The Portfolio Committee on Defence has requested a briefing by the Department of Defence (DOD) about the DOD use of State land and how that impacts on the national land reform program.

The aim of this briefing is to inform the Portfolio Committee on Defence about how the DOD uses the State land allocated to it and how that use relates to the national land reform program.

MANDATE OF DEFENCE DEPARTMENT

Section 200 (2) of the Constitution provides that ‘the primary object of the defence force is to defend and protect the Republic, its territorial integrity and its people in accordance with the Constitution and the principles of international law regulating the use of force’.

In order for the DOD to execute its constitutional mandate, the DOD uses land as one of its major resources in the preparation for its core function. The South African National Defence Force (SANDF) requires this land for effective force development and preparation that includes field exercises and weapons testing. The land resource in the DOD extends from undeveloped land used for open-air military operations with no structures to land that has costly and complex facilities. In view of this, the DOD controls one of the biggest State land portfolio in the country, this being approximately 400 000 hectares of land. This DOD land portfolio is managed in a manner that ensures consistent support to the successful execution of the core function of the DOD.

The significance of the land resource in the defence function has necessitated the DOD to promote a clear internal land management policy. This DOD land management policy ensures that the DOD land uses are sound and justifiable within the framework of the DOD's core business function and the wider national policy on land management.

TRANSFORMATION IN THE DOD

The strategic change in the international security environment coupled with the introduction of the constitutional democracy in 1994 has had far reaching implications for security in South Africa. This change has led to the revision of South Africa’s military posture. South Africa has abandoned the offensive military posture in favour of the defensive posture. In order to sustain the new political dispensation, it became necessary that all government institutions be re-engineered both in terms of structure and process. As one of the organs of government, the DOD had to embrace the changing mode of government.

The DOD is currently undergoing a process of transformation regarding its force structure. This process, inevitably, leads to changing land requirements. This re-engineering of defence core functions and activities leads to a leaner Defence Force with lesser land requirements. In line with these new emerging land requirements, some facilities including land are becoming totally redundant whilst others are becoming partially redundant. The DOD is thus faced with the challenge of managing its current land portfolio effectively and efficiently through these changing times.

The DOD land management policy is designed in manner that strikes a balance between the fulfillment of the DOD core business and the national land reform program’s imperatives. The DOD has clearly committed itself to the unfolding national land reform program in all its aspects. This DOD commitment is contained in both the White Paper on Defence (1996) and the Defence Review (1998).

It needs to be, however, noted that the management of land in the DOD is not managed in isolation from broader facilities management of the DOD. Land is considered as part of the DOD’s facilities portfolio. The DOD has adopted the principle of life cycle management in its management of all its facilities including land. The life cycle principle requires a logical and sequential phases of managing facilities. This phases include:

Acquisition.

Use and Maintenance.

Disposal.

On each of these phases, the DOD has developed set of policy procedures to be used. These policy procedures ensure that any decision that is taken is taken on the basis of a justifiable process that takes into account all relevant national policies.

Acquisition of Land: The current posture of the DOD lands itself to reduced land requirement. This effectively means that the DOD ‘footprint’ should be reduced accordingly to dovetail with the support requirements of the DOD. In view of this development, the DOD has to reduce its land holding to the level adequate to support its core business. The DOD is thus not engaged in any process that seeks to acquire more land. To the contrary the DOD is involved in the process of giving away land that it considers excess to its requirements. Details of land handed back to the Department of Public Works are provided in Appendix A. In reducing its land portfolio the DOD follows a rigorous process that commences with the determination of tasks to be executed by the DOD. An assessment is then made of the land that will be required to enhance the execution of that task. On the basis of this exercise, a decision is thus made of whether or not a land parcel has to be retained or not. In the event where land has to be acquired, the same exercise has to be conducted.

Use and Maintenance of Land: The DOD is faced with the challenge of managing its current land portfolio effectively and efficiently through the constantly changing times. There is a need to identify and implement sound land management principles in the DOD. These will, obviously, lead to an efficient system of land management and it will also ensure the delivery of a better quality service to all DOD corporate divisions thus enhancing the output of the entire DOD.

In using and maintaining its land portfolio properly, the DOD subscribes to the concept of maximum utilization of State assets and cost-effectiveness. In order to realize and implement the concept of maximum utilization of state land entrusted to the DOD, the DOD has put into place coherent facilities management systems and strategies. All these systems and strategies are directed at achieving efficiency, economy and effectiveness in the delivery of the DOD mandate as well as the management of State assets entrusted to the DOD.

The land use and maintenance systems and strategies the DOD has put into place for purposes of achieving proper use of facilities include the following:

Proper Environmental Management. In terms of the White Paper on Defence (1996), the DOD is responsible for ensuring the exercise of proper ecological management and control of military properties. This is done in co-operation with other government departments and environmental organizations. The environmental function in the DOD thus seeks to ensure environmental sustainable management of military activities and facilities by following an advanced and comprehensive approach of Military Integrated Environmental Management (MIEM), which has come to be known as Green Soldiering.

In utilising its training areas and ranges in an environmental sustainable manner, the DOD endeavours to implement sound range management practices through following the Integrated Training Area Management (ITAM). ITAM is, inter alia, a training area management practice that is aimed at achieving identification of military training missions and the training area resources required to satisfy this mission.

The DOD has demonstrated its commitment to sound environmental management through the development of the DOD EIP in response to the requirements of the National Environmental Management Act (Act 107 of 1998). The purpose of the EIP is to indicate how the DOD goes about conducting its core activities in a manner that carries as little impact as practically possible on the surrounding environment.

DOD Policy on Co-Use of Defence Facilities. The Defence Review (1998) acknowledges that co-use of defence facilities by both the DOD and other non-military partners is another method by which the downsizing of defence facilities portfolio could be realized and savings effected. The present budget allocation to the DOD necessitates the exploration of this alternative way of financing the maintenance of its facilities especially those that are under-utilized.

The White Paper on Defence (1996) further states that the co-use of defence facilities by the military and civilians should not jeopardise the military’s activities. Military utilization of facilities should always enjoy a priority status.

The DOD acknowledges that co-operation and partnerships with other State organs and non-governmental organizations are preconditions of a successful defence facilities co-use program. The DOD therefore is working towards the achievement of this co-operation. These DOD policy pronouncements provide a foundation on which the co-use of defence facilities by the military and the non-military agents could be based.

DOD. The DOD is primarily responsible for the identification of co-use opportunities and the integration thereof with its own activities.

DPW. The DPW is primarily responsible for the management of the acquisition of co-use partners for military facilities.

Details of the proposed co-use projects that the DOD is involved are provided on Appendix B.

Disposal of Facilities: Disposal is the last phase of a facility’s life cycle where the DOD writes off a facility from its portfolio because the facility has become redundant to the military requirements or the facility has lost its economic value or cannot be maintained.

Defence facilities disposal has became prominent in the DOD due to the change in the force structure and posture of the SANDF as a consequence of the changed security environment.

The DOD’s new facilities requirements are such that some of the facilities that were necessary to support the DOD’s functions in the pre-1994 period have now become unnecessary. This has resulted in the need to down size the defence facilities portfolio in a manner that creates a fit between the defence facilities holdings and the force structure, strategic direction and the budget allocation of the DOD.

The downsizing of defence facilities starts with the auditing of the total facilities portfolio on the basis of the new DOD facilities requirements. The auditing process identifies facilities that are still required to support the DOD functions and those facilities that are no longer required in the DOD and have to be disposed off. The defence facilities identification as either required or redundant involves all the DOD corporate divisions that use those affected facilities.

There are three ways in which a facility could be written off from the DOD

facilities portfolio:

Handing over the facility to the DPW when the facility is still in good state of functioning but has become redundant to the requirements of the DOD.

Demolishing the facility when the facility has lost its value such that any investments into its maintenance will not be of economic value to the State.

Termination of a lease of a non-State property.

The DOD has identified two processes as specialised forms of redundant facilities disposal in which the defence facilities rationalisation could be achieved. These two processes are the Land Restitution process and Military Base Conversion process. The next two sections are thus dedicated to the discussion of these two specialised forms of disposal.

Land Restitution. Some of the land that is currently used by the military was occupied by people who were forcibly removed from their land at the height of apartheid years. This has inevitably led to land claims in respect of those portions of land. This, therefore, means that the DOD has to deal with the issue of restitution that, for all intents and purposes, is a Constitutional obligation.

Preference will be given to the restoration of land, rather than other forms of restitution.

The DOD is committed to a speedy resolution of restitution cases.

Creative alternatives need to be explored in cases where land cannot be restored.

The DOD will not insist on alternative land being made available in cases where defence land is handed back to the claimants, but will assess its requirements in terms of the core functions and activities of the department (i.e. no settlement will be dependent on the automatic substitution of land for land).

The DOD is committed to transparency in this process.

The DOD is committed to the resolution of land claims through negotiations and will only use the Land Claims Court as a last resort.

Any need for alternative land for the DOD arising from settlement transfers will be determined consensually amongst all relevant government departments and ministries on the basis of the line function of the DOD.

The land under claim will be made available for restitution unless the DOD deems it not feasible. Non-feasibility could be due to the fact that:

The facility might be in the national interest from a strategic point of view.

The specific location of the facility might be unique in terms of military requirements.

It might not be cost-effective.

Base Conversion. The White Paper on Defence (1996) and the Defence Review (1998) acknowledge that base conversion is one mechanism by which the defence facilities downsizing concept could be realized in the DOD. The White Paper on Defence (1996) acknowledges that the conversion of defence facilities presents both opportunities and serious challenges. It points out that some of the serious problems associated with defence facilities closure are the following:

The loss of employment opportunities in the military and associated industries as well as within local supporting economies.

Some military properties are environmentally contaminated and often require very costly clean-up operations.

Maintenance and protection of the Defence facility before re-use or ultimate disposal can be costly.

DOD. The DOD is primarily responsible for the identification of redundant bases and facilities, as well as the closure thereof. This includes rehabilitation and clean-up if necessary.

DPW. The DPW is primarily responsible for the planning for and implementation of the conversion of the facility for alternative non-military use.

Details of specific base conversion projects that the DOD is involved in are provided on Appendix B.

The DOD has been involved in the process of right-sizing and/or reducing its facilities portfolio for a long time. Current imperatives both from a societal and a financial point of view have accelerated the extent of this process. It is a dynamic process that is managed jointly between the DOD and the DPW. By optimising the implementation of the programs discussed above the DOD and the DPW can contribute substantially to savings on the DOD and DPW budgets but also to making facilities available for productive alternative non-military use.

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

Keys: F/C = Full conversion

P/C = Partial conversion

C/U = Co-use

APPENDIX C

Land claims lodged against the DOD amounts to 311 270 ha. Details of claims that have been settled or are in the process of being settled are provided in the tables below: