulately argued the reasons for not supporting the Bill, the sceptical but very accurate words of Bertrand Russell kept ringing in my ears. He said:
We have, in fact, two kinds of morality side by side; one which we preach but do not practise, and another which we practise but seldom preach.
These words ring so true because my recollection of events that charted my young life is littered with such ambiguities.
The mass removal of residents from Pageview in Johannesburg to Lenasia was conducted with the assistance of the then Johannesburg City Council. Need we remind ourselves who, in fact, was in control of that council at the time? Yes, members have guessed it, the predecessor of the DP, the PFP. The hon Adv Lever, who I hope is here - oh, he is not listening - must know that what made it so much more painful was the fact that while that very party made such eloquent protestations in the press, its supporters happily bought up the properties that were expropriated. But then, who are we to argue, for they are all all honourable people?
Is it not the experiences of Cato Manor that we seek to redress with this Bill? Yet I see in our midst the hon Mr Raju, who claims to have the interests of the people of Cato Manor at heart, vote against it. But who am I to argue? Who am I to question conscience, because they are all all- honourable people?
There is one thing I would like to share with the hon Ackermann. Honestly, if there was one redeeming feature I did find in the old NP, it was the fact that there was no pretence in what they did. They were honest about their intentions and they implemented their policies, no matter how diabolical they were.
I would like to tell the hon Botha that this issue is not about race, as we are so often accused of saying, nor is it about maintaining a burden of guilt over the heads of the privileged of the past. It is about extracting a collective responsibility for the past so that we can build a better future.
In April 1994 a reading of the election manifestos of the respective political parties made me pregnant with hope that indeed we had at long last turned over a new leaf. I believed that the collective responsibility we sought would lead to reconstruction. Instead, every transformation Bill that has come to this House has been met with resistance. No, the resistance does not now come in the form of crude and robust remarks. It is now dressed in a different form, embellished with questions of efficacy and clothed in technical and intellectual diversions. But, ever so often, the slip under the dress shows, whether it is the thumb in the coffee or the reference to a boy in the Chamber, it is the same thing. [Interjections.] I mean reference to a Minister or a Deputy Minister as a boy in the National Assembly. We have not been reading the press, have we? Deep down we know the real reason for opposing the Bill. It is to maintain a system that at least the NP was honest about.
The hon Ackermann would remember a definition of a PFP member that used to be bandied about in years gone by, which said that a PFP member was one that voted for the Progs but prayed like hell that the NP would win. How else could one get land so cheap? I ask members what has changed. But, then again, who are we to question? They are all all-honourable people.
Now to the business at hand. The forthcoming local government elections bring to a close one of the few transitional measures that are still with us, from the era of the Kempton Park negotiations. The sunset clause that maintained certain political assurances finally comes to a close. What confronts us now is a challenge that is succinctly captured in the Constitution. It mandates local government to provide democratic and accountable government for local communities, ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner, promote social and economic development and encourage the involvement of communities and community organisations in the matters of local government.
The series of Acts and Bills that followed the passing of the White Paper establishes the basis for a new developmental local government system, which is committed to working with citizens, groups and communities to create sustainable human settlements which provide for a decent quality of life and meet the social, economic and material needs of communities in a holistic way. While the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act defines the political structures of new local government models, the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill restructures the internal systems of municipalities. The core of this Bill is contained in three key chapters. These are the chapters that deal with community participation, public-private partnerships and the relationship between the administration and the councillors.
Speakers have already discussed these areas quite extensively, but I would like to discuss the latter somewhat further. The past five years has shown us that there has been a somewhat awkward relationship between the administration and the councillors, largely because these areas of operation are not clearly defined in the system that has evolved from the British system. We found that councillors felt hamstrung in implementing policy and placing a transformation agenda on the table. In many instances they felt that their work was an unnecessary appendage. The credibility of councillors lay in question in many instances. I, for one, can cite a number of examples in which the quality of services still continues to be disparate, despite the policy of the council. The creation of performance contracts and key performance indicators that must be met seek to address some of the inadequacies of the past. We hope to have a greater degree of accountability as a result.
This House has been involved in a number of interventions in terms of section 139. Members will remember that what was particularly frustrating was to approve an intervention in a town when the patient was already in the intensive care unit. We constantly appealed for an early warning system. I am pleased to inform members that those early warning systems have now been created. For example, if an integrated development plan has not been submitted to the MEC by a council either timeously or at all, the NCOP has to be duly informed by the MEC. There would also be a link between the Auditor-General's office and the NCOP. A report by the Auditor-General on the state of affairs in the municipalities of a province must be tabled with the NCOP.
I believe that perhaps a restructuring of the administration of this House may have to be considered to accommodate the important role this House will play in this regard. I agree with the member from the provincial legislature Mr Klaas about the tagging. Clearly the tagging committee is viewing local government as a function of provincial government and not as a sphere of government. Consequently legislation like this one is being tagged as section 75 legislation when there is no doubt of the impact of the legislation in provinces. I would urge the presiding officers to take the matter up in the appropriate forum. If an amendment to the Constitution is required, so be it. But, clearly, the intention of the Constitution is not being honoured by Bills of this nature being tagged as section 75 legislation.
Finally, I would like to thank the members of my committee for enduring long hours, sometimes up to 16 hours, on the trot to consider this Bill. I would also like to express my thanks to Jackie Manche, Fanie Louw, whom I can see sitting up in the gallery, and to Dr Bouwer, who persevered throughout our constant interrogation. I must also extend a special word of thanks to my counterpart, Mr Yunus Carrim, who, in his inimitable way ensured that we did not stray from the task. Although I do not think the Minister has a say in the salaries of his staff, he is surrounded by a team that has a work ethic like no other. [Laughter.] I think I should tell him that.
Let us fasten our seatbelts and usher in the new system. We may just enjoy the ride, provided local government gets its fair share of funding. I hope the hon Ms Mahlangu will take note of what I am saying. It will be a long one and we may not achieve everything at once, but if we are armed with the will I am certain that we will reap the harvest of the efforts of many. [Applause.]
Chairperson, let me take this opportunity to thank all hon members who participated in this debate. I note that the hon speaker from the DP specifically said that the DP did not support the Bill. I suppose it is their democratic right not to support democratic legislation. [Laughter.] [Interjections.]
The hon member proceeded to say that the DP did not support the Bill because Government advocates the establishment of big municipalities. What we know is that the DP, by its various names, was not in the least concerned about the exclusion of people of my type from benefiting from the revenue base which they help to generate. We go to Johannesburg, work there and generate a lot of revenue, but it should not follow us to Soweto, and that is what they mean by the necessity of keeping municipalities small.
The hon member went on to decry the fact that Government did not coerce, as she put it, traditional leaders to accept the forthcoming local government elections. Indeed, the word ``coerce'' does not exist in our political vocabulary. [Laughter.] She also talked about positions taken by the Government which amount to imposing leaders on communities. It takes the unique genius that she is to see what the rest of us do not see, namely the imposition of leaders through democratic elections.
The hon Mr Horne from the New NP complained about what he called the dictatorial powers conferred on the Minister by the Bill. I guess he joined the New NP a bit too late. Perhaps this was because, for a long time, its ranks were not open to him and me. [Laughter.] [Interjections.] They did not tell him about this progressive literature which they banned, which if he had had access to it, he would have known something about the necessity of managing the creative tension that exists between local discretion and national unity. But I suppose he can only blame his own party and not me for that. [Laughter.] I want to repeat what I said earlier in case the hon member Ms Botha did not understand what I said. The responsibility of announcing the local government election date lies with Government, and Government intends to make that announcement this week. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Bill agreed to in accordance with section 75 of the Constitution (Democratic Party and New National Party dissenting).