(1) What (a) is the total number of technical advisors who are currently deployed by the National Treasury under Programme 8 and (b) is the name of each (i) municipality and (ii) provincial department to which each technical advisor is currently deployed?
(a) There were 82 MFIP technical advisors deployed under the Municipal Finance Improvement Programme (MFIP) as at 30 August 2019.
(b) Attached kindly find annexure ‘A’ which details the deployment of the 83 technical advisors per municipality, National Treasury (NT) and provincial treasuries (PTs).
(2) whether he has found that there is any improvement as a result of Programme 8 with respect to the financial management of the specified municipalities and provincial departments; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
The MFIP III context
The current phase three of the MFIP, which commenced on 1 April 2017 and ends 31 March 2020, is a strategically-driven programme of technical assistance aligned to the six Local Government Financial Management (LGFM) game changers, viz. funded budgets, revenue management, mSCOA implementation, asset management, supply chain management and audit outcomes. The overall strategic goals of the MFIP are to facilitate improved local government financial management capacity, enhanced budget and financial management practices and improved audit outcomes through the provision of direct technical capacity support.
Accordingly, the MFIP III is designed to build the institutional and technical financial management capacity of the National Treasury (NT), provincial treasuries (PTs) and Municipalities. This is mainly achieved through the placement of technical advisors (TAs) within the MFMA support units of national and provincial treasuries, and the Budget and Treasury Offices (BTOs) of municipalities.
Almost 50% of the TAs were sourced by November 2017 with the remaining TAs sourced between January 2018 and August 2019. It should thus be noted that the actual date of deployment is directly associated with the extent of improvements shown.
Has there been any improvement as a result of MFIP with respect to the financial management of the specified municipalities and provincial departments? If yes, provide some details:
Yes, there has been improvement, in some of the following financial management areas:
2.1 Supply Chain Management
a) Capacitation of Councillors specifically in dealing with Unauthorised Irregular Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure (UIF&W) which has resulted in some municipalities that did not have functional MPACs establishing such committees.
b) Establishment of Disciplinary Boards in most of the municipalities now monitoring implementation of the implementation of this reform.
c) Evaluation for alignment of SCM Policy to the legislation and reforms resulting in municipalities increasingly complying with applicable regulations. There has been a marked decline in the utilisation of SCM regulation 32 which was a major source of irregular expenditure for municipalities.
2.2 Audit outcomes
a) Most municipalities with Municipal Advisors improved or retained their previous audit opinions in the 2017/18 financial year, as outlined below:
2.3 Asset management
2.4 The following are some of the key institutional and technical factors that contribute to areas that do not show the requisite improvements?
(3) Whether the progress related to the specific tasks of each advisor is monitored; if not, what is the position in this regard; if so, what are the relevant details;
Yes, the progress related to the specific tasks of each advisor is monitored by the MFIP Programme Management Unit (PMU) as part of the overall performance management protocols of the programme. The following are the key steps involved:
(4) What is the (a) specific task of each technical advisor and (b) cost to the National Treasury with respect to each technical advisor;
a) Each technical advisor signs a support plan or workplan that details the specific key focus areas, functional areas, tasks/activities and timelines that they will be performing, in accordance with the original scope of work published in the procurement terms of reference. The support- or workplan is also signed by the counterpart at the relevant entity and approved by the MFIP PMU.
(b) The cost of each technical advisor is capped as follows:
(5) Whether he will make a statement on the matter?
The Minister is prepared to make a statement relating to the above responses.