Honourable Chairperson of the NCOP, Deputy Minister of Health, permanent and special delegates of the NCOP, all protocol observed, yesterday, 18 March, the Select Committee of Corporative Governance and Traditional Affairs in the NCOP concluded its two-day visit to the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality where it fully investigated the circumstances under which the provincial government of Gauteng invoked section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution. The City of Tshwane is not only the single largest metropolitan municipality in our country but is also the administrative capital of South Africa. This city
has the second largest number of embassies in the world after Washington DC, and therefore many people across the global village call it their home. Hon Chair, by invoking Section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution, the Gauteng Provincial Government express a cautioned message that needs no other interpretation and the message was that the Tshwane Municipality was unable to fulfil its executive obligations in terms of the Constitution and that exceptional circumstance exist warranting its dissolution.
This intervention was subject to Section 139(3) which calls for the Gauteng government to immediately submit a written notice of dissolution to the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, CoGTA, to the relevant provincial legislature and to the NCOP, and that the dissolution would take effect 14 days from the date of receipt of the notice by the NCOP, unless it was set aside by the Cabinet Minister or the NCOP before the expiry of those 14 days.
During its visits to Tshwane the select committee of this House, which is a multiparty committee consisting of 12 Members from the ANC, DA, EFF and IFP interacted with both the internal and external stakeholders in order to solicit their views and opinions on the Constitutional, procedural and substantive matters relating to the invocation of Section 139(1)(c). During this visit the select committee received presentations from six of the seven political parties represented in council as well as South African Municipal Workers' Union, SAMWU, the trade union, SALGA, the traditional leadership, the youth forums, the women forums, the business federations as well as the civic movements.
All these presentations by stakeholders were proceeded by submission from the MEC of CoGTA in Gauteng, hon Lebogang Maile, who presented the circumstances and reasons which led to the decision to dissolve the Tshwane Metropolitan Council, and this broadly includes the following: That the municipality was dysfunctional, and council meetings were not taking place as a result of disruptions, walk outs and
the unlawful conduct of the Speaker for more than two months. But there was paralysis in the municipality because there is no Executive Mayor, no mayoral committee and no substantive City Manager. But because the council has not established ward committees, this undermines participatory democracy in its affairs.
Hon Maile also indicated to us that since the 2006 post local government elections the city has experienced serious governance challenges ranging from the appointment of the City Manager, motions of no confidence to[in] the Mayor and Speaker, allegations of widespread corruption, maladministration and inefficiencies. That irregular appointment of staff and the unlawful awarding of tenders was causing major financial losses for the city, but the city has serious challenges of water quality especially in Hammanskraal and surrounding areas where its quality was found to be unsustainable for human consumption by statutory bodies. That the water shortage was a high risk for the municipality as it posted health hazards in communities, in schools as well as in the Jubilee Hospital
which had to be closed down and had its patients transferred to other areas. Despite obtaining unqualified audit opinions, the city has accumulated problems of unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditures with no plans to curb them. According to the provincial government of Gauteng, all the above problems have not only placed the Tshwane Municipality in a dysfunctional state, but they have also impeded the municipality from fulfilling its executive obligations in terms of the Constitution. The Gauteng Government stated that in order to address these problems it issued directives in terms of Section 139(1)(a) to address the crisis situation.
Premised on the above, hon Chair, and based on its investigation on the state of municipality of Tshwane and the interaction that it made with internal and external stakeholders, it is the considered view of the select committee that exceptional circumstances do exist to warrant the invocation of Section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution in Tshwane. That the existence of special
circumstances is a special requisite, prerequisite to the exercise of power to dissolve a municipal council. But in this particular case all the remedies to the situation were followed and observed without any success.
Given the collapse of the municipal council meetings, the leadership challenges, vacant position of the City Manager, Executive Mayor and Mayoral Committee, Mayco, the water challenges, the non-establishment of ward committees amongst others, the capacity of the municipality to manage its affairs and to deliver basic services to the residents as well as to provide accountable government for the people of Tshwane was paralysed. Therefore, the select committee submits that the decision to intervene in terms of section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution under this exceptional circumstances is both justified and warranted since all forms of support in terms of section 154 of the Constitution and the directives in terms of section 139(1)(a) were exhausted. All parties except the DA supported this form of intervention.
However, it is also important to state, hon Chair, that the DA's argument is that failure to appoint the Executive Mayor of Tshwane is the cause of failure of the councilors to attend meetings, especially by the ANC, the EFF. That is a problem according to the DA.
Having conducted an oversight visit to the City of Tshwane and interacting with internal and external stakeholders and acknowledging the declaration made by the President of the Republic on measures to combat the COVID-19 virus, the Select Committee on CoGTA recommends the following to the House: that the NCOP approves the intervention in the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality in terms of Section 139(c) of the Constitution; that a seasoned, competent and capable administrator be appointed in the City of Tshwane and be supported by a team of experts with clear terms of reference; that the administrator should fast-track the process of appointing and filling of the position of City Manager; that the member of executive council, MEC of CoGTA in Gauteng should institute a forensic investigation in terms of Section 106 of the Municipal Systems Act on all
allegations of corruption and financial management and table a report to the NCOP and to the Gauteng Provincial Legislature; that the MEC of CoGTA should submit a quarterly report to the NCOP on the status of the intervention in the municipality, including the termination report; that the Select Committee on CoGTA should, in cooperation with the relevant portfolio committee in Gauteng Provincial Legislature, conduct a follow-up oversight visit after the by-elections in order to evaluate progress made in respect of the intervention in the municipality; and that the Independent Electoral Commission, the IEC, should develop should develop an implementation plan on the by-elections elections, taking into account the presidential declaration made on 15 March 2020 on the measures to combat COVID-19 so as to facilitate fair and free elections. Thank you very much, hon Chair. [Applause.]
Debate concluded
I shall now put the question. The question is that the report be adopted, but in accordance with Rule 71 I shall first allow provinces the opportunity to make their declarations of the vote, if they so wish. Any province wishing to make a declaration? Western Cape. Let us start with the Western Cape and then Goyiya and Dangor and the Eastern Cape. In that order. [Interjections.] No, no. Yes, start. [Laughter.]
Declarations of vote:
Hon Chairperson, the sudden rise to have the NCOP certify the Gauteng Provincial Government's intervention in the Tshwane Municipality is nothing short of political exploitation of an independent national legislative body and incorrect interpretation of the Constitution.
Based on the list of reasons provided by the provincial government, the choice of a Section 139(1)(c) intervention is not warranted as these reasons refer to a mix of
executive and financial obligation that the municipality has been accused of not fulfilling.
When it comes to the failure of fulfilling executive obligation at Section 139(1)(b) or (1)(a) or (b) should be firstly be executed. That would see the provincial government either notify the municipality where they have failed and provide steps to amend or assume the responsibility of the executive obligation.
Section 139(5) dictates that necessity for the provincial government to impose a recovery plan should the municipality fail to meet their financial commitments that compromise service delivery, such as the one listed in the notice of intervention. Instead what we have now is a provincial government avoiding their constitutional role by rushing to what seems to them as a quick fix.
The intervention was only referred to the NCOP last week leaving the Select Committee of CoGTA with very little unprecedented time for adequate engagement. SALGA was
afforded no opportunity for engagement before the intervention was issued. [Remarks] They further noted that the dissolution of council and new election could just again result in no party obtaining a majority, risking the municipality with a hang council and no political leadership.
An additional problem with the Tshwane Council is the failure of councillors to attend meetings and elect a Mayor they are constitutionally obligated to. Rather than a dissolution of council, action should be taken against these councillors who contravened the Code of Conduct.
It is further irregular for this council to prioritise the Tshwane intervention over those of other intervention that have been with the NCOP for several weeks, such as Maluti- a-Phofung in the Free State and Mogalakwena in Limpopo.
The NCOP has a constitutional role to investigate whether an intervention in the municipalities and provinces is justified and in accordance with the spirit of our
Constitution and cooperative governance. After yesterday's select committee meeting it is evident that Section 139(1)(c) in Tshwane is not reasonable and not in the best interest of the residence of the Tshwane. I thank you. "Baie dankie." We do not support. [Applause.]
Thank you very much, hon Chairperson. I rise on behalf of the Northern Cape in support of the recommendations by the Select Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs to dissolve the dysfunctional Council of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality in the interest of service delivery to the people of Tshwane.
Our support is based on the fact that the majority of stakeholders in that municipality, both internally and externally concur that the municipality is in a state of paralysis and has dismally failed to deliver deserved services to the people of Tshwane. The continued collapse of council meetings and the excessive political bickering as well as the total disrespect of rules and orders by the
council and the failure to apply the rules, all those are testimony to a paralysed institution that is unable to fulfil its Constitutional mandate.
The fact that Tshwane Metro has failed to elect an Executive Mayor since the resignation of Stevens Mokgalapa is a confirmation of a crisis of the highest proportions. The absence of the Executive Mayor has a ripple effect in that there is no mayoral committee and there is no oversight provided on the administration.
Section 79 Committees have not performed their duties in line with the Municipal Structures Act, Act 117 of 1998. Public participation has been negatively affected by the absence of ward committees, since the election of that council in 2006. This means that the community has been, has never been represented in the compilation of the Integrated Development Plan, IDP. [Interjections.] It is an insult to the people of Tshwane and a clear flouting of the Municipal Systems Act, Act 32 of 2000 in relation to public participation. [Interjections.]
Hon Chairperson, Tshwane Metro has reached a political cul de sac ... [Interjections.]
Can I get an opportunity, hon members. [Interjections.]
... with no room for progress.
Just a minute, hon Goyiya. Can I make a plea that even if you hackle, do so in a way that does not allow for the drowning of the speaker. [Interjections.] Let us not deny other people the right to hear the points that are being raised by the speaker. Thank you very much.
Hon Goyiya!
Tshwane Metro has reached a political cul de sac with no room for progress. The council has not even been able to unite on issues of service delivery. The case in point is the lack of provision of clean drinking water
to the people of Hammanskraal who are predominantly African working class that have been subjected to drinking water infested with worms.
The people of Tshwane deserve better than the raw deal they are now, they have now been subjected to. Therefore, let us allow them to take their destiny in their own hands. We support the dissolution in the interest of the people.
Finally, Chair, we need to dispel the myth that there are attempts to wrestle power. There are no attempts to wrestle power here. There is no outright winner in Tshwane. So, people should not behave as if they have control of Tshwane. The DA was given a favour. Finally, Chair, Amilcar Cabral says -
"Hide nothing from the masses of our people, tell no lies, expose lies whenever they are told, mask no difficulties, mistakes and failures."
So, Chair, we want to support the dissolution of Tshwane Municipality. [Interjections.]
Yes, as he concludes.
Thank you very much. [Laughter.] [Applause.]
Hon Dangor! [Interjections.]
Thank you, Chairperson. The dissolution ... [Interjections.]
Yes, what is your point of order?
In terms of Rule 71 ... [Interjections.]
Just hold on, Dangor.
Yes, hon Mokause.
House Chairperson, I am making a plea. We cannot be subject to mediocrity when these provinces are making declarations. These are ANC failures in Tshwane. So we cannot be told of all these things. They made declarations and that is it. We cannot be subjected to this. [Laughter.] [Interjections.]
That, hon members, is not a point of order but a point of view by a member.
Hon Dangor, please proceed. Dangor!
Chairperson, thank you very much. I rise in terms of Rule 71. The Gauteng delegation supports the report and the recommendations that flow from it. From the submissions by the majority of stakeholders, it is evident that the Tshwane Municipality is non-functional. Consequently, the said local authority is unable to fulfil its obligations of delivering services required to the citizens of the city. The dissolution of the said local authority and the appointment of an administrator followed
by elections at the date to be determined by the IEC is in the public interest. I so submit. Thank you very much, Chairperson. [Applause.]
Thank you very much. Let us proceed to the Eastern Cape. [Interjections]
Thank you very much, Chair. Chair, I rise on behalf of the Eastern Cape to support the report of the Select Committee on Cooperate Governance and Traditional Affairs, particularly its recommendations for invocation of Section 139(1)(c) of the Constitution in Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality.
We base our support on the following, Chair: The city has failed to table the annual report in terms of Section 127(2) of the Municipal Finance Management Act; Section 129 of the same Act compels the municipality to adopt the report;
Section 127(5) directs the accounting officer - which they
do not have- to make the report public so that members of the public are able to make interaction with the report. Chair, the last leg will be to submit the report to the Auditor-General, the Gauteng Finance department and lastly CoGTA at national level. They have failed to do so.
Secondly, Chair, they were unable to adopt the adjustment budget in terms of Section 28 of the Municipal Management Act, which was supposed to happen in February. They have failed to do so.
Lastly, Chair, they have not adopted their draft integrated development plan in terms of the Systems Act of 2000. It is an obligation to do so and to allow members of the public to participate in that, including the traditional leaders. On this basis, as Eastern Cape we are saying we should be taking an urgent decision on the matter, and that decision must be within the prescript of the law. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Thank you very much, hon
member. We shall now proceed to the manual voting on the question and the question is that the report be adopted. I shall now do this, take you through a process of voting and we will follow alphabetical order and go from province to province.
The first province is the Eastern Cape. Please indicate your vote, Eastern Cape. Eastern Cape. [Interjections.]
In favour: Eastern Cape, Free State, Gauteng, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, Northern Cape, North West.
Against: Western Cape
The Council adjourned at 11:38. -----------------------