Hon Chairperson, hon Ministers, hon Deputy Ministers, hon members and distinguished guests, on behalf of the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements it is my great honour to present the Rural Household Infrastructure Programme to the House.
Basically the report is about the work done by the portfolio committee in overseeing departmental performance in regard to accelerating service delivery and managing state resources in a cost-effective and efficient manner. The portfolio committee embarked on various interactions and briefing sessions with the department in respect of the above programme.
The main task of the report is to sensitise and seek interventions of the Executive Authority to ensure compliance and adherence to policy legislative aspects. It is also important to inform the House that the report has been discussed with the Executive Authority and the National Treasury in respect of the issues that have been reported on.
Let me give some background to the matter. The National Sanitation Programme Unit, NSPU, was established in 2002, and administered by the former Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Dwaf. The strategic objectives of the programme were to ensure the provision of universal access to sustainable sanitation services; the promotion of effective sanitation practices; health and hygiene; and the improvement of livelihoods.
In May 2009 the President announced that the responsibility for the provision of sanitation would be transferred from the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, Dwaf, to the Department of Human Settlements. In response to the prioritisation of rural development, the National Treasury established the Rural Housing Infrastructure Grant, Rhig, over the Medium- Term Expenditure Framework, MTEF, period. The grant is gazetted under Schedule 7 of the Division of Revenue Act, and is administered by the Department of Human Settlements.
In the provision of on-site sanitation and water facilities to rural communities, a total amount of R1,2 billion has been allocated over the MTEF period. For 2010-11, R100 million was allocated for the provinces. In accordance with this, the department identified 26 municipalities in 7 provinces of the country to implement sanitation services.
Observations made by the committee on the implementation of the programme were that the implementation had made slow progress during the 2010-11 financial year.
The concern was also that having one service provider servicing a total of 18 government departments could lead to inefficiencies and incapability in future.
Under expenditure, the department spent 47% of the total allocated budget. The performance target was approximately 12 000. They delivered approximately 5 000 by the end of the financial year. Alarming projections that the programme will suddenly record a high expenditure of 63% by the end of March 2011, when it initially indicated a low expenditure of 10% by the end of February 2011, bring questions that could warrant the institution of proper audits. Therefore, the Minister was requested to commission an audit of the Rhig expenditure programme.
There was a lack of monitoring and evaluation mechanisms of the programme.
There was also a lack of a risk management plan in the management of the programme, and appropriate measures were not taken to assess whether there would be any risk of an inability to perform on the part of the service provider when the department decided to award the tender to them. Similarly, no appropriate measures were taken prior to agreeing to pay in advance to ensure that the service provider would meet its obligations as agreed. The portfolio committee raised a concern about the lack of system integration on management of sanitation, including procurement processes.
The portfolio committee wishes to express its confidence in the Minister, that he will act diligently and decisively, and use his wisdom. Therefore, the committee recommends the following. The Minister is requested to commission an audit by the Auditor-General on the expenditure of this programme for the 2010-11 financial year, in order to evaluate value for money and whether most of the money has been translated into the final product.
The department must expand the delivery capacity by appointing more service providers to roll out the sanitation programme, as it is one of the Millennium Development Goal, MDG, targets. The Department of Human Settlements should present a broader perspective of the total backlog in provision of sanitation, as well as what has actually been delivered.
The Department of Human Settlements should present a framework and plan to manage the R1,2 billion budget allocated for the programme. Co-operatives should also be seriously considered in the implementation of the programme.
Lastly, in future the department must ensure that the programme is introduced appropriately to provinces. In the developing of business plans, service providers must consult with the relevant provinces for compliance purposes.
The committee requests that the report be considered.
The second report is in connection with Kwazulu-Natal oversight by the portfolio committee, to fulfil its strategic objective from Parliament to oversee the work of any executive organ of state that falls under its portfolio.
The Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements conducted this oversight during the second term of the parliamentary programme. The delegation held a number of briefings with the provincial department and other stakeholders in relation to the roll-out and implementation of Human Settlements strategic plans, projects and programmes, and conducted site visits in the province.
The province indicated that it had threats and opportunities, and these were expressed to the committee. The province further indicated that programmes and projects were confronted by a number of challenges. These were, amongst others, the budget allocation formula, which could be seen as being disadvantageous to rural municipalities.
The province raised the issue of sanitation challenges. They indicated that there were 14 water services authorities and sanitation was part of a cycle. The progress on sanitation was very slow, with very little chance of achieving the targets to meet the Millennium Development Goals.
The cost of infrastructure was also cited as being very expensive. It cost R18 000 per household to connect water pipes, but this varied, depending on the slope on which the house was situated. In some areas, water connection cost up to R42 000.
The following observations were made. Regarding the incomplete houses, the rectification programme has been implemented three times without their being completed. The province reported that rectification was taking place, whereas there was no indication of this and the contractors were not on site. At Imbali Phase 1 hostels, the committee reported the illegal sale of houses. During the interaction with the community, the portfolio committee resolved that the matter was very complex and would require special investigation by the department.
At Impumelelo, sanitation required urgent attention from the department, as the sewerage connections were not appropriate.
There is a lack of adherence to intergovernmental relations and co- operative governance.
No new projects were reported in relation to any of the areas that the portfolio committee visited. Most of the implemented projects were due for rectification.
The management of the beneficiary list is still a major challenge in many municipalities.
Public participation is still a challenge.
The relocation of families from one site to the other, and people's being neglected for many years before their housing needs can be attended to, are also problematic. There is poor quality housing. It was observed that the province was still using corrugated iron temporary relocation units in some areas. The portfolio committee also requests that this report be considered. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
There was no debate.
House Chairperson, I move:
That the reports be adopted.
Motion agreed to.
Report on Rural Household Infrastructure Programme accordingly adopted.
Report on Oversight Visit to KwaZulu-Natal, 15 April 2011, accordingly adopted.