Mr Chairperson, I once more thank the hon member, in this case for asking this question. We say that the obligation and authority to plan human settlement development vest with local government throughout the country. This obligation and authority stem from the provisions of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act of 2000 and the Housing Act of 1997. Section 26(c) of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, Act 32 of 2000, prescribes that every municipality should formulate a spatial development framework, SDF, as part of its integrated development plan.
The design of urban development plan strategies is furthermore directed by overall national and provincial spatial development plans that ultimately impact on the integrated development plans of municipalities.
So, in terms of section 9 of the national Housing Act of 1997 every municipality must, as part of the municipality's process of integrated development planning, take all reasonable and necessary steps within the framework of national and provincial housing legislation and policy, and ensure that inhabitants in its area of jurisdiction have access to adequate housing on a progressive basis. Let me stop at this point. Thank you.
Thank you, Deputy Minister. Do you have any follow-up questions, hon Mncube?
No, thank you. I would ask the same.
Position regarding conducting of on-site audit of resident owners of RDP houses, and achievement of delivery targets
42. Mrs E C van Lingen (DA) asked the Minister of Human Settlements:
(1) Whether his department has conducted an on-site audit of resident owners of the Reconstruction and Development Programme, RDP, houses in all municipalities since the inception of the housing beneficiary occupancy audit in 2008; if not, why not; if so, (a) what were the results, (b) how many RDP houses have been (i) sold by the original owners and (ii) transferred with the Deeds Office;
(2) whether all provinces have reached the national targets to deliver on RDP houses since 1 April 2010 up to the latest specified date for which information is available; if not, (a) why not and (b) what are the reasons in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details? CO285E
Thank you, hon member Van Lingen, for the question. Our response is as follows.
No, the national department has not conducted an on-site audit of resident owners in any of the provinces since the housing beneficiary occupancy audit, initiated in 2008. The study initiated in 2008 covered 262 668 housing units, representing 10% of all housing units completed between April 1994 and June 2008, across seven of the nine provinces. All district municipalities were represented.
Although the study needed to cover 262 668 - that is 10% - no suitable bids were received from the Eastern Cape and the Northern Cape. The sample of these two provinces, representing together 55 590 of the total of 262 668, was scheduled to be conducted during the 2010-11 financial year, but due to insufficient funding could not proceed.
So, in terms of the findings, 53% of the occupants are approved beneficiaries. For example, it was 68,9% in Gauteng, 47,4% in the Western Cape, 59,7% in KwaZulu-Natal and 60,2% in the Free State. This means that the occupant's identity number and name are registered on the housing subsidy system as those of an approved beneficiary who received the housing subsidy from the government.
Of the approved beneficiaries, 34% are occupying the houses allocated to them in terms of the housing subsidy scheme, which is, therefore, a perfect match. This means that since being allocated a house, these beneficiaries have never relocated or given their houses to their relatives or children. So, they are still the same people who were living in those houses. The balance, 19% of the occupants, cannot be matched with the houses approved to be allocated to them in the housing subsidy scheme. Therefore, the variation there is 19%. I thank you.
Mr Chairperson, I thank the hon Minister. My question is: If the Eastern Cape and the Northern Cape have not been done in this regard, what are the plans for the future?
We are of the view that that still needs to be done. It is in our plans, because we definitely want to have an understanding as to whether the houses that those people are occupying are the houses that are for intended beneficiaries. This is so that if we find that there are a number of discrepancies, we can deal with those discrepancies. Therefore, it is critical for us to do those two provinces as well.
Chairperson, I got very excited because I got some of the results in her answer to this question and the Minister was right on target, but I am not so sure that the Minister answered the second section of the question.
About the national targets having been reached, hon Deputy Minister?
You are right - let me answer the second part of the question. Regarding the delivery of housing units since April 2010, the provincial human settlements departments managed to deliver 98,1% of the target of the 2010-11 financial year. The preliminary evaluation for 2011-12 indicates a delivery of 83,2% for the relevant financial year.
The details are as follows, hon member. In the Eastern Cape, the 2010-11 figure was 49% and 2011-12 was 81,8%; in the Free State, for 2010-11, it was 96,4% and 2011-12 it was 98,3%; in Gauteng, for 2010-11 it was 75,8% and for 2011-12, it was 65,6%; in KwaZulu-Natal, for 2010-11, it was 84% and for 2011-12 was 86,3%; in Limpopo, for 2010-11, it was 101% and for 2011-12, it was 101,6%; in Mpumalanga, for 2010-11, it was 1,1% and for 2011-12, it was 74,1%; in the Northern Cape, for 2010-11, it was 183% and for 2011-12, it was 105,8%; in the North West, for 2010-11, it was 105,1% and for 2011-12, it was 91,3%; and in the Western Cape, for 2010-11, it was 86,1% and 2011-12, it was 87,5%.
Position regarding priority of accelerated delivery of housing opportunities
52. Mr S H Plaatjie (Cope) asked the Minister of Human Settlements:
How does his department reconcile his reply to question 296 on 28 March 2012 in the National Assembly regarding the free provision of housing with the priority of accelerated delivery of housing opportunities? CO296E
Chairperson, we thank the hon member for asking the question. Our reply is as follows. The priority of accelerating the delivery of housing opportunities requires that a comprehensive set of programmes with required targets and outputs must be achieved by the state in conjunction with society, including business and communities.
The set of programmes includes the provision of infrastructure and basic services to all households, as well as improving access to land and finance by the state, society and individual households to ensure that the socioeconomic goals set by government and the state are achieved.
The provision of free basic housing is but one programme funded and implemented by the government as Human Settlements' function, so we have no illusion or thought that we will stop this programme as yet, because there is still a need out there. Thank you.
There is just one other aspect, Chair. I just want to find out from the Deputy Minister if this initiative is intended to assist her department in achieving their Millennium Development Goal to eradicate informal settlements by 2014. I just want to find that out from her.
Chair, because of the growing, rapid urbanisation thus far, we understand that the upgrading of informal settlements in Outcome 8 is our priority. We are also looking at the fact that 2014 is just around the corner and we have no illusion that we will be able to achieve this goal by that time. However, what we are encouraging municipalities to do is to fast-track informal settlement upgrading. With an injection from government by way of the urban settlement development grant - which is four times the municipal infrastructure grant - we hope that we will be able to go towards that target, although not necessarily achieve it, because the programme is very demanding at the moment. Thank you.
Particulars regarding applications by organisations for departmental subsidies
38. Mr M J R de Villiers (DA) asked the Minister of Social Development:
(1) What is the (a) number and (b) percentage of organisations which (i) have applied for subsidies to her department and (ii) were successful from 1 January 2012 up to the latest specified date for which information is available;
(2) whether successful organisations have received or will receive the full amount they applied for; if not, why not; if so, what are the relevant details;
(3) whether any steps will be taken to assist the unsuccessful applicants; if not, why not; if so, what steps?
