School Sanitation Audit; Education Infrastructure expenditure; with Minister

Meeting report

The Chairperson stressed the importance of the educator and they must motivate the educators when doing oversight. He welcomed the Minister of Basic Education, Ms Angie Motshekga.

Education Infrastructure Grant (EIG) 2017/18 expenditure: National Treasury briefing
Ms Ogalaletseng Gaarekwe, National Treasury Director: Intergovernmental Relations, outlined the challenges provinces faced in not meeting their targets:
• Contractors not being paid on time, which results in them abandoning site and stalling projects.
• Poor contractor performance, which results being delays and poor workmanship on projects. Non performing contractors are not adequately dealt with.
• Some contractors appointed do not have the appropriate grading for the type of infrastructure that is required to be built.
• Delay in receiving practical completion certificate from the consultants, projects cannot be closed
• Community unrest and labour disputes, partly the result of all stakeholders not being consulted adequately.
• Supply Chain Management blockages causes delays on project implementation.  

The conclusions by National Treasury were as follows:
• The EIG is a schedule 4 grant which supplements provincial allocations, however, over the past few years provincial contributions have been dwindling, with some provinces relying almost entirely on grant funding.
• The completion of new and replacement schools in 2017/18 were well below target in most provinces, while the maintenance output performed slightly better. Considering that provincial budgets were almost fully spent, there is a clear gap between expenditure and performance.
• Contractors with appropriate grading should be appointed, and penalties must be imposed when there is non-performance. This has to be made clear in the contract documents.
• Capacitate the SCM units with the required competencies to manage the infrastructure procurement effectively.
• There needs to be proper consultation with all stakeholders, especially communities to minimise the risk of unrest later in the project implementation
• Departments need to ensure the contractors are paid within 30 days so that they remain on site to complete implementation and the projects do not stall because of cash flow reasons.
The Chairperson commented that looking at slides 13 and 14; there needs to be an action plan.

Provincial Education Infrastructure Programme 2017/18: Department of Basic Education report
Mr Mathanzima Mweli, DBE Director General, observed that there is broad concurrence between the presentation by Treasury and DBE.  He spoke on the Education Infrastructure Grant and the School Infrastructure Backlogs Grant saying grants are interventions that are time bound and ideally, for sustainability, an important deliverable such as infrastructure must be firmly located within the Equitable Share and the figures from the presentation by the Treasury clearly show that that is not the case.

He confirmed, from the presentation by Treasury, that the capacity of implementing agents is a major challenge; and it is linked to the performance of the two grants and also in those provinces that do allocate some money from their Equitable Share. These challenges are also located within the line function department such as Public Works and they are engaging with those departments. The implementing agents is a real problem as the Basic Education department ends up focussing on what is its core business, but if it does not address it, then it affects its core business. Due to the measures put in place to fix the capacity challenges, DBE was forced to take over the projects and implement them - instead of being implemented by implementing agents and Public Works.

Provincial Infrastructure Programme:
Mr Solly Mafoko, DBE Acting Chief Director: Infrastructure, outlined the total expenditure per province. Pictorial evidence of the schools completed through the ASIDI programme were shown (see document).
Total spending on the Education Infrastructure Grant (EIG) was 101% of the R10.6 billion. Almost all of the provinces spent their EIG in totality; the underspending was on the Equitable Share. The Maintenance budget was spent quite well too and added that provinces were mandated to allocate not less than 20% towards maintenance with the intention of increasing that percentage so that more money is spent on maintaining schools instead of building new ones. The target is that in the next five years, 60% will be spent on maintenance and only 40% will be spent on infrastructure. The cost of one of the first schools they completed in Limpopo, Molepo Primary School cost around R30 million.

He outlined the number of delivered items against the set targets for the following 21 project types:

New Schools, Replacement schools, Full Service Schools, Provision/replacement of Sanitation, Provision/upgrade of Water, Provision/upgrade of Electricity, Maintenance Projects, Libraries Project, Laboratories Projects, School Halls, Technical Workshops, Nutrition Centers, Additional Classrooms, Grade R Classrooms, Administration Blocks, Provision/upgrade of fence, Provision/upgrade of sport field, Special Schools, Natural Disasters Projects, Guard House, Boarding Schools (see document for deliverables).

With regards to new schools, quite a lot of provinces did not meet their targets but those schools are in their final stages of completion and they will be completed in the current financial year.

He identified challenges for each province as well as the mitigations put in place to address those challenges. Every month, DBE engages with the provinces to discuss the reasons for the challenges and how they can be addressed (see document). The EIG budget for the MTEF in 2018/19 is R9.9 billion going to R10 billion and in the outer year R11 billion.

Accelerated School Infrastructure Delivery Initiative (ASIDI):
Mr Mafoko said 204 out of 367 projects have been completed to replace inappropriate structures i.e. “mud schools,” (although he noted the document shows 202).

A detailed breakdown was provided of the Sanitation, Water and Electricity projects, which are at different stages. With regards to electricity progress, all 21 schools have completed their electricity projects but because they have not yet received their closure certificate, it still reflects as incomplete.

He outlined the expenditure of the ASIDI programme over the years and highlighted that in 2017/18, ASIDI slightly overspent, about 2% over expenditure. This is an improvement as 2016/17 had been only 60%. Since inception, the programme has spent about R9.6 billion.

Sanitation Audit Report
DBE provided its Sanitation Audit Report that was conducted by provinces and is a work in progress. They are working on a daily basis to clean the numbers. Mr Mafoko said their first priority are the schools with pit latrines only and unacceptable sanitation.

The provinces submitted their audit and the DBE team did a costing exercise for the backlog. The projects being run by the provinces in the current year through the EIG and through ASIDI were removed from the costing. The majority of schools with pit toilets are in the rural areas and their envisaged dry sanitation plan for those areas was shown in photographs.

Challenges facing Gauteng and Western Cape are the influx of learners and therefore insufficient sanitation facilities for the many learners. There are many schools in some provinces with low enrolment and these schools have been included in the costing. However, if the schools were to be removed (by being merged with other schools or closed) then there would be about R2 billion less in costing.

On implementation, the private sector has shown interest and they are engaging with private sector to better implement the projects.

Ms Angie Motshekga, Minister of Basic Education, pointed out that it was only after Lumka’s death, did they find in their audit that the non-demolition of old pit latrines is a serious hazard. The issue is prevalent nationwide and the cost of proper demolition is not factored in and they have now had to factor in that cost to reduce that risk. Gauteng and Western Cape provinces are not having enough suitable sanitation facilities due to the influx of learners and overcrowding in those provinces. Northern Cape and the North West have reprioritised their budgets, therefore these four provinces will not be needing assistance. The remaining five provinces will be needing assistance. They are running a huge programme to try and source funds, together with the President and there is interest from the private sector. This is due to there being no immediate funds available to deal with this problem. She hopes that they will be able to roll out their plans by July, at the latest.

Discussion
The Chairperson emphasized that monitoring must be at regional level and engagements of HODs at the different provincial departments must be weekly, ideally. There was no mention of solar energy plans or of recycling of water in the presentations.

The Chairperson commented that the document is to be used as a monitoring tool and that when Members visit schools they need to look at performance using this document as a tool for monitoring.

Mr T Motlashuping (North West, ANC) referred to DBE’s breakdown in numerical figures of the audit in slide 39 and said that the implementation costing plan should be based on those figures. In the implementation plan on slides 44 and 45 those figures are missing. Those figures should be on their implementation plan, as those are their targets – and that would be costing with a rationale.

He commented about a committee visit to a King William’s Town school in the Eastern Cape, which is in a bad state. The infrastructure is horrible, sanitation is bad and the conditions are inhabitable for learners. He pointed out that previously the NCOP had addressed DBE about certain matters such as asbestos roofing. On their third visit to a certain school, the asbestos roofing was still there. At a school for the deaf, the teachers are not professionally trained to teach learners with disabilities of that nature. Both the teachers and the principal do not know the methodology for teaching children with special needs, hence the very low pass rate of below 20%. There was a primary school under construction for more than 10 years now in Mamusa. The school is being vandalized. If contract management was properly dealt with, this would not be the case.

Mr T Terblanche (Western Cape, DA) lamented that it was during their visit to the Eastern Cape when the learner drowned in the pit toilet. There is no running water at the schools they visited. He added that he is impressed with the Department’s exercise in discovering the specific challenges with the toilets but the exercise is only a cost estimate, if not guesstimate. He would appreciate if they could get a cost estimate on a “per learner” basis. This would give them a better indication of what they are looking at in terms of backlog.

Implementing agents come up every single time as a challenge and he suggested that National and Provincial Public Works should be invited to the committee meetings because they cannot tolerate this non-performance or obstacle any further. Procurement / supply chain management is haunting them on a daily basis and it needs to be addressed ASAP.

Mr Terblanche noted the finding that provinces do not allocate much funding anymore from their equitable share and depend on the grant and that that is something the Committee needs to look into.

It is a good thing that the 20% for maintenance is going to be increased because quite often government buildings are in such a dilapidated state and that is also what they saw on their oversight visit.

Mr Terblanche asked for clarity about the mention that there is a lot of interest from the private sector about the sanitation backlog. What is that interest actually and what are their plans?

Mr M Shabangu (Free State, EFF) stated that education is a cause for concern and that things on the ground are not good at all, particularly in the Free State from where he comes. There are too many vacancies at schools, as teachers are overworked and underpaid, so they leave, looking for greener pastures. He asked for the reason of the underspending in Gauteng and Mpumalanga. In the Free State, learners are forced to do matric twice and that the slow learners are not allowed to write final exams – that that is why Free State is always number one. He knows this from experience.

The Department has the highest water and electricity bills and municipalities cannot function due to the huge amounts owed to Eskom; he asked how the Department plans to address this. He pleaded with DBE to remedy the pit toilets which are most prevalent in rural areas. The Education Departments have a bad reputation for paying service providers on time, as a result service providers end up either doing a shoddy job or not doing it at all.

Mr L Gaehler (Eastern Cape, UDM) agreed with the opening remarks by the Director General and asked why only the Education Department is called in and not the Department of Public Works as well. Government’s mandate is very clear, infrastructure should be done by Public Works and it is not right that Public Works keeps on telling them that they do not have the capacity; by now they should. This Department’s mandate is education not infrastructure; they are overloaded. In future, Public Works should also be called.

He referred to the challenges on slide 19 where a number of Eastern Cape infrastructure projects have been put on hold, to avoid over-commitment. He asked for clarity on that. He asked when the Free State’s litigation problem will be solved.

He referred to page 29 and asked if the listed implementing agencies are the only ones, because he is aware of an implementing agency, Mvula Trust which is paid by the Department, but has not been paying service providers; which they have not listed.

He asked whether it is possible to negotiate on the 12% professional service providers (PSP) fees in the draft costing plan because they are too high. He pointed to slide 41 that stated the plan “will draw from economies of scale, by clustering projects, so that contractors from CIDB Grade 6 are utilised. The smaller the contracts, the higher the cost per seat.” He disputed this and wanted to be convinced otherwise. He commented that the state of schools in the Eastern Cape is horrible, even basic furniture is lacking.

The Chairperson pointed out to Members that they must be specific about which school has a problem and the Committee can forward it to the Department so that DBE can give a report back.

Mr M Monakedi (Free State, ANC) remarked that the Department of Basic Education is critical as it is the foundation of the success of the country and therefore its performance has to be exemplary, but it is clear that there are some serious challenges. Non-payment of service contractors needs to be resolved as per the National Treasury directive to avoid unnecessary delays. He asked if there has been any improvement in this in the last couple of months. With regards to supply chain management, it is unacceptable that unqualified contractors are hired. The DG needs to ensure that this does not arise as a challenge. DBE cannot be coming to meetings with this same challenge.

He asked if DBE takes the Foundation Education Phase seriously because the classrooms that were supposed to be built were not built, particularly Grade R as that is the foundation. The ASIDI expenditure fluctuates throughout the years from 2011 onwards (slide 33). There is no consistency and he asked if this meant that there are no clear plans to meet the challenges. He wanted to emphasize the importance of DBE and that, if South Africa wants to implement the policies of the NDP, the Education Department has to lead them in that direction.

The Chairperson said that the public-private partnership (Triple P) is the solution and made an example of schools in the Northern Cape that are being assisted by small mine houses. The government cannot do everything with its limited financial resources. Schools with mobile temporary toilets must be connected and that is a Public Works issue and shows the lack of engagement there. He emphasized the role of the circuit manager who must be the link between the school and Department. Members had to review the role of the circuit manager. There should be an action plan for each of the identified challenges. He emphasized the role of the School Governing Body (SGB) as well as their role as Members of Parliament to visit their local schools, do follow ups and address challenges.

DBE response
Mr Mweli explained that there is a comprehensive report on all the schools that Members of Parliament have visited and that DBE has made the report available to the NCOP Chairperson and they can make it available to the Committee members. DBE has instructed the provinces to develop a plan to deal with the challenges identified in all the schools. That is how they are addressing the complaints arising from “Taking Parliament to the People,” and they have been monitoring the process to ensure that they are responded to.

He replied that solar energy is being used but the solar panels get stolen. Schools in this country get terribly vandalized. On electricity and water bills, the schools are shared with communities who use the school amenities and thus the bills become exorbitant and unmanageable. In other circumstances the problem is with municipalities who take schools for a ride by giving them bills that are miscalculated. However, he acknowledged the challenge and he does engage the schools and principals to ensure that they do not contribute in running down municipalities but rather advance their capacity so that they can serve the schools as well.

On the Triple P solution suggested by the Chairperson, the Minister is planning to invite Business SA to a round table where they are going to pledge towards the sanitation project led by the President. In the North West the mines have already pledged to assist with sanitation.

Losing one child is one too many and it is abhorrent and should be avoided. The pit toilets are still the only means of sanitation in most rural areas but what is puzzling is that these pit toilet tragedies do not happen in the homes of communities and he looks forward to scientists helping them understand this phenomenon. The reason could be a lack of supervision at school but children are hardly supervised at home.

On the rationale for costing raised by Mr Motlashuping, he agreed with him. This is only a preliminary exercise and the next step is for the professional team, with the help of the Provincial Support Unit (PSU), to go to every school and come up with exact costs for what needs to be done. Only after the final work has been done, can they plan with exact figures. The Mamusa school is part of a memorandum that they have received and they are addressing that matter.

DBE meets with implementing agencies monthly and it is caught up in infrastructure while the core business of educating is going to suffer. If DBE does not focus on infrastructure it affects its core business but that valuable time could be used to improve the quality of education. He looks forward to a time when they are called together under one roof with Public Works.

All of his comments are not excuses but until these things improve, they will keep on arising as challenges to be addressed. As a Department they meet and discuss if the thirty-day payment period to implementing agents has been met. The problem is that implementing agencies do not pay the service providers. DBE will follow up and address the agents to ensure the service providers are paid on time within thirty days.

Provinces are trying under really difficult circumstances and he would not be surprised to hear that the reason for vacancies is the lack of funds but the Free State MEC will respond to that. There have been budget cuts in the recent years and a 5% cut in Education is a lot. It can halt a department and as a Department, they are battling to survive.

Mvula Trust was not included in that slide as they focus only on sanitation. It is an implementing agency that has started to perform. They have been paying them on time, as he signs documents that prove that. The issue may be that they do not pay contractors on time.

Clustering projects may require a discussion and at times one benefits from economies of scale when they cluster. He stated that they do take Grade R and the Foundation Phase seriously and that they have included those in the presentation. When ASIDI began they had huge problems as any project at the start, but they have learnt and the programme has also improved.

Mr Mafoko added that the rationalising of schools did have an impact on the ASIDI programme and there were delays as a result.

Mr Mafoko replied about the 12% professional fees, saying that the industry norm is 18% so they have actually decreased and are looking to decrease it even further. It can be done and they will look at it although the industry will not be happy about it.

The projects on hold in the Eastern Cape are directly linked to the lack of sufficient contributions from the provincial equitable share. The Eastern Cape was overcommitted by an amount of around R3 million. The Eastern Cape Education Department was promised a certain amount from the equitable share and they did not get it.

Mr Thembi Matunda, DBE Team Leader: Provincial Support Unit (PSU), explained that the plan is to consolidate documentation at the centre so one can achieve the economies of scale at the documentation stage and that has drastically reduced the fees. What mitigates against reducing the budget is that the schools are generally in the rural areas but the main centres are in urban areas therefore travelling up and down is a major factor.

In the first phase of ASIDI there was a major clustering of projects which looked at Grade 9 CIDB contractors and attracted specifically contractors that were not familiar with the terrain, leading to major terminations of contracts. The lesson there was that because it is time bound, they need to ensure that the contractors given the opportunity to work on projects, are familiar with the terrain and are also able to give the most cost benefit for the programme. They are also looking to subcontracting with the grades lower than Grade 6 as there is a need to balance and find a sweet spot where it will be cost efficient; where the programme will give one a better result.

Mr Mweli pointed out that they have built more schools in the Eastern Cape than any other province. Through the 204 schools built through ASIDI, 98 of those schools are in the Eastern Cape.

The Chairperson said that the performance record of the contractor must be investigated before one chooses a contractor. This has been an ongoing problem as the basics are not done or are not done right.

Mpumalanga Education Department
Ms Nono Maribe, Chief Director: Physical Resources, Mpumalanga Education Department, said that Mpumalanga did not spend all the budget (93%), hence they find themselves in front of the Committee. Their 2017/18 budget was adjusted down due to them not spending in 2016/17. The EIG budget was allocated to different projects. She outlined the projects, how many were completed as well as the money spent on them.

Grant expenditure dropped in 2016/17 from that of the previous year, but there has since been improvement in 2017/18. With the kinds of backlogs t Mpumalanga has as a province, they cannot afford to not spend every cent of their allocated budget.

The challenges faced were accruals and they had to apply for rollovers but they were not allocated due to the underspending. Other challenges included have only one implementing agency which is Public Works. She listed the solutions that they have come up with to address the identified challenges.

Mr Sibusiso Malaza, Mpumalanga Education MEC, added that they are engaging with Public Works to solve the challenges. He emphasized that budget cuts really negatively affect them, it affects their day-to-day operations. The infrastructure problem makes them unable to focus on the core business of the Department, but they are engaging with Public Works to attempt to remedy this.

The Chairperson referred to a speech made by the Minister of Finance in which he stated that provinces need to budget for less, they need to consult with experts about planning.

Mr Monakedi asked if the Public Works delegate might want to comment.

Mr Skhumbuzo Mona, Mpumalanga Chief Director, Public Works, Roads & Transport, stated that in the infrastructure sector, they have a framework called the Infrastructure Delivery Management System (IDMS) which has several prescribed gateways in which emphasis is put on planning, design, procurement strategy compliance with the framework which will assist them as a sector in reaching their targets.

Free State Education Department
Adv Tsoarelo Malakoane, HOD: Free State Education Department, said that in previous years, they have had expenditure challenges due mostly to problems with their implementation agency, Public Works. The province is mostly dependent on the grant and they have since improved due to the work that they have done in capacitating the Department.

He outlined financial performance per grant in terms of expenditure and focussed on four performance areas: completed projects, ASIDI claims, spending and compliance.

Challenges were due to the funding they lost in previous years due to slow spending. Their biggest challenge in the Free State is the overheated budget for compensation of employees (COE) due to Equitable Share cuts; hence vacancies are unable to be filled. The payments that were done on the Occupation Specific Dispensation (OSD) for teachers also contributed. Another reason for the overheated COE was the cross-border problem they face due to Lesotho learners crossing the border and coming to South Africa.

They have a serious problem with Public Works with non-compliance. The Free State Education Department wants to use more implementing agencies as Public Works continues to fail them. He then outlined the impact of accruals.

The Chairperson stated that it is important for the provinces to learn best practices from each other in order for there to be improvement.

Western Cape Education Department
Ms Debbie Schaeffer, Education MEC Western Cape, stated that planning for a lower budget would mean that there would be fewer resources that they need and that cannot happen because they have an influx and they do not have enough money, space and schools to accommodate the learners. COE is also on the rise and that cripples them as they have to keep spending money that they do not have.
The Equitable Share formula is not responsive as it is way out of depth and they need more reliable data, which they have been trying to get from Treasury. The other issue is that there has been a population increase and DBE has done good work on that in terms of the funding.

She reiterated that there is a problem with Public Works’ capacity throughout the country and one of the issues they have found in the Western Cape is the lack of skills with the infrastructure personnel. Cost of delivery is also much higher because of Treasury. in the Western Cape, they have had a small management contractor to deal with smaller matters and arising emergencies and there is a possibility that it may not be approved in the future and they are fighting hard to make sure that it gets approved because it is necessary. They have done a study to determine the difference between professional fees for management contractors versus in-house Public Works staff and it is much cheaper.

She requested that the municipal funding model be looked at, as the municipal costs go up way more than inflation every year while their budget does not. They need to get land for schools and municipalities charge them on market value to build schools and that is not right. There should be special rates for schools.

She disagreed with the Triple P solution suggested by the Chairperson as their experience with it is that it was a hugely complex regulatory environment and it is not ideal.

The other huge risk to infrastructure is the level of criminality they face. They are unable to get around the vandalism that occurs on a daily basis. It does not only affect the infrastructure but also the teachers and the learners as well.

She agreed that they want to support small contractors but at times the small contractors are unable to cope or become bankrupt. As much as it looks bad to give money back to Treasury, sometimes it is necessary due to the constraints they face due to the Provincial Treasury; and they would rather underspend than overspend.

Mr Archie Lewis, DDG: Planning WCED, stated that the original 2017/18 budget increased and of that a total amount of 23.7% was used for maintenance. However, that is far too little to deal with maintenance of their facilities which is one of their biggest challenges in the province.

There was an under expenditure of about 3.6% however it is not money lost; as that money has already been committed and they have applied for a rollover. The reason for under expenditure was due to drought interventions and the remainder was for procurement and placement of mobile units.

Some schools need replacement and that falls under the category of new schools. Due to the difficulty of finding land, they will expand schools by adding classrooms where there is extra land. They do this in consultation with the school’s SGB, agreeing that if they do expand, the school is to take on more learners and they shall provide more ablution services to accommodate the increased number of learners.

Smaller contractors who have been allocated building the smaller Grade R classrooms are struggling. Emergency maintenance is a challenge and that has partly to do with crime in the schools. Fencing is also a problem as it gets stolen but now they have chosen to use the “ClearVu” fencing which is more difficult to steal and to sell because of the nature of the material; which is quite expensive (about R1 million to fence one school).

They implemented the initial intervention for helping schools during the drought, including smart water meters which works with an app and can be managed by school principals through their cell phone. If there is a leak, the principal is informed through the app. The school may also control the amount of water they use per day using the app. They have developed a GIS tool which uses the web to determine what exactly is happening at a school in terms of its water facilities and will show where the water networks are located.

He outlined the challenges that they face (see document).

Discussion
The Chairperson said that the other provinces must take note of the apps that have been developed in the Western Cape. Questions will be first posed to the Mpumalanga Department as they had to leave.

Mr Gaehler proposed that in the future the proceedings should begin with the provincial presentations.

Mr Motlashuping referred to the Treasury presentation and wanted reasons for Mpumalanga’s underspending as it achieved only 83%. He congratulated them for reaching their target for building schools.

Mr Malaza, Mpumalanga Education MEC, replied that the reason for underspending was because they received the invoices late; and because of the volume, they were unable to process them. They have learnt how to deal with this challenge in a better manner.

Mr Motlashuping congratulated Free State for their performance and for being consistent as number one in education. He wanted clarity on why they have not built the one new school they set as a target. He noted that the Treasury presentation reflected no school maintenance projects in the Free State and wanted clarity on that. He asked about this variance regarding maintenance projects.

Mr Shabangu asked if the cross-border issue is the responsibility of the Free State Education Department. The Department does not have the capacity to deal with this problem and the Department of Home Affairs is responsible for resolving this. The two departments need to liaise on this matter.

Mr Terblanche stated that Public Works is a problem across the spectrum. However, he is cautious about employing other contract managers when they are still dealing with the challenges of Public Works nationally and provincially. He expressed pride in his province, Western Cape, stating that they performed very well.

Mr Monakedi stated that he hopes the Committee will follow up on the concerns raised by the provinces and provide feedback. The Western Cape listed the challenges they have faced but did not provide what measures they have planned to implement as interventions.

The Chairperson said that provinces must provide an action plan on how best to deal with the challenges they have identified. The safety of learners is crucial, particularly in Cape Town, and a safe environment is crucial for the performance of learners and teachers.

The Division of Revenue Bill went through serious consultations but their budget concerns are noted as well as the reality of the migration of people who are moving to find better service delivery.

Adv Malakoane, Free State, replied about the unmet target of building a new school, saying that the fault lay with Public Works. All projects above R10 million are projects that fall under Public Works and they failed to complete this project. There was no need to replace any schools, hence no budget was assigned to this.

On litigation, Public Works irregularly appointed a number of contractors. When it was realized that they were irregular, the contracts were terminated and Public Works was taken to court. He stated that, by law, they are forced to admit children who cross the border and they cannot remove the children until the conclusion of the court case.

He assured the Committee that the results of “modularized” students are never considered for final results and that the Free State results are authentic.

Mr Lewis, Western Cape, stated that their biggest challenge is accommodation and as a mitigating measure, last year they spearheaded two workshops inviting all stakeholders including universities, to try and find a way to provide infrastructure in a cost effective and quick manner. Out of that, they have piloted a few things and one of them is to move away from the conventional way of building infrastructure. They have built four schools within two schools and they were cheaper and quicker. Land is a sensitive matter, but they are engaging with schools to expand on unused land on their premises. They are engaging Public Works on the methodology of hiring contractors to try and provide schools faster by using light steel. He emphasized the budget and asked the Committee to assist them in keeping alive the ASIDI programme at the very least.

They have engaged with Public Works to refine the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP) policy to make room for communities and engage the communities more to try and decrease community uproar and provide more work for community members. They are trying to improve school designs to remedy safety concerns, but they are also trying not to make them look like prisons.

Ms Schaeffer stated that the Western Cape rejected the Division of Revenue Bill this year, as it does not meet the requirements that the Western Cape has.

The Chairperson stated that it is one thing to reject the Bill but it is another thing to send money back to Treasury. They need to come up with a proposal on how to spend money wisely.

Mr Motlashuping stated that R6 billion was budgeted for drought relief and he is unsure how schools have benefitted from it, as the Western Cape stated that the drought was a challenge.

Ms Lesline McGlenatendolf, Chief Director: Physical Resources, WCED, replied that the R6 billion has not been allocated to provinces yet although they have made applications. As a result they had to reprioritise their budget to deal with the drought.

Ms Gaarenkwe, National Treasury, spoke to the Equitable Share with regards to population shifts, saying the Western Cape has been compensated to accommodate the influx. The Equitable Share data is updated every year using the Learner Unit Record Information and Tracking System (LURITS) which updates more regularly to track learners and they used that to determine the allocation.

The Chairperson gave closing remarks and adjourned the meeting.