Chairperson, hon Minister, hon Members of Parliament, "no person may unlawfully and intentionally or negligently commit any act or omission which pollutes, or is likely to pollute, a water resource". This is one of the many offences laid out in the National Water Act, Act 36 of 1998, the foundation of water governance in South Africa. Legislators in this House passed this Act more than a decade ago, with the full expectation that it will be implemented. Notwithstanding the Minister's commitment today to crack down on water transgressors, there are literally dozens of municipalities in this country that place the environment and our people at risk through the discharge of sewage into our water courses, or directly into our streets.
The Department of Water and Environmental Affairs seeks compliance with the National Water Act by attempting to persuade transgressors. And yes, the Act does allow for the provision of notices and directives to allow a transgressor to rectify the noncompliance. But the big stick of criminal charges against municipalities that continually transgress is being avoided by the department. In reply to DA parliamentary questions, the Minister told this House that in 2009 at least 40 municipalities were issued with section 19(3) notices for polluting the environment. In some cases, the municipalities do not respond and they have to be reminded by the department, while in other cases their responses, which should contain substantial remediation plans, are simply inadequate.
Consider the case of Madibeng Municipality in North West province, where the spillage of sewage into the Hartebeespoort Dam has become a persistent problem. A municipal official from Madibeng is on record as saying that local residents will just have to get used to sewage spillages, because there is no money to buy pumps or repair existing pumps. There are apparently several criminal charges that have been laid against the municipality at the Hartebeespoort police station for leaking sewage, but it is understood that the local police do not have an appetite for enforcing environmental laws.
A DA councillor, Eddie Barlow, has laid charges against the same municipality for, among other things, pollution of the Crocodile River and the streets of Brits. The outrage from residents of this municipality over water supply and water-quality issues is substantial. There are many involved community groups who are prepared to work with the municipality to solve the problems. But the municipal officials lurch from precipitating one environment disaster to the next. Using the persuasive clauses of the National Water Act in Madibeng does not appear to be working. In Madibeng, a criminal prosecution should be pursued.
It will be interesting to see what happens in the case of eight current and former officials of Matjhabeng Municipality in the Free State, who have been charged under the National Water Act for not attending to persistent and ongoing pollution events. This case is before the court, following charges by, among other people, DA member of the provincial legislature, Peter Frewen. I hope a precedent can be here, and that it will serve as a wake-up call to municipal managers around the country.
The DA welcomes the earmarked amount of R5 million in the budget for setting up a dedicated compliance monitoring and enforcement unit. We trust that this unit, which will presumably be the home of the Blue Scorpions, will provide the necessary capacity for dealing decisively with offences under the Act.
I note as well that the Minister has said that there are now 14 accredited water inspectors. This is far too low, Madam Minister, considering that in the environment department there are 960 environmental management inspectors.
Entities which extract water require a water-use licence under the National Water Act. In a reply to a DA parliamentary question last year, the Minister revealed that 104 mines in South Africa are operating without a valid water licence, the majority of which are in Limpopo. The DA welcomes the Minister's commitment to rectifying this situation, and, admittedly, the backlog has been reduced since then. But what I cannot understand is why operations at these mines are not suspended, or indeed why they are allowed to start in the first place.
I understand there is now a process whereby the Department of Water and Environmental Affairs and the Department of Mineral Resources are working on a co-operative authorisation, and it is noted that the Regulations on the Use of Water for Mining are out for public comment at the moment. It must be stressed, however, that every mine must have an integrated water management plan before a water licence can be issued. Further, every effort must be made by the department to ensure that it does not deviate from its own Best Practice Guideline on Water Management Aspects for Mine Closure, which is not currently happening.
The threat that mining poses to our water courses is substantial. One only needs to look at the decanting of acid mine water in the West Rand to understand the legacy of mining. And while we debate here today, the acid mine water in the central basin is rising steadily to the surface and, if left unattended, will wreak havoc in the City of Johannesburg. The DA welcomes the Minister's recent financial commitment of R6,9 million to begin dealing with the decant in the West Rand. It must be said, however, that the decanting has been occurring since 2002, and so the intervention is rather late.
The DA urges the Minister to commit her department to dealing with the eight years of environmental damage caused by the decanting in the area, and to assist in the rehabilitation of the Robinson Lake, which contains uranium levels 40 000 times above uranium background levels. Also, the Minister should commit to addressing the acid mine drainage that is flowing in the Zwartkrans Compartment, which threatens the Cradle of Humankind and the drinking water of 11 000 people.
Chairperson, besides the threat that acid mine drainage poses to water quality, the department must respond decisively to the problem of eutrophication and endocrine-disrupting compounds in our water resources. Our eutrophication levels are among the highest in the world, and there are at least 19 major dams that are either eutrophic or incipient eutrophic. Eutrophication has implications for economic development and drives up production costs, not to mention the severe impact it can have on our population, which contains a high number of people with severely compromised immune systems. We need to rebuild our scientific capacity at a national level to deal with these problems. The department must realise that engineering solutions alone are not adequate in this regard and that a new wave of scientifically informed thinking is required. Last week, on the same day that the World Bank was deliberating over whether to grant Eskom a loan for Medupi, I was in Lephalale, only a few kilometres from the Medupi building site. My colleague, Annette Lovemore, and I met with representatives of Eskom, Exxaro, AgriSA, and the local chamber of commerce to discuss the implication of Medupi and the proposed Kusile and Sasol plants. These plants have the potential to wreak havoc on water users in the area. On average, 1 000 MW of installed coal power uses the equivalent amount of water of more than 120 000 households. Medupi has a 95% assurance of supply from the department, which suggests that when times are tough, competing water users will be negatively affected.
Madam Minister, the farmers in this area, many of whom have water rights for at least the next 15 years, are justifiably concerned about this situation. Their farms cannot exist without water. It is important that the department addresses this issue and, in addition, meets with the affected farmers to discuss the issue of compensation for rights that may have no guarantee of being realised.
Water boards perform a valuable role in South Africa. They pull together various water resources in an area and ensure that the water is purified. The performance of water boards is mixed. Namaqua had a negative nett profit of 176% last year, while Botshelo had a debt rate ratio of 217%. What is most shocking is that, in reply to a DA parliamentary question, the Minister revealed that, at the latest date for which information was available, R1,2 billion was outstanding by municipalities to water boards. This figure is higher than the R1,1 billion that was outstanding on 31 July 2009. For example, Bushbuckridge had over R151 million owing to it, of which R147 million was arrears.
Madam Minister, please ensure that the National Treasury, which has a mandate to mediate between water boards and municipalities in terms of section 44 of the Municipal Financial Management Act, puts pressure on municipalities to pay their outstanding debts. Punitive measures should be taken against municipalities that are tardy in paying.
The department has begun a process of reviewing the water tariff regime. We know that a substantial portion of the water infrastructure is in a poor or very poor condition. Realistically R1 billion needs to be allocated to maintenance of infrastructure per year for the next 10 to 12 years. But only approximately R350 million is devoted to it in this year's budget. The department tells us that there is a R2,6 billion shortfall on the water trading account, which is no doubt a warning that water users can expect a significant upward readjustment of tariffs in the future.
Madam Minister, you are the champion of this review, and we urge you to consult widely and to make use of the brightest minds in completing the project. The hard-pressed consumer cannot be expected to deal with another Eskom-like tariff price hike. The DA supports the establishment of an independent regulator that will set water tariffs. I thank you. [Applause.]