Hon Members, I have been informed that the "to talk" button is faulty and members must please indicate by raising their hands - it doesn't matter which one, left or right - if they wish to ask a supplementary question. I will be assisted by the Table staff to identify members. I would also like to remind members that a maximum of four supplementary questions is allowed. The member who put the original question gets the first opportunity to ask a supplementary question. The first question has been asked by the hon A J Williams. I recognise the hon Deputy President. [Applause.] Findings and outcomes of Public Participation Week
1. Mr A J Williams (ANC) asked the Deputy President:
(a) What are the key findings and outcomes of the government Public Participation Week which took place from 9 to 15 November 2009 and (b) how will issues raised by communities at these events be addressed to ensure that our people's quality of life is improved? NO384E
Mr Speaker and hon members, 85 events were held during the government Public Participation Week, which took place from 9 to 15 November 2009. Apart from Ministers and Deputy Ministers, provincial and local executive members in all provinces actively participated during this period, over and above their usual planned public engagements.
There was, unfortunately, less participation from members of Cabinet than usual, as the week had to be postponed from the last week of October, and many Ministers had already incurred prior engagements. Issues raised included service delivery challenges, crime, allegations of corruption, unemployment, drug abuse and the state of the roads. A number of events were planned, taking into account matters raised at previous public engagements and complaints logged with the presidential hotline.
A particular highlight of the week was the extent to which issues were solved on the spot, as service delivery drives of government took place together with the events. It was clear that government programmes to address concerns in these areas are not being implemented as swiftly as expected, hence the need for constant feedback and ongoing public participation processes of this kind. There is also a need to improve co- ordination between the provincial and national spheres regarding matters of concurrent jurisdiction.
A number of issues raised by communities were attended to on the spot, as some research had been conducted before the events to identify the issues that communities were likely to raise. Those issues not attended to or resolved on the spot were documented for further action. This process is being overseen by intergovernmental structures and action taken by the relevant departments is being monitored through monitoring and evaluation units in the Offices of the Premiers. Overall, provincial directors-general are responsible for monitoring the feedback and resolution of issues raised during public participation events and taking up the matters with the appropriate departments where necessary.
Over and above the strengthening of intergovernmental relations and public liaison structures in all departments and spheres, the Minister in the Presidency responsible for performance monitoring and evaluation will also add impetus to our efforts. This is a direct response to lessons learnt from this and previous public engagements. Government is also emphasising the need to give regular feedback to communities on all issues, whether resolved or still being processed. I thank you. [Applause.]
Thank you, Deputy President. Bearing your comprehensive response in mind, what is the executive doing when local governments fail to implement the Constitution in general and the Bill of Rights in particular? An example of this is that in the recent public hearings on service delivery it came to light on two occasions that the trickle system used to deliver water to the poorest of the poor leads, at times, to a situation where there is no water for the Muslim community to perform their ritual washing before prayers.
This community is situated in Mitchells Plain, and it is here where the City of Cape Town puts more emphasis on their income than on the people's right to pray. This is a clear violation of Muslim people's human rights and a violation of the South African Constitution. By doing this, the City of Cape Town has knowingly taken away the rights of the Muslim people. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker and hon A J Williams, I am sure that I am not expected to answer, because it was more of a declaration. [Interjections.] So, I can only thank the hon A J Williams, because I am really unaware of this happening. Thank you. [Applause.]
Mr Speaker, numerous demonstrations have rocked the country due to government's failure to deliver. In light of this, the ruling party has committed itself to a year of action. Will timeframes be set in each of the cases to ensure that concerns raised will be attended to, especially in Mpumalanga, Limpopo and the Eastern Cape, and how will such progress be communicated to the affected communities? Thank you.
Hon member, the response I gave the hon A J Williams covers this question, because the public participation week processes highlight delays in the implementation of government programmes. That is why I made the point that we need to improve on co-ordination between the spheres of national, provincial and local government, and also to ensure that where concerns have been raised, the evaluation and monitoring point persons in the premiers' offices are charged - that is apart from the directors-general - with the responsibility to ensure that nothing should fall through the cracks, and that where commitments to address concerns are still being processed, such communities should be kept posted at all times. There should be feedback on that. I thank you.
Mr Speaker and hon Deputy President, one cannot fault the response that you have given on how one is going to deal with this matter. However, it is common knowledge that especially during times of election, just before an election, Ministers and politicians cannot resist the temptation of making promises to the people on the ground. What follows is that the promises are not kept. Now, we are glad that you have said that the offices of the premiers would follow this and also the Ministry in the Presidency on performance monitoring and evaluation.
What I would like to know is the following: Is the Ministry in the Presidency already working out mechanisms to deal with regular feedback and ensuring that we do not lead people up the garden path when we make promises, especially like the one made in the area of Jozini, where last year people were promised water and electricity, which is still manna from heaven for them. Thank you, Mr Deputy President.
Hon member, yes, the Minister in the Presidency responsible for performance monitoring and evaluation has been given the mandate by the President to ensure that the implementation of the programmes of action is given effect to without any further delay. The hon member wants to know whether the mechanisms have been developed. I can say that the performance audits are meant to throw up and reveal any delays or challenges in terms of implementation and that is the responsibility of the Minister in the Presidency responsible for performance monitoring and evaluation.
Mr Speaker and hon Deputy President, in the light of serious large-scale service delivery protests, characterised by violence, what has been the role of the different intelligence-gathering agencies in helping government to understand the nature of the problem and, thereby, helping it to be proactive in seeking a solution? Furthermore, are these protests not in themselves sufficient to let government know what it is that it needs to do, rather than to have these public participation weeks, which seem unnecessary?
Mr Speaker and hon member, most of the causes of these demonstrations are well known. Intelligence structures are not really required to gather that information. For instance, in Orange Farm, with regard to the latest protest that happened a few days ago, a section of that community had been identified for the installation of a sewerage system. The work was then allocated to an engineering company, which installed the main pipes as well as the toilets and the systems, but without connecting the households to the main pipes.
This means that that community is still without a sewerage system. That community is well aware that other sections, which had been identified much later and the work allocated to different engineering companies, had their sewerage system installed and it was working. So, whereas they were first in the queue, they are still waiting for the connections to be completed. What really riles is that they know the company that did this shoddy work, and that, since then, it has been given a contract to do similar work in another section of the same community. It doesn't really need an intelligence agency to dig up the information. The community knows and it is willing to share that information with government. Thank you. [Applause.]
Proposed sanctions on Ministers failing to reply to questions
2. Mr M J Ellis (DA) asked the Deputy President:
Whether, with reference to his reply to oral Question 16 on 4 November 2009, he proposed any sanctions to Cabinet on Ministers who failed to reply to questions in the National Assembly in 2009?