Chairperson, before I respond to the questions, allow me to highlight that I am aware that this is the first time that the President of the Republic has come to the NCOP to answer questions from members. [Applause.] I came because I believe that it is important that members of the NCOP have the opportunity to put questions to the President and for me to engage with them on responses regarding programmes of government. I thought I should briefly note this because I do believe in interaction generally. As you correctly said at the beginning, this is an important House of our Parliament.
In response to the question, the main purpose of the President's Co- ordinating Council, PCC, is to ensure the co-ordination and alignment of priorities, objectives and strategies across the three spheres of government and to promote the implementation thereof.
The PCC discusses various issues to harmonise action by the three spheres of government, including those mentioned by the hon member. The improvement of service delivery is a top priority. The fourth democratic administration has emphasised performance monitoring and evaluation and has introduced the outcomes-based approach to monitoring service delivery.
The PCC meeting of 31 March 2010 discussed at length the outcomes-based approach, including the notion of delivery and performance agreements by Ministers and departments.
On 23 April 2010 I met with the directors-general of national and provincial departments and gave clear direction on what we expect in regard to improving service delivery and citizen care.
At the PCC meeting held on 6 March 2012 we received a progress report from the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation as well as Administration in the Presidency, which indicated that the directors- general were working hard at improving frontline service delivery, performance management systems and the general implementation of programmes. The Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation as well as Administration in the Presidency will continue to monitor progress.
At the same PCC meeting we received a report from the Free State province, reflecting on municipalities which were not viable, and which have an impact on service delivery in general. The PCC resolved that the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs and the National Treasury should conduct a survey in all provinces of municipalities that are not viable and make recommendations.
The issue of clean audits and how these were obtained was discussed at length at that same meeting of the PCC in March. Various concerns were raised about audit practices, including consultation with regard to audit outcomes and implications, a proposal for a review of the Public Finance Management Act and the upgrading of financial systems to support the regulatory framework.
The PCC meetings of 29 November 2010 and 29 March 2011 discussed the issue of legislation impeding service delivery, following a concern raised by the Western Cape. Some of the sectors identified as needing attention were land use management and human settlements, and in particular there was the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act, Act 19 of 1998. At the March 2011 PCC meeting, it was emphasised that all departments should study the legislation they administer to ensure that such legislation enhances rather than impedes service delivery. National departments were directed to develop internal capacity to review and amend legislation or to draft new legislation where required to do so.
To ensure follow-up by Parliament, the Department of Performance Monitoring and Evaluation as well as Administration in the Presidency can be requested to provide further information on the aspects that the department monitors to improve service delivery.
I will now allow follow-up questions. I have been informed that Ms Boroto will stand in for Ms Ntwanambi.
Sihlalo, ngithokoze khulu ngokuzikhakhazisa, ngitjho phambi kobana ngibuze umbuzo oyilandelela bona sizikhakhazisa khulu simalunga womKhandlu weNarha owengamele iimFunda ngomlando owenzeka namhlanje ngeNdlini le. Ukusukela ngomnyaka we-1994, kuyathoma bona kube nemibuzo ebuzwa uMongameli wenarha ngemKhandlwini lo. Lokho ... (Translation of isiNdebele paragraph follows.)
[Ms M G BOROTO: Chairperson, I am very thankful and proud, but before I ask my question I want to indicate that as members of the National Council of Provinces we are happy about the history that is being made today in this House. This is the first time since 1994that questions are being asked directly by Council members of the President in this House. That ...]
... is a sign that our government has shown commitment to openness and accountability.
Iveke ephelileko sibuya evekeni ebizwa ngeVeke yeemFunda lapho amalunga avakatjhela iimfunda zawo. Bengifuna ukutjhejisisa ... [Last week was Provincial Week, and members visited their provinces. I just want to check ...]
... with His Excellency whether the PCC has highlighted the need for municipalities to have effective financial systems and to appoint skilful people to senior management positions, such as chief financial officers, municipal managers and audit committees. I am asking this follow-up question because our theme when we went to the provinces last week was a focus solely on achieving clean audits in our municipalities.
Chair, as I indicated in my answer to the question, the issue of clean audits has indeed been a subject of discussion for the PCC. It is vitally important that the manner in which we utilise the resources of government is proper and professional. So, that issue has been discussed and we have taken very serious decisions to ensure that we improve on this. Indeed, part of such improvement is to employ people who are better qualified in the handling of finances. I hope our efforts will bear fruit very soon.
Thank you, hon President. Hon Bloem, do you have a follow-up question? Members, you must be careful, as I remind you all the time. If you ask a departmental question, you may not get an answer. Please ask a follow-up question that arises from the question asked.
Welcome, Mr President, to the very beautiful House that we have now. Three days from today the country will celebrate 18 years of freedom. Three weeks ago I went to Sasolburg in my province. People were showing me Reconstruction and Development Programme, RDP houses that were built in 2003. Up to today these houses do not have toilets. People are digging holes in their yards! Hon President, my question is: Will this programme that you are telling us about today address this? These people are questioning whether they are part of or enjoying this freedom that we are going to celebrate on the 27th.
You are almost doing what I said you mustn't do, but it's fine.
Chairperson, the toilet problem in that hon member's province has come out into the open in the recent past. It is a matter that is being attended to. Certainly, no one will be left out. We are all South Africans and we need to enjoy our freedom together. What the hon member is talking about is service delivery that was started but not completed. It is not that nothing has happened. The fact that there are RDP houses means there was some delivery.
The people should have asked a different question. Put in the manner in which you presented it, it sounds more political. The question should have been this: There are houses here and we thank government for that. Unfortunately, there are no toilets. Can government complete them? If the question is put as if nothing has happened, it is political and the real question is distorted a bit. [Applause.]
Having said that, that matter in the Free State is being attended to.
Chairperson and hon President, in your reply you said that there was a review of municipalities that were not viable. Can the President share with us what the emphasis of that review is? Is it looking into service delivery intervention plans that the government could put into action in those municipalities, or is it looking more into the finances of such municipalities, including the very existence of such municipalities?
Chair, I'm certain the review will take all those questions into consideration. I think it is important that we do so.
What we cannot continue doing is to close our eyes to the reality that there are municipalities that are not viable and cannot do what is expected of a municipality. We need to establish exactly what the problems are. When we have diagnosed them, the next question is how we resolve these problems. We must find remedies. I can't predict the outcome but it must be one that changes the situation or the quality of life of the citizens of this country who live in those municipalities.
Should we retain such municipalities? That's a big question. Do we have the finances to pump in to make them viable or do we do something else? I can't predict the outcome. We are going to work very hard, and whatever decisions we come to we will have to implement.
To me, it is not the boundaries that are important. I think boundaries are done mainly for administrative purposes, although at times people in this country see them as political and hard borders. They are done to ease the work of administration. If certain municipalities cannot exist on their own, we will have to decide - all of us - whether we incorporate them with others or remake them differently.
Do we put in more money, saying therefore that the budget must deal with that issue? What is the logical and correct thing to do? When the report comes out, I am sure it will need all of us to participate and take a collective decision.
We cannot continue with municipalities that are not viable; that cannot pay the debts they owe; that exist only to pay salaries; that cannot do any development; and that cannot attract investment from somewhere. There is no logic to that. I think it's an issue we cannot shy away from.
Chair, through you to the President, has the PCC discussed Operation Clean Audit, in view of the Provincial Week we had, where we found that many municipalities - in the Free State in particular - were making excessive use of consultants? They have received disclaimers for the last six years and it would appear that none of the skills have been transferred to the municipal officials who are supposed to be doing the work. They are duplicating the system because consultants are doing the work that the municipal officials are supposed to be doing. Do you have any thoughts on reducing the dependency of such municipalities to ensure that the amount spent on consultancies is gradually reduced and that there is a skills transfer?
Yes, we have certainly discussed the clean audit question in general and nationally. We have also discussed the question of consultants.
We have realised that a lot of resources have gone to consultants instead of going to service delivery, and we have approached the matter from that angle. We have agreed that government at all levels, from national and provincial to municipalities, needs that skills transfer. You need to skill the people who are employed. We have also discovered that generally speaking civil servants are employed because of their specific skills and profession. However, once they are employed, they employ the services of consultants instead of doing the work they have been employed for. That needs to be remedied.
The Free State is not the only case, but maybe it is a particular case to refer to.
We have discussed the issue in general, that we need to reduce this dependency on consultants. What happens, we discovered, is that people with experience in government resign from government to form consulting companies. Then they come and do exactly the same job. I think this needs to be remedied. We take the point, we have discussed it and we are looking at ways to remedy this.
Thank you, Mr President. Mr Lees, I see your hand is up but we have exhausted the time allocated to follow-up questions.
Monies owed to municipalities by national and provincial departments
2. Mr T E Chaane (ANC) asked the President of the Republic:
(1) Whether the Cabinet or government has discussed the issue of departments that owe monies to municipalities for services such as water, electricity and refuse collection, fire and traffic services, utilisation of municipal infrastructure; if so, (a) what is the total amount owed by the national and provincial departments to municipalities and (b) what are the further relevant details; if not,
(2) whether he will (a) initiate such a process and/or (b) intervene to expedite the payment of municipalities by the national and provincial departments; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details? CO204E
Chair and hon members, no municipality can function effectively on state grants alone, without the additional revenue generated by payment for services. Government departments at both the national and provincial levels must be exemplary and pay for municipal services on time. They should not contribute to some municipalities' becoming nonviable or having difficulty in functioning. Their failure to pay for services does not promote the spirit of co-operative governance required by the Constitution. This is a point I emphasised in my meeting with mayors of all municipalities held in September 2009, at the start of my term as President of the Republic of South Africa.
The matter of nonpayment for municipal services by national and provincial departments has not been tabled for discussion by Cabinet and has not been raised as an issue at the PCC, which is attended by the premiers of the provinces and the leadership of the SA Local Government Association, Salga. As a result there is currently no comprehensive quantification of the extent of the problem on a national scale.
However, in the light of the concerns raised about nonpayment for services by national and provincial government departments, I have instructed the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs to investigate this matter further. I have also put the matter on the agenda of the next Presidential Co-ordinating Committee meeting, which will be held next month.
We are confident that all national and provincial departments fully understand and appreciate their civic duty to pay for services and that they are indeed paying for all municipal services rendered to them.
Thank you, Mr Chairman, and thank you, hon President.
Sinenhlanhla kakhulu ngokuthi sivakashelwe nguwe Mongameli, siyethemba ukuthi uma sikuphathe kahle uzophinde ubuye. [Uhleko.] [We are very fortunate to be visited by you, Mr President, and we hope that you will come back again if we treat you well during your visit.][Laughter.]]
I am wondering whether, in the President's view, the problem could not be easily solved if the people who are accountable - the directors-general and the accounting officers in the departments that fail to make the payments - were simply held accountable. In the earlier question the President explained the performance agreements that are entered into. Could this problem not become part of such a performance agreement and the problem solved quite easily and quickly?
Ngibonga kakhulu, lungu elihloniphekile, ukungiphatha kwenu kahle kungasho ukuthi singahle siphinde sibuye. [Thank you very much, hon member. The welcome I have received indicates that we might come back again.]
The performance agreements and outcomes agreements include such activity, so there is nothing outside of this.
We realised when we came into this administration that if you left government without any proper monitoring, anything could happen. One could be in government for years, doing very little or nothing. In general, performance monitoring and evaluation is aimed at assisting government to function properly.
There are specific areas that we focus on, of course, and this would not be outside of them. For example, we have said payments must be made within 30 days - that is giving a very clear timeframe. Therefore, the system of monitoring performance is undoubtedly going to deal with that.
It is a question of how we enhance and improve it; how we make it more effective. If people are so used to doing things in their own time, it is going to take a bit of time. Certainly, those who are responsible will be taken to task, because they must pay. In fact, there is improvement. We have not yet succeeded in eliminating the problem completely, but there is an improvement.
I am satisfied with the approach that government has taken. No public servant today is just sitting and not working, because this system has been put in place to monitor each and every public servant. The system has become more prominent because it involves people outside of government, such as service providers, who have already been complaining. That is why we are focusing on it and looking at it very seriously.
Central to the issue of money owed to municipalities is monies related to unfunded mandates. We just want to check with the Office of the President whether the issue of unfunded mandates has been raised with His Excellency's Office.
Hon Deputy President! Sorry, hon President! [Laughter.]
Don't worry, I am used to it. I was the Deputy President for a long time. [Laughter.]
Yes, Chair, that matter has been addressed. It has been looked at from all angles as part of the question of the usage of money provided by government. The unfunded mandates, the underspending and overspending, all of those matters have been looked at. Part of what I have just referred to - the monitoring of performance - includes all that. Are the monies of government being used properly and appropriately? Do the people who work understand their task and mandate, the broadness or narrowness of their mandate? Are they able to perform as expected? That includes the issue you have raised. So, yes, it is being taken into account in this process.
Thank you, President. [Laughter.]
Chairperson, I would like to ask the President whether Cabinet has considered that business from government departments to municipalities is government-to-government business. So, is it proper that they should also be paid within 30 days, or can you perhaps reduce the time span? Since municipalities can be considered government, in my view it should be easy to do those transfers.
Chairperson, business is business. Whether it is between government and government or government and the private sector, business is business.
I think that the time taken, the nature of the paperwork and the manner in which you account are the same. It would be very difficult to say that because it is government to government we will apply different standards.
What is important to us is that once services have been rendered, payment must be made within a reasonable timeframe, and we think 30 days is a reasonable time for payment to be made in. Whether it is done with other government spheres or not - because it could be national and provincial government, and municipalities - I think it is important to give people a reasonable amount of time to process the papers and everything.
I am sure that the private sector would also feel aggrieved if government did business differently with itself from its doing business with business, where it took its time. I think we should apply one standard to dealing with all business. That is appropriate and acceptable. Otherwise, it would be unfair to people outside of government who did business with us.
Outcomes of Presidential Nodal Zones relating to poverty alleviation
3. Prince M M M Zulu (IFP) asked the President of the Republic:
(1) Whether the Presidential Nodal Zones, PNZs, which were identified for poverty alleviation have made improvements to those areas; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
(2) whether the PNZ in the Jozini Dam area is being fully utilised; if not, (a) why not and (b) when will the benefits envisaged by the PNZ planners be (i) seen and (ii) felt by the residents of this area; if so, what are the relevant details?