Chairperson, let me start by bringing greetings from the president of Cope, president Lekota, to all of you. Chapter 3 of our Constitution sets out the principles of co-operative governance in section 41. I can see when I mention the President of Cope, people are getting hot. That is the President of Cope.
All spheres of government must, however, observe and adhere to the principles of Chapter 3 and must conduct their activities within the parameters that the Chapter provides. All in all, the intention of government has been very good. The problem is implementation. Let us admit that there is a problem. Cope has identified what the problem is, and it is that one hand does not know what the other is doing.
This is a serious problem for service delivery. Our Chairperson, tata [father] Mahlangu, has just mentioned an example of a project in the Free State. If you are screaming, you are screaming and saying that tata [father] Mahlangu is not talking the truth.
On the side of implementation, government, by its own acknowledgement, has been failing very badly. The President's recent unannounced visit to Sweetwater left a bitter taste in his mouth. The fact that an interministerial committee on corruption has been established and the Special Investigating Unit, SIU, has been asked by the President to investigate seven departments or entities is a sad outcome.
Many don't know what they are required to do and many steal what they are supposed to protect. Corruption is a cancer in all spheres of government. All the alliance partners, like the SA Communist Party, SACP, are competing in challenging each other to come clean. The SACP introduced the term "tenderpreneur".
Comrade Vavi went so far as to mention two Ministers, and Cosatu called for a lifestyle audit. Some premiers, MECs and mayors are also being mentioned. The list is long. You can call it whatever you want, but corruption is a cancer. Every day it is in the media, which holds the executive to account while we, who have been given a constitutional mandate, hardly ever do so. When last did we ever really subject a Minister to proper scrutiny? Cope is offering very good solutions. The problem is that people and the executive are not doing what they are supposed to do. Let me mention an example in the debate here. The executive, provincial legislature and local government are under one roof. I can say without any doubt that I have seen the passion in the Chairperson of this NCOP, Mr Mahlangu, who is trying very hard to make this House work. I want to congratulate him. He is very passionate. Cope will always support him in the work that he is doing. [Interjections.] You can get angry. [Time expired.]
Ms G N SWARTBOOI (KwaZulu-Natal): Deputy Chairperson, let me kick off by first apologising for my colleague, MEC for co-operative governance and traditional affairs in KwaZulu-Natal, Ms N Dube. She wanted to be here but, due to commitments, she could not make it.
The President of this country, hon J G Zuma, at the beginning of this year emphasised that this year is the year of the programme of action. This debate offers us a welcome opportunity to deliberate on strategies that will sharpen and unleash the full potential of our government delivery machinery in order to breathe life into the injunction of our Constitution to create a nonracial, nonsexist, democratic and prosperous society.
The constitutional system of governance in our country is one of co- operative governance in which the powers of important functional areas are located concurrently in the different spheres of government. Adopting this system of governance was indeed a remarkable accomplishment of the new South Africa and a sound policy choice, as opposed to the competitive federal system which was favoured by a few. This choice, therefore, cemented co-operative governance as a cornerstone principle of our democratic dispensation.
Whilst one acknowledges that a lot has been done to institutionalise co- operative governance through a framework of intergovernmental relations, the reality, however, is that there is a pressing need to ensure that we move beyond the legislative pronouncements. We also need to ensure that what is envisaged in our Constitution and legislation finds practical expression on the ground by changing the lives of our people for the better.
We are still experiencing poor co-ordination and accountability within the different spheres of government. This has resulted, in some cases, in communities picketing and toyi-toying to show their dissatisfaction with the level of provision of services and sustainable development opportunities. Most of the communities are in the Western Cape. Clearly, this talks to the need to improve the entire government delivery chain by ensuring better accountability and co-ordination. This includes planning, budgeting, implementation, support, monitoring and reporting, all supported by a stronger oversight by the legislatures.
Intergovernmental co-operation lies at the core of the success or failure of our system of co-operative governance. It is our humble submission that the NCOP, by virtue of being the only House that is endowed with the wisdom of public representatives from all the different spheres of government, should play a pivotal role in ensuring that the executive and the government unlock the synergy for collective delivery by promoting and enhancing our system of co-operative governance.
We thank the NCOP for visiting KZN where we, together with them, visited a number of municipalities. We also took Parliament to the people and strengthened public participation. We hope that a similar programme is extended to all provinces, as this has a valuable impact.
The introduction of the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, and the assignment of a new mandate to it, is one sure effort by government aimed at encouraging integrated delivery and doing away with the silo mentality in government. We as legislators have a duty to play an effective oversight role in monitoring whether co-operative governance is happening in practice across the spheres of government.
Being a body of legislators, there are challenges that we must deal with and we must analyse whether they need legislative tightening. Among these are the different standards and oversight mechanisms that apply to the various spheres of government. Yesterday a question was asked about the Public Service Commission. The point that was raised was that whereas this body plays its role with regard to the conduct of provincial and national public servants, there is no such body at the local level. What implication does the absence of this body at the local government level have in promoting the values within the Public Service as enshrined in section 195 of the Constitution?
One of the important issues that we have to deal with is the intergovernmental relations fiscal formula, in particular the need to ensure equity when allocations are made so that they take into account the delivery conditions on the ground. There is a disjuncture in this area because rural municipalities and provinces are granted revenue which does not accommodate topography and the amount that they have to spend travelling to their communities to deliver services.
The allocation of the municipal infrastructure grant, MIG, to municipalities does not include maintenance. Municipalities keep on building and building, but there is no money for maintenance. They also have to commit themselves to using 100% of their MIG in each financial year. When we deal with the appropriation Bills we must address this as it has a serious impact on the intergovernmental fiscal relations issue. Together with the NCOP we must ensure that there is an equilibrium in financial relations among the spheres of government.
To promote co-operative governance and intergovernmental relations in KwaZulu-Natal we have established 10 district intergovernmental forums. We have also established the municipal legal forum, which engages legal practitioners in all municipalities; the peer networking forum, which engages with all municipal managers in the province; and a synergistic partnership forum between the district municipality and the local house of traditional leaders to deal with service delivery matters of mutual concern to both institutions.
The government has made a concerted effort to improve intergovernmental relations with the implementation of various policies and frameworks. These positive developments, however, are hampered by a number of challenges originating from the national sphere of government. In the provinces and local municipalities or governments we have departments that have national competence like, for example, Home Affairs. When people have problems with identity documents, IDs, land or water, they go to local government or provincial government. These issues should be taken into consideration. For instance, it is unfair for the community of Umkhanyakude District Municipality not to have water when they have a big dam known as Jozini in their area.
With regard to the so-called unfunded mandates, the approach in implementing the community development worker programme, for example, gave rise to unnecessary tensions between councillors and community development workers, CDWs, and confusion in respect of functions, roles and responsibilities. In addition, once implemented the responsibility for funding the programme was devolved to the provincial department responsible for local government, without providing for the associated financial obligations.
Again, without arguing the necessity of the occupation-specific dispensation, OSD, this is a measure developed and implemented by the Department of Public Service and Administration, DPSA. There is an enormous impact on the finances of many provincial departments which have to reprioritise their budgets and curtail service delivery projects.
Again, proper planning, consultation and alignment of fiscal resources could have avoided these negative impacts. Municipalities even have to fund libraries, museums and some aspects of environmental health functions. These functions should either be assigned to the local sphere, with accompanying funding, or should be taken up by the relevant responsible departments.
Our recommendations are as follows. A review of the planning and budgeting cycles across the spheres of government is required and must lead to key legislative amendments relating to local government and a restructuring of the fiscal system. There is clearly a need to establish a co-ordinated system for planning, budgeting, implementation, monitoring and reporting, and the system must be outcomes-focused as alluded to by hon Mahlangu. There should be a better allocation of roles and functions to address the fragmented approach and problems with local municipalities.
In conclusion, we want to say good governance is about good co-ordination. We therefore call upon the relevant structures to play their roles in ensuring there is co-ordination. Together we can do more. I thank you