House Chairperson, chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, MECs of co-operative governance, traditional affairs and local government, representatives of Human Settlements, Traditional Affairs and Local Government, all mayors present here, chairpersons of associated institutions, senior managers, our royal and indigenous leaders, and hon members, it is a sad moment for us to present this Budget Vote at this rare and trying time when the country is laying to rest three of the leaders with whom we shared responsibilities in running this government's oversight and executive organs respectively.
Today, the Minister for the Public Service and Administration, Comrade Roy Padayachie, is entering his permanent place of postlife rest. On Saturday this week, the former Minister for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Comrade Sicelo Shiceka, will be buried. Mom-Flo Nyanda, Member of Parliament, is also no more. These three leaders have run their race and fought their fight and have now reached their final destination, cold, still and voiceless. They leave their spears with us.
I am honoured to present the Budget Vote for the portfolio of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs for the financial year 2012-13. We are making use of this opportunity to account to Parliament and the nation on how we rolled out the programme to address the priorities we set for ourselves during the past financial year, as well as to commit ourselves to implementing the new programme.
It was a bold step, which only the brave can take, for the portfolio to have announced a turnaround strategy for Local Government. It was a journey to a brighter destination, yet routed through rugged terrain, over rocky inclines and sometimes down slippery descents with trap doors that required co-ordination. It was a journey derived from a deep-seated political will to do things differently, with a view to strengthening confidence between the people and the government through effective, efficient and responsive developmental local government structures which are accountable, among other things. If we were asked whether we were on course with the objectives of the turnaround strategy, the answer would be that it is work in progress on this tough journey. More was done; more remains to be done.
Of course, we are on this rough journey at the same time as having the similarly, challenging responsibility of somehow steering the ship in the unstable waters of the transformation of traditional and indigenous affairs.
We identified five focus areas as constituting our agenda of fast-tracking the implementation of the turnaround strategy, in terms of which we seek to evaluate our performance as we commit to a programme of faster implementation. These focus areas are service delivery, governance, financial management, infrastructure development and the fight against corruption.
It has been said several times that local government is at the coalface of service delivery. It is here that the triple challenge of unemployment, poverty and inequality is located. It is here that the practical delivery programmes take place, be it by national or provincial government departments or by private-sector institutions. All delivery programmes take place in the local government arena. The role of the Department for Co- operative Governance and Traditional Affairs in this regard is to mobilise all the actors involved to give support to the local government structures.
We can report that for the past financial year we provided leadership to the nine national departments that are part of Outcome 9, with a view to promoting support mechanisms for accelerated performance. Our observation was that sometimes there is a distinct disconnection in the figures as we present them in terms of the Outcome 9 report.
It is a priority this year to revise the formula and come up with a more people-focused approach so that what we will be seen to be reporting on as outcomes will speak directly to the views of the people. We have therefore decided to hold service delivery assessment sessions, called One for All summits, in all the provinces, where we plan to engage on service delivery questions with all councillors, all traditional leaders and, finally, all civil-society formations.
In terms of the Local Government Turnaround Strategy, we have set ourselves a target to review certain pieces of legislation that are said to be impeding service delivery, The progress report on this point is that we have now identified more than 300 sections of legislation that fall under this category and we are moving ahead to propose reviews.
Yes, there has been a delay in finalising this matter, chiefly because those who identified these laws did not go further than mentioning them. We have put together a team of legal experts to deal with this matter so that we either establish facts, validate the claims and then continue to review the laws, or we do not validate such laws and remove them from the list. We will have to complete this process by August 2012.
When we developed the Local Government Turnaround Strategy after the 2009 report, the situation was characterised by confrontation between the people and our government, with so-called service delivery protests becoming more prevalent. Today, as we give account of our work, we want to state, regrettably, that the country still seems to be experiencing challenges.
People are becoming intolerant of the situation. They easily take to the streets and become extremely violent at times. We saw the destruction of government property and councillors' houses at the Lesedi Municipality in Gauteng recently. We saw what residents at Sunrise Park in Rustenburg referred to as a war-zone-like situation. Even as this budget speech is being delivered, there are reports of confrontation in the Western Cape, the Free State and also in Bushbuckridge in Mpumalanga. We condemn this in the strongest possible terms, especially when some of the issues raised could be resolved without resorting to violence.
Unfortunately, we do not have bold individuals and organisations in this country that are prepared to mention any of the many good things that are being done for the betterment of people's lives in the local areas. Without sounding complacent about our record of service delivery, let me refer to the findings of the South African Development Index, an initiative of the South African Institute of Race Relations. They made these findings during the third update in 2011, stating, "Of the six policy areas tracked by this index, three policy areas showed improvement and three remained the same."
If this does not bear testimony enough to convince us that turning the situation around is a work in progress, we may want to consider the SA Auditor-General's remark that, although there are clear indications that there is room for improvement in dealing with financial management in municipalities, it is not all doom and gloom.
Another important observation was made by the Public Protector in her report titled "Dipaleseng: Glimmer of Hope?" Although she had made more than five findings of maladministration against the municipality, she indicated that all was not lost.
Of course, the record speaks for itself, if we look at the reality. I just want to mention a few facts. Over 85% of local households have access to electricity and the majority of them are in the rural areas. Our housing delivery record shows that over 2,2 million houses have been provided since 1994. More than 95% of households have access to water. Access to sanitation and refuse removal is at 85% and 72% respectively. We have created 93 702 work opportunities through the Community Work Programme and we plan to upscale these as we continue to deliver.
You will remember, hon members, that when the Minister of Finance delivered the Budget, he indicated that this was a programme where we grow as we deliver. When we deal with infrastructure development programmes, we focus on both bulk infrastructure and municipal infrastructure, and this is at the centre of service delivery.
The state of the nation address on infrastructure development introduced a new way of doing things with the establishment of the Presidential Infrastructure Co-ordinating Commission and the identification of the Strategic Integrated Plans, or Sips. There are 17 of them.
Sip 7 deals with the integrated urban space and public transport programme, and we will communicate details on this. We are formulating this Sip and it deals with issues around integrated urban space and public transport programmes. Suffice to say that for now, as part of this programme, R47 billion has been budgeted for the next three years for the development of infrastructure in the 12 major cities. Of course, we have completed the diagnostic report on the state of municipal infrastructure in the identified 23 district municipalities, with a view to rolling out the programme of action through the Municipal Infrastructure Support Agency. It has already been piloted.
This laid a foundation for an effective intervention to turn things around, and it translates into a total of about 105 local municipalities. According to the diagnosis, some of the key findings include the following: noncompliance with legislative Integrated Development Plan processes; no strategies to address land invasion; incompetent chief financial officers in many municipalities; overspending on operational budgets; and the Community Development Worker Programme not being incorporated into municipal operations.
One of the key aspects in the life of government structures is their ability to sustain sound financial management. We have set several targets in this regard, including Operation Clean Audit, boosting the viability of the municipalities, accelerating revenue generation and rolling out the municipal public accounts committees, with 80% of them having been established by now.
We want to be upfront and state here that the main driver of the Clean Audit Campaign has not come clean for two consecutive years now, and that is a problem. That is a fact. This state of affairs compromises the department's ability to intervene and provide support. We have since taken steps and are managing a project in this regard meant to recommend remedial measures by August 2012, after which we believe that we will be on course. We continue to focus on doing things differently through action support.
Recently, as national government, we began working closely with the Gauteng government and the local municipality of Lesedi to deal with issues relating to credit control. Together, we are searching for a solution to what the community identifies as unfair treatment, where sanction on electricity is used as a default credit control mechanism - a practice that is somewhat common. If you owe on water, rates or refuse removal, your electricity supply is cut off. What we are doing in this project is to make sure that the enforcement of bylaws and the activation of other credit control mechanisms are stepped up to address credit control. This will ensure that the revenue-generating capacity of the municipality remains high as we implement the practice of sanctions on service nonpayment in the area of default.
We know that this has generated a lot of interest, as electricity consumption and credit management is one of the manageable interventions. Through the Misa programme, we will build the necessary capacity for the municipality to rise to the challenge. Those who doubt that this is possible, put us to the test and we will prove you wrong.
Mhaka leyi yi lava hi yi teka kahle ku ya hi leswi yi lumbaka swona. Loko ho yi teka hi vuhefuhefu bya matimba ya nkanu wo lomba hi ta vaviseka. Xivuriso xa Xitsonga xi ri "Le'bya nyarhi le'yo, u nga ri ndza yi vona, hikuva u ta ya wela' makokweni ya yona. Ha va twa vanhu va vula leswaku loko va kolota masipala "service" [vukorhokeri] yo karhi; va lava leswaku va tshinyiwa eka "service" yaleyo. Ku nga ri ku loko va kolota mati, kumbe ti-rates [tihakelo], va tshinyiwa hi ku va tsemela gezi na loko va nga ri koloti. (Translation of Xitsonga paragraph follows.)
[We must consider this issue well, according to the merit it deserves. If we consider it in haste, with borrowed aggressive defiance, it will hurt us. A Xitsonga proverb says that forewarned is forearmed. We do hear people saying that if they owe the municipality for a particular service, they need to be fined for that service and not that when they owe money for water or rates, they are sanctioned by having their electricity supply cut off, even when they do not owe money for that.]
In fact, to consider cutting off electricity as a default credit control increases the risk that service providers may not develop an interest in addressing sometimes genuine concerns about quality in respect of the delivery of other services. The debate is on about this issue and it will soon be considered at the national dialogue on local and traditional governance. It is, however, necessary that we raise this issue here, so that we develop an appetite for engagement.
Combined with the revival of the Masakhane-type campaign, it is possible to succeed in this area. We believe that if we, the various actors in the field of co-operative governance, work together, share our experience and respect each other's mandate, we stand a chance of succeeding to the point where the people will have this to say about our municipalities: "My municipality, my service". This includes the actions of political mandating structures. If all of us support our municipalities, then sound financial management for effective service delivery will be a reality. The question of viability is a critical factor in the lives of municipalities. The debate on the municipal demarcation process, which we will soon unveil, will also address this matter.
Good governance is one of the pillars for effective service delivery. In this regard, we want to focus on providing support to ensure that there are reliable systems and a capable workforce. Information technology management in municipalities is fragmented at the moment and, more often than not, we witness solution-based or product-marketing interventions in municipalities. This is an unfortunate development, given that in 1999 we created a vehicle for ourselves, as government, namely the State Information Technology Agency, or Sita. This was done with a view to providing an information technology regulatory regime by co-ordinating purchases to leverage on the economies of scale through bulk-buying and ensure the interoperability of systems for a government connected with itself across the spheres, as well as connected with its citizens.
In partnership with the Ministries for Public Service and Administration and of Finance, we will soon be concluding the required intervention. There is also a need for effective monitoring and evaluation to realise the implementation of human resources management. We have to strengthen the recruitment norms and standards and finalise issues relating to the rationalisation of salaries of municipal managers. We recommit to giving a progress report on this matter towards the end of the financial year. I know that we still have to finalise the municipal regulations to give effect to the implementation of the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, as amended.
There has been a delay in the finalisation of the regulations due to differences arising from the interpretations of the Act and/or serious content issues that became apparent when the Act was being developed at the Bill stage, notably as raised by the SA Local Government Association and the trade unions. We have put together a joint facilitating team with Salga that will report to an appropriately configured forum. It is intended to deal with issues with a view to having the regulations published by July 2012. We could have accelerated the matter, but the reality is that we must deal with these matters without creating loopholes that would cause difficulties in the implementation.
In the spirit of co-operative governance by all three spheres, we want to consolidate the effective use of the tools that we have created to deal with the scourge of corruption in the public sector. The anticorruption inspectorate in the Department for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs will play a critical role in co-ordinating the fight against corruption, without necessarily duplicating the mandates of the other corruption-busting instruments.
The inspectorate will also be capacitated to deal with issues related to the violation of norms and standards in the general administration of local governance. We will unpack this when we address the NCOP, as we present our budget there in the near future.
Let me now cross over to matters of traditional and indigenous affairs. The progress we are reporting in this regard is that the transformation programme is on course. We are working on the National Traditional Affairs Bill and are still committed to tabling it in Parliament by July 2012.
This Bill seeks to review the Traditional Leadership and Governance Framework Act, with a view to creating space for the inclusion of certain categories of persons who may now be excluded, either through a technicality or by design. The Bill seeks to review the National House of Traditional Leaders Act, with a view, of course, to provide for greater participation in that institution.
The Local Government: Municipal Structures Act is also a subject to be considered for a possible review, primarily to provide for the active participation of traditional leaders at the local municipality level.
It is well known that traditional leaders are treated the same as other public representatives when it comes to the determination of salary levels and the provision of the tools of the trade. The determining body here is the Independent Commission for the Remuneration of Public Office Bearers, which was established by the Constitution.
The Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Act is currently being reviewed in terms of the Act that I referred to in an effort to incorporate other categories of traditional leaders who are currently excluded. With regard to transformation work, we have not been playing as active a role as we ought to have in the development of a mechanism in the form of a legal instrument that talks about the administration of justice in the traditional communities.
We know a Bill, commonly referred as the Traditional Courts Bill, is currently being drafted. This is what I am referring to as a mechanism in which we have not, up to now, played a key role.
It has to be understood that the issue of administration of justice is one of the elements of traditional affairs and therefore it cannot be excluded from the activities dealing with issues of other elements. That is why we are getting on board. We have agreed with the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development that we would do that.
As hon members are aware, we continue to provide support in dealing with litigation against the findings of the Nhlapo Commission. We can only say now that we still have a long way to go to put those cases behind us.
I also want to mention that we still have many cases of disputes and claims on traditional leadership. These cases are being considered by the in-house commission, which is headed by Commissioner Tolo. In total, we have a backlog of 1 244 claims and disputes that involve kings, senior traditional leaders, headmen and headwomen. It is a serious challenge that we are dealing with, but, of course, we believe that working together with institutions in the traditional affairs arena, we will succeed.
As a caring government, we feel obliged to take the people on board, so we will soon publish the list of those who raised claims or disputes. We are planning to do so on the day we present our Budget Vote to the NCOP. The list will indicate the claimant, the traditional authority that the claimant represents and the traditional leadership position that the claimant is in.
We are committed to the restoration of the dignity of the Khoi and San leadership and communities, and we are further determined to move faster to close the chapter on the transformation and affirmation of these communities. We believe, and we are committed to it, that come the time when we table the Traditional Affairs Bill, this question is going to be addressed.
We are encouraging all those people who raised issues and all those people who believe that there are still issues to be raised in the area of traditional or indigenous affairs to come forward so that when we conclude and finalise the Bill, we finalise it with all issues having been covered.
Between the Department for Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs and the commission, we established a team to work closely with Treasury, so that we can be in a position to deal with outstanding questions regarding the remuneration of traditional leaders at all levels.
We commit ourselves to reporting on this matter soon. I want to state here that the issue of putting together a team, which we still talk about, is actually informed by the complexities of the issues themselves, for instance, the area of junior traditional leaders, who are commonly known as headmen and headwomen. Thank you. [Time expired.] [Applause.]