Hon member.
Salga looks forward to playing a meaningful role in the NCOP and appeals to the House to support it. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Conclude, conclude, you have only few minutes left.
Yes, I am finished. Thank you. [Laughter.]
Hon Deputy Chairperson, intergovernmental relations in the South African context are concerned with interaction between the different spheres of government. The Constitution provides that government comprises national, provincial and local spheres of government which are distinctive, interdependent and interrelated. According to the Constitution, an Act of Parliament must establish or provide structures and institutions to promote and facilitate intergovernmental relations and provide for appropriate mechanisms and procedures to facilitate settlements of intergovernmental disputes.
The Constitution further provides that an Act of Parliament must provide for the equitable division of revenue raised nationally among the national, provincial and local spheres of government. For this reason Parliament has passed the following pieces of legislation: the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act and the Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act, as well as many others that other colleagues referred to.
The purpose of the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act is to establish a framework for national, provincial and local governments to promote and facilitate intergovernmental relations and to provide for mechanisms and procedures. The Act provides mechanisms for these spheres to talk to each other, co-operate, support and to assist one another. Nothing in the Act stops any of the forums established in terms of the Acts to refer any matter discussed in those forums to the NCOP or to any of its committees, especially if such matters have policy or budgetary implications.
For that reason, Deputy Chairperson, I do not agree with the narrow interpretation of the Constitution by hon Harris. I am surprised that hon Harris chose to self-promote, self-place and lobby for a federal state, instead of sharing the good ideas he has on this particular subject. Perhaps we need to remind each other, Deputy Chairperson, that the fact that we all fly for two hours to Cape Town from our provinces does not make the Western Cape a federal state separate from South Africa; it remains a province in South Africa and it will remain so. [Applause.]
It is also not surprising that he chose that particular route because, as a Member of the NCOP, I have never heard any leader of the DA in this House saying anything good about the ruling party. They are best at mastering criticism on every good thing the ANC and its government does.
As for the comments, I was listening with interest to hear the solutions that hon Bloem provided from Cope, but I could not pick up even a single one, except to hear from media clips and what he said in the media. But perhaps I need to share with hon Bloem that he was unable to share with us those matters because Cope has of late mastered the art of using the courts to run its own affairs. Perhaps at some point we will have to debate those issues.
Our oversight visits to different provinces in the past weeks exposed us to the harsh reality that there seem to be no connected relations between the three spheres of government, despite the existence of the structures. [Interjections.]
O nt?ela nako, monna. [You are wasting my time.]
Deputy Chairperson, would the hon member take a question from me?
Hon Chaane, would you like to take a question?
Deputy Chair, I'll dedicate one hour of my time tomorrow to engage with hon Bloem; not today.
You are not brave enough to take my question. [Laughter.]
We found that some provincial departments operate in silos away from municipalities to the extent that they cannot detect problems at an early stage. A classic example is the current intervention by the national Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs in municipalities on matters that, in our view, could have been detected earlier by provincial departments if they were playing that role in terms of intergovernmental relations.
In most instances, integrated development plans, IDPs, in municipalities are not properly aligned with the provincial plans. One area of concern is the tendency that we have detected in municipalities of compromising service delivery by choosing to invest huge sums of money. For what purpose, we don't know. I hope that the Ministry for Co-operative Governance and Traditional affairs as well as the Ministry of Finance will have an interest in pursuing this matter further.
The NCOP is strategically placed to drive the process and encourage intergovernmental relations between the three spheres of government, particularly on matters aimed at fast-tracking service delivery. In simple terms, intergovernmental relations, in my understanding, means working together to do more, and that is the call the ruling party has made and it is a call that we should all respect.
Communication between spheres of government should be improved and properly co-ordinated at all stages - from planning to implementation. Whatever decision is taken in any of the forums created by the relevant Acts or interaction forums should also be communicated speedily to the recipients of such services. Perhaps this should be communicated at a faster speed than one would normally see used to report negative occurrences.
It is important to note that municipalities are assigned key service delivery functions such as housing, roads, provision of electricity, water and municipal infrastructure. They have significant autonomy to allocate resources to meet basic needs and respond to local priorities, while at the same time giving effect to nationally agreed upon priorities. For these reasons one wishes to commend the NCOP on adopting an approach of seeking to solve problems on the spot through the programme of "Taking Parliament to the People". This approach, if adopted by all communities during oversight visits, will yield much more fruit - as seen during the oversight visits in Limpopo, North West and the Eastern Cape.
The approach seems to be working wonders, given the reports we are receiving from all those visited so far. We are also beginning to see a lot of improvements in the spending of conditional grants, particularly those that are aimed at improving services at local municipalities.
Over and above that, the NCOP has the very important role of facilitating stakeholder engagement through its public hearings on the Financial and Fiscal Commission, FFC, recommendations for the division of revenue for the next financial year. The NCOP again, through its involvement within the Budget Council, as represented by the chairpersons of the Select Committees on Appropriations and Finance, has a role to ensure that inputs from stakeholders are seriously considered by the Budget Council. In terms of the Money Bills Amendment Procedures and Related Matters Act of 2009, it has a role to play by ensuring that, when considering the Budget, the issues that arise through the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Act structures and forums are taken into consideration.
We appreciate the fact that the government is accelerating its efforts to better assist municipalities to improve planning and financial capacity; to achieve greater efficiency in delivery and expand service access to households in predominantly rural and/or lower-capacity areas. In the context of these efforts, the equitable share, excluding the Regional Services Council, RSC, levy replacement and special support for councillor remuneration, has been growing and will still grow by an annual average of 12%.
We are, however, noting the challenges that remain key in the local equitable share of some of the municipalities. To state a few: the need for a differentiated approach for funding the different types of municipalities, whilst considering the unique expenditure needs, fiscal capacity and long-term planning and population dynamics; the broader objective of the local government fiscal framework, which is linking the local equitable share to conditional grants, especially infrastructure grants, so that any additional operating costs for municipalities are factored into the formula; increased operating costs associated with new social infrastructure funded by the municipal infrastructure grant, where there is no return on the infrastructure; the large maintenance backlogs and the continued difficulties in addressing these backlogs; sufficient flexibility to incorporate changes to current free basic services; cognisance of the other services that local government provides and the effect these expenditure items have on the respective budgets; and the cross-subsidisation ability of certain municipalities to provide services and account for fiscal capacity more accurately.
We appreciate the role that the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs is playing together with the Development Bank of Southern Africa as well as Treasury in assisting and ensuring co-operation between the provincial departments and local government. We are beginning to see, through such interventions, some progress in most parts of our country.
I wish to say, Deputy Chairperson, that it would be appreciated if Mr Johnson could provide the consistent presence of Salga in this House, so that they enrich our debates to assist in all the challenges cited at local government. I thank you. [Applause.]
Madam Chairperson, NCOP Chair, MECs, comrades and friends, this debate is particularly welcome and I congratulate you on organising it. I bring to you the very good wishes of Minister Shiceka. As most of you will know, he was a member of this House not so long ago, and so the NCOP is very close to his heart.
Indeed, the NCOP is very close to the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Cogta, because if we are going to work on the new, emerging model of co-operative governance, the NCOP is a very, very crucial partner for us, more so than the National Assembly. And it seems to me that this debate should not just be about the NCOP, of course. It should also be about the NA. The NA should be looking at and reviewing its role, so that it is more effective and efficient in accelerating service delivery and development, to which we are all committed. In fact, Parliament as a whole should be doing this sort of introspection, and I congratulate you once again.
Parliament is ultimately the tribune of the people. It is the organ of people's power. It is Parliament that holds the executive to account. It is Parliament that represents the people to the executive. It is Parliament that puts pressure on the executive to ensure that we deliver on our mandate, as it does on both Houses -not least the NCOP - to ensure that the work we do contributes to service delivery and development. A crucial measure of the quality of a democracy is the vibrancy and effectiveness of its Parliament. In our case, we have two equally important Houses and we have huge developmental tasks, which means that these two Houses also have to work together and engage with the executive much more stridently than what I, for what it is worth, think is currently the case.
When it comes to co-operative government and intergovernmental relations, friends, the NCOP has a very, very crucial role to play. After all, as has been said repeatedly today, you are the legislature in which all three spheres converge. You are unique, in fact. If I am correct, NCOP Chair, I think this is one of the only national legislatures anywhere in the world in which local government is represented.
While I am on the subject, I think it is about time we considered looking into the possibility of the SA Local Government Association, Salga, actually having a vote in the National Council of Provinces. It is something we need to debate. In the same way, we need to consider what Councillor Johnson just said, which is that when the NCOP is deciding on interventions, Salga should be allowed to address the House. Why not, in my view? Let us look into those sorts of things.
It strikes me that Mr Harris is actually remarkably narrow-minded. Presumably it reflects the party he comes from. It is a minority party and it is difficult for them to go beyond a minority perspective. However, it is a remarkably technocratic, elitist, and narrow understanding of the Constitution. Indeed, the references he makes to the Constitution are abysmally crude. This is out of context with the overall system of the need for co-operative governance that is conveyed in the Constitution as a whole.
And for a member of the legislature, it is remarkable, too, that he would want to say that the role of intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance resides primarily in the executive. Why? Why should Parliament not take responsibility? If you like, there are two dimensions to intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance, if he has not worked it out yet. One is an executive and the other is the legislature, and really, the power should reside in the legislature.
None of the structures we have - Minmecs, Munimecs, the President's Co- ordinating Council and the premiers' co-ordinating forums - can substitute for the role of the NCOP; by no means. In fact, your very rationale for existing, surely, is partly the role you play in co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations. Partly, if not, substantially, the reason Salga is here is precisely because you have a crucial role to play in co- operative governance.
I could reply, if there was time. The whole 15 minutes would be consumed by it, but there are three quick things I want to say: firstly, he essentially conflates the role of the executive in Parliament; secondly, he does not seem to understand that Parliament is located in the people, and whatever the executive does is irrelevant to the extent that you represent the people more than we in the executive do; and thirdly, he is offering technical solutions. I will skip that. It will take me too long to explain.
I think I will move on to say that if you look at the topic, in fact, maybe, just maybe, it should have been the role of the NCOP in co-operative governance, not just government. So, that links both the sense in which you represent the people and civil society out there and the sense in which you relate to the other two spheres in so far as we are speaking of the NCOP as a national sphere.
You will be pleased to know that I will not be repeating what has been said many, many times today - what the role in the Constitution is for the NCOP. I will skip that, for which I hope I will get some applause, because you have heard it so many times. [Applause.] And if you do not applaud me, I will read it word for word and that will really bore you. And there is nothing wrong with being bored in Parliament. What is wrong with that? We are all human, and in a three-hour debate, obviously one's mind drifts, and so, really ...
Coming back to the point, though, I think there is a sense in which we must understand too, that since 1996, there has been no major intergovernmental dispute that has been taken to a court for settlement. It is partly because the NCOP is here, and partly that the three spheres have some scope to address those issues through a structure like this and fulfil what Chapter 3 of the Constitution requires of us in the three spheres - that we do not use the courts and we settle disputes through intergovernmental mechanisms and processes, one of which is, of course, the NCOP.
Chairperson of the NCOP, I welcome your proposal that the NCOP should set up specific committees, as I understood you to say, to have scrutiny and oversight over how intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance is working. We think that is a wonderful idea. We also think that with the National Planning Commission and the developmental role that we all have to play, the NCOP is again reinforced in the need for it to play an active role in intergovernmental relations and co-operative governance.
I will skip some of these very ... I want to quote to you how we should never write in government. What does this actually mean? The person who helped me with the speech - and I have taken only chunks of it, mercifully - reminds us that the 2007 guide says that "IGR is all about complex and interdependent relations amongst three spheres of government as well as the co-ordination of public policies amongst national, provincial and local government". This is very wordy. Basically, it was far more clearly set out, I think, by many members of the House.
In the 1999 audit we speak of the following:
... an interacting network of institutions at national, provincial and local levels, created and refined to enable the various parts of government to cohere in a manner which is appropriate to its institutional arrangements... It is an evolving system of institutional co-operation that seeks to address the relations and quality ...
These are many words, actually. It can be easily simplified by explaining - and especially to our friend, Mr Harris - that intergovernmental relations are evolving all the time. I think the NCOP is poised now, more than ever before, to play a very effective role. [Interjections.] Has my time expired?
Chairperson, on a point of order: Will the Deputy Minister take a question? Thank you.
I will take question providing it is precise.
It is very concise. In the light of your harsh criticism of your own speech writer, will you consider firing the person, and writing your own speeches?
If you listened carefully, I said that the speech writer took texts out of two documents, and yes, I think government officials should not write like that. So, at least we agree on one thing, though you misunderstand, because you did not pay keen enough attention to what I actually said. It is not the speech writer, it is the person who drew notes from government documents. We should not write like this. I have gone on record saying it repeatedly. It can actually be simplified in five or six words, and the members of the House - not you, though - were much clearer in what they said than what the government officials are saying.
So, yes, I have no doubt that in your provincial government and in your municipality they are actually even worse. However, the point is that civil servants the world over ... I will not take your question, if that is what you are asking, because I want to deal with issues that are more relevant. Thank you. But he is entitled to ... Yes.
Madam Chair, would you please ask the speaker to speak through you and not speak directly to the members of the House?
Indeed, I will do exactly that. Thank you very much, that is no problem.
I would like to draw your attention to what the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs is actually doing, because we think you are playing, and will play, a crucial role in this regard. We are processing the first drafts of legislation dealing with interventions - national intervention in the provinces in terms of section 100, and provincial intervention in terms of section 139 in the municipalities. We are engaging with the SA Local Government Association. We will engage even before we bring the Bill to Parliament, maybe with senior officials of the NCOP, and look at this Bill ...
Chairperson, I just want to ask the hon Deputy Minister if it is true that the leader of the ANC Youth League does not agree with his policy position on what he has just stated?
Thank you. That is a facile question. It is incoherent, as well. You can speak to me after this meeting. [Laughter.]
As one or two speakers in this House said, the issue, quite simply, is that we are seeking to ensure that we do not intervene in municipalities, Madam Chair, when the municipalities are almost on the brink of disaster. We need early warning signals, and so on, and we need intervention that is more pre- emptive. The intention of the Bill is not to disempower municipalities, not to take away any powers and functions, but precisely to empower municipalities by ensuring that the national and provincial spheres intervene more actively.
If you look at the community protests that have been spreading throughout the country this year, they are not the failure of local government alone. They are ultimately the failure of the co-operative governance system as a whole and, to some extent, it reflects on the NCOP, too. We are pleading with the NCOP to play a more active role in that regard. You do, in fact, play that role, but we are saying you should do so even more actively than you have been doing. I know the chair of the committee that has oversight over us has been visiting the municipalities, and we are very grateful for that. However, between the committee and ourselves, we need to be more like activists - both you as Parliament, and we, as the executive - in seeing early signs, also, of municipalities that are about to dissolve, as it were.
So, we will be introducing this Bill. We are very keen to engage with you. In fact, before the Bill is formally channelled through the parliamentary process, we will have started that discussion, as we have done with your chairperson in a certain structure of your committee that does oversight over us. We hope to bring such legislation before the end of the year which, I am sure you will be very keen to know, enhances your co-operative governance and intergovernmental role.
We also have a process under way at the moment, a Green Paper on co- operative governance, that will hopefully be completed by the end of this year or early next year. And there again, the role of the NCOP is quintessentially important. Without you, this system of co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations will not work.
We know there are criticisms of the role of the NCOP. Councillor Johnson referred to them, and so on. There are people who argue that the NCOP is subordinate to the NA. In fact, there are members of the NA who also see the NCOP as inferior. I think these issues should be challenged.
Ultimately, the NCOP's credibility will reside not in this or that interpretation of the law or the Constitution, but in its activism. And in this term, one has noticed that the NCOP is being more active. Obviously, the more active the NCOP is, the more the NA, the people and civil society out there will take it seriously. But we, as the co-operative governance Ministry, are especially keen that you play the role that the Constitution and legislation provide for you. Of course, we have passed the Intergovernmental Relations Act, but there are weaknesses in it and we need to review it. As part of the co-operative governance Green Paper, that is one of the things we will seek to do.
We want to be very clear, though. Part of the aim of fine-tuning, entrenching, and consolidating the system of co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations is to simplify the system and to ensure that we do not, with the changes we mean to make in consultation with you and other stakeholders, bureaucratise it. We want an activist system of intergovernmental relations, which requires both the executive and the legislature - and not least the NCOP - to acknowledge that, ultimately, it is the people that decide their own destiny. We are merely their representatives, and those of us who are deployed in the executive also need to understand that very clearly.
Therefore we need to engage more with the NCOP than we might have been doing until now, and, as the executive, to take it more seriously than we have been doing. It works both ways, as I said earlier, comrades and friends. If the NCOP plays a more activist role, we, as the executive, are obliged to take it more seriously.
So, as has been raised in this meeting, in this discussion, and having moved on, I also want to stress the crucial role that you have in intergovernmental fiscal relations.
My time is fast running out and I have less than two and a half minutes left, so I will focus very quickly on one further aspect which I think is crucial. It is to say that the reason why we, too, are forced to entrench our co-operative governance system and intergovernmental relations is precisely that we are committed to a developmental state. The two are mutually related. For those of you who might be sensitive to it, they are dialectically interrelated, not in a crude sense, but the one feeds into the other. If we have a stronger co-operative governance system, it creates the conditions for a developmental state, and the more we forge a developmental state, the more the conditions are created for a strengthened co-operative governance system.
Securing co-ordination and co-operation across the spheres is actually a challenge all over the world, not just in South Africa. We are a young, emerging democracy. But if you look at some of the works that I have sometimes browsed through about how governments elsewhere in the world work in the established democracies of the United States - the biggest democracy you can think of - or India, and so on, it is very difficult to secure co- operation with the silo mentality.
So, we must not be too hard on ourselves. On the other hand, we cannot be complacent. We have challenges the USA and other countries in the developed world do not have. We are simply saying that these five years are do-or-die years. If we do not develop our country substantially, if we do not significantly advance service delivery and development, the people out there are going to become increasingly cynical about government and all of us, whichever political party we come from.
We have had this debate now. So what? Where do we go from here? As the co- operative governance Ministry, we are especially keen to see what the outcomes are. The NCOP Chair suggested in his initial input - and I apologise that I was a few minutes late, but if I tell you why after this meeting, you will understand fully - that we are very keen to see what the outcomes are.
Let us not just have this debate, as government and Parliament often do, and have nothing come of it. Two years from now, we may have yet another debate but there is no movement forward. If, indeed, we have another debate, I suggest it might be in 18 months' time or a year from now, although it is only a broad suggestion I can make. And then we can review how far we have come between this debate now and the next debate. But there should be some outcomes.
There are some practical issues that have arisen today, like the sort of things Councillor Johnson raised. There are other issues, like the NCOP Chair raising this committee idea which I think the NCOP should actually apply its mind to.
There is a certain party whose name I will not mention, which is turning 100 very shortly and which is having a major conference of over 2 000 delegates in late September. There is an issue there. These issues can be taken there to get some mandate in a democracy. It is the majority party that guides government. So, hopefully, some of these issues will be taken up there. Finally, I can say that we have now reached a critical juncture and we must deliver. I thank you very much for a very interesting debate. Thank you, indeed.
Thank you very much to all the people who took part in this debate.
Debate concluded.