Report of the Portfolio Committee on
Human Settlements on oversight visit to
The Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements, having conducted an
oversight visit to
1. Background
In terms
of
2. Objectives
of the visit
The objective of the visit was to conduct briefing sessions
with the provincial department and other stakeholders in relation to the implementation
of human settlement strategic plans, projects and programmes. In addition, the
Committee recognised a need to conduct site visits. The focus was on the
following key issues:
·
Implementation of
a comprehensive, integrated human
settlements strategy in the province;
·
Performance in
meeting service delivery targets identified for 2010/11, as well as and
challenges encountered;
·
Role of public
and private sector in service delivery;
·
Plans, programmes
and service delivery targets for 2011/12;
·
Progress in supporting
disaster-affected communities;
·
Blocked projects and plans to unblock them;
·
Strategies in relation to the rectification programme;
·
Number of informal settlements, the plan and the progress
in upgrading such settlements, including Community Residential Units (CRU’s);
·
Implementation of Farm Worker Assistance Programme;
·
Co-ordination and management of the beneficiary list and
incorporation of backyard dwellers in the provincial housing database;
·
Use of alternative technologies in construction.
3. Multiparty
delegation
The delegation consisted of Hon BN Dambuza (ANC) as leader
of the delegation, Hon MR Mdakane (ANC),
Hon GM Borman (ANC), Hon TMA Gasebonwe (ANC), Hon JM Matshoba (ANC), Hon NA
Mnisi (ANC), Hon D Dlakude (ANC), Hon AM Figlan (DA), Hon AC Steyn (DA), Hon T
Botha (Cope) and Hon KP Sithole (IFP). The delegation was also accompanied by
the following officials from the national Department of Human Settlements: Mr L Jolobe, Mr C Mazubane, Ms N Thembani, Ms
T Mabalane and Ms M Pine, as well as Ms K Pasiya (Committee Secretary), Mr L
Tsoai (Researcher) and Ms N Mnyovu (Committee Assistant).
The delegation was also accompanied by members of the following
standing committees of the legislature: Mr SJ Vilane, Chairperson of the Standing
Committee on Human Settlements; Mrs MC Frazer, Chairperson of Standing
Committee on Works; Inkosi NB Shabalala; Rev NW Ngcobo; Mr SV
Naicker; Mrs LL Zwane; Mrs H Ngxongo; Mr G Mari; Inkosi MZN Madlala; Mr DN
Khuzwayo and the Committee Secretary, Ms S Sibisi. Mr SN Mtetwa, the House
Chairperson, joined the delegation at the
4. Overview
of meetings and site visits
Day 1: 27 February 2011
4.1 Meeting with the MEC, provincial
Department of Human Settlements and other stakeholders
Hon Dambuza, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee
on Human Settlements and the leader of the delegation, introduced the
delegation provided an overview of the delegation’s expectations from the
presentations. Amongst others, the delegation
was interested in how effect is given to the priorities identified in the state-of–the-nation
address, the newly-transferred sanitation function, the role of the private
sector and traditional leadership in the province, as well as the possibility
of a performance agreement between the MEC and Head of Department.
4.1.1 Presentation by MEC for Human Settlements
and Public Works, Ms M Govender
The MEC made a presentation to the delegation on
the following:
·
The national Department of Human Settlements did not
allocate funding for rural housing development.
·
The province had restructured the awarding of
contracts to a maximum of four contracts per developer. This was necessitated
by past experience where contractors would be awarded up to 16 contracts.
Contractors subsequently issued sub-contracts, which compromised the delivery
of quality houses.
·
The province was committed to rural development and would
allocate about 60% of its budget in favour of rural communities. However, water
remained a challenge. Each rural house constructed would be fitted with a Jojo
tank to harvest water.
·
Rural land was largely administered by the Ingonyama
Trust, while urban land was privately owned. The province was engaging with the
Ingonyama Trust, which had yielded positive results to date.
·
The allocation of disaster funding was discontinued, and
future disaster projects would be included in the conditional grant.
·
Beneficiaries living in CRUs could only afford rental
of R20 per month, since most residents are elderly and vulnerable.
·
The province has since May 2009 not approved any
projects not registered with the National Home Builders Registration Council (NHBRC). The lack of skilled personnel was hindering
the delivery progress. Most senior members of staff were in acting positions,
like the Chief Financial Officer, however, department was undertaking a process of
developing a retention strategy and appoint permanent staff in strategic
positions.
·
Social housing showed good quality housing projects,
but the challenge remained the collection of rent.
·
The R1 million guarantee fund was not yielding results
due to the failure of banks to co-operate.
·
The province proposed that military veterans use the
People’s Housing Process (PHP) model to construct their houses. To date, 5 000
serviced sites have been allocated in this regard.
·
A successful CRU project was located in uMhlatuze.
The province was engaged in the following
projects in an attempt to upscale delivery within the province:
4.1.2 Presentation by Head of Department (HOD) of
Human Settlements, Ms Gumbi
The HOD presented a report on the status of the province
as follows:
·
The province was experiencing capacity challenges,
especially in regard to rare skills such as project management, surveying and in
other technical fields.
·
The province has exceeded its targets in relation to
informal settlement upgrading, serviced sites, affordable rental units, as well
as supply of affordable housing finance.
·
Access to land and densification remained a challenge.
The province has the largest housing backlog, as well as the basic services
infrastructure backlog.
·
In line with Outcome 8 that seeks to create
sustainable human settlements and improved quality of life (2009-2014), the province
has committed itself to progress towards the national target.
·
In regard to Outcome 8 targets the province stated in
the provincial report that in cases such as the informal settlements upgrade,
the target was 76 200 units but the province made a commitment in respect of 140
000 units. .In respect of serviced sites and transferred, the target was 28 000
units but the province made a commitment to achieve 40 820 units for the period
2009 to 2040. In respect of affordable rental units, the target was 15 240
units but the commitment was 38 168 units. In respect of the supply of
affordable housing finance, the target was 114 300 but the commitment was 28
200 units but access to land and densification 1200 hectares. However, the land
issue has been singled out as one of the challenges with which the province is grappling.
The Committee, however, wanted to verify the information provided in relation
to Outcome 8 as the difference between the targets and commitments were
confusing.
4.1.3 Progress report
Progress with and plans for
rectification
An allocation of R120 million was received from the national budget for
rectification. A service level agreement
(
Informal settlements in the province
A total of 17 municipalities had informal settlements, which were
plotted using a geographic information system (GIS). A strategy for the
eradication of slums in the province was in place and needed to be rolled out
in a co-coordinated manner to avoid a recurrence of these informal settlements.
Farm Worker Assistance Programme
The programme has not been significantly popularised by the Department,
but there was a working relationship with the Department of Rural Development
and Land Reform to approach the process holistically. This programme will form
part of the rural housing delivery targets. However, the issue of land and bulk
infrastructure remained a challenge.
To address the bulk infrastructure challenges, the Department resolved
to install gutters and water tanks in all rural houses to be constructed. In
municipalities where there was a general drought, Water Services Authority (WSA)
would be required to transport water to households. In this regard, the NHBRC
was tasked with designing models to ensure safe and hygienic processes.
People’s Housing Process (PHP)
A strategy was in place to drive rural housing, and the iNanda project
could serve as a best practice example. It was acknowledged that PHP produced better
housing products.
Hostel upgrade/ Community
Residential Units (CRUs)
EThekwini continued to experience challenges in the upgrading of hostels
due to poor maintenance, as well as legal disputes over ownership that remained
unresolved between the two spheres of government. To address these challenges,
the province proposed that all occupants move into low-cost housing and convert
hostels into family units. Consideration was being given to alternative options
aimed at reducing maintenance costs.
Projects constructed using alternative
technologies
The Department was in the process of establishing an innovation hub to
exhibit alternative building technologies. Various stakeholders have been
engaged to assess their products. The Department was considering green and
water conservation technologies. The NHBRC was assisting with the evaluation of
the quality of these innovations.
Disaster Management
The rehabilitation of partially destroyed houses was being implemented through
the voucher system, and those that had been completely destroyed were being
rebuilt. A comprehensive database, verified with COGTA, has been compiled. Backlogs
dating back as far as 2008 have been incorporated to ensure proper costing and planning.
A panel has been established through the supply chain management process which
will immediately respond to disasters and which will be extended to all
districts by June 2011.
Blocked projects and plans to
unblock them
Specific information was not provided on the number of blocked projects
and the plans to unblock them. However, a total amount of R77.4 million would
be required for bulk infrastructure services in all 11 district municipalities.
When considering the land acquisition and finalising the environmental impact assessments
(EIAs), an additional R122.7 million would be required. In total, an amount of
R200 million would be required for both bulk infrastructure and land acquisition.
It should be noted that the amount for bulk infrastructure and land acquisition
in some districts had not been stipulated (e.g. Amajuba, iLembe, uMkhanyakude,
uThukela, uThungulu, and uMgungundlovu).
Sanitation
The sanitation function has yet to be transferred from the national department
to the province. This is linked to bulk infrastructure and services backlogs,
which is part of Outcome 9’s outputs for COGTA. The department is awaiting a directive
from the national department on the rollout of the programme and future
targets.
Densification
Four new projects are anticipated, while the following projects will be
enhanced:
·
Cornubia in EThekwini – 55 500 units.
·
Driefontein in Kwadukuza – 15 000 units.
·
Vulindlela in uMsunduzi – 25 000 units.
·
Blaaubosch – 25 000 units.
·
Nyoni – Green field Mandeni – 3 000 units.
Opportunities and proposals
Top-sliced funding from the
conditional grant to fund bulk infrastructure
A proposal was drafted which sought to motivate for the 10% top slice from
the conditional grant to be allocated for bulk infrastructure. The proposal would
also be pursued with National Treasury, the provincial treasury and the national
Department of Human Settlements. This process will involve leveraging the municipal
infrastructure grant (MIG) funding and crafting appropriate conditions for the
grant.
Tripartite agreements
The provincial department has developed a system called “tripartite
agreements” that seek to ensure proper co-ordination and co-operation between
the three spheres of government. The municipality will only be limited to its planning
mandate, while the province will appoint, monitor and manage implementing
agents and ensure accountability. The national department
will continue to provide a monitoring and supporting function.
Support provided by the NHBRC
The NHBRC has established close working relationships with the provincial
department, and was continuously rethinking ways to reduce costs while
fast-tracking delivery. The NHBRC assisted with unblocking projects that were stalled
due to poor workmanship. It was committed to supporting and training emerging
contractors, while also steering rectification programmes.
Establishing
a Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E) Unit
The department was in the process of establishing an M&E unit to
improve monitoring, intervention and evaluation mechanisms. The unit would also
serve to strengthen the co-ordination of reporting across the three spheres of
government. The unit was meant to come into operation during March 2011.
Challenges
Funding and allocation formula
While the housing development conditional grant increased exponentially,
the equitable share of the provincial department remained unchanged. This has
resulted in the department not being able to support its work and mandate
because of the following:
·
Cost-cutting measures hampered service delivery.
·
Resources and tools of trade could not be accessed.
If challenges were experienced with the current funding formula, rural
municipalities would continue to be disadvantaged in favour of bigger
municipalities and the metropolitan municipality.
Land assembly funding
The funding intended for land restitution has been exhausted and unless
the province obtained appropriate land for human settlements, delivery would be
threatened. The ongoing competition for land between government and the private
sector was also not assisting service delivery in the province.
Non-approval of proposals by the national
Department of Human Settlements
This has been identified as a challenge for both bulk infrastructure and
land acquisition, with the effect that the province is unable to achieve
implementation of identified projects.
It is further suggested that unless municipalities have adequate
capacity to deliver bulk services in a structured manner, service delivery will
be compromised. Further, the land expropriation court challenges add additional
strain to the delivery momentum.
Lack of skilled and adequate staff
The provincial department is significantly under-capacitated,
and seeks to attract highly skilled, knowledgeable and capable technical staff.
The temporary nature of contract positions undermines the department’s ability
to attract skilled personnel (lack of security). In this regard, the department
intends to strategise, motivate and train existing staff.
4.1.4 Presentation by Mr Brook, Department of Cooperative
Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA)
Status of
infrastructure in the province
·
There are 14 water services authorities in the
province and sanitation forms part of the cycle. The progress towards adequate
sanitation has been very slow and the province will not be able to meet the
Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) in this regard.
·
The total number of households amount to 2,6 million with
10,6 million people.
·
The sanitation backlog in the province is 21%, which
constitutes 527 000 households in need of adequate sanitation.
·
The water backlog amounts to 394 000 households.
·
The quality of tap water is good, with only 14% not at
acceptable quality standards.
·
Infrastructure development is costly due to the
topography and dispersed rural settlements. It currently costs the province R18
000 per household to connect water pipes. However, the cost varies depending on
the slope on which the house is situated.
In some areas a water connection costs up to R42 000 per household.
·
About 42% of water is not adequately treated, since
treatment plants are decaying. The province spent more on water purification,
and there was a need to invest and build more treatment plants.
Challenges faced by the programme include:
·
Financial constraints (cost increased by almost 40% in
three years and has affected budget allocations).
·
Capacity (only 11 engineers are employed, and value
for money has been compromised due to the appointment of consultants).
·
Planning (lack of bulk infrastructure and dispersed settlement
patterns).
There was no funding for infrastructure maintenance and services. Infrastructure planned for 15 years
deteriorates in six to seven years. The
bucket system was eradicated in 2007 and was completed in uMzimkhulu in 2009.
The Ugu District represented the highest water backlog (with 33% of
households without water) while Uthungulu represented a 41% sanitation backlog -
the highest number of households without sanitation. EThekwini had 18
traditional councils, including a high number of households that lacked adequate
sanitation. This would pose a great challenge in years to come if sanitation
and water were not adequately and urgently addressed. In addition, some Water Service
Authorities lacked the capacity to run their own affairs, including the maintenance
of treatment plants.
Deliberation and interaction on the
presentation
Members of the delegation raised a number of concerns and questions following
the presentations:
·
Why a single contractor was awarded so many projects which
could lead to failure in achieving its mandate?
·
Clarity was sought on the number of houses that were
completely destroyed by the by disasters.
·
How far has the department gone in addressing disaster
backlogs in the province?
·
What support is provided by the department in ensuring
that housing chapters which are developed through Integrated Development Plans
(IDPs) processes are credible?
·
What measures were adopted by the department to
address contractors who performed poorly?
·
The delegation further requested an explanation with
regard to R200 million which was reallocated.
The delegation also requested further information on the following:
·
The number of informal settlements upgraded in the
past two financial years and the
location of such settlements, including the current upgrading plans for 2011/12
financial year;
·
The number of houses due for rectification and related
costs, including monitoring mechanisms;
·
The role played by the Housing Development Agency (HDA)
in the acquisition of land;
·
Reasons for the high vacancy rate as this might
compromise service delivery;
·
Reasons for the housing backlog in the province,
including the number of blocked projects and reasons for such blockages;
·
The number of households that benefited from the
voucher scheme and the cost, criteria
used and location of such beneficiaries;
·
The extent of housing support provided to child-headed
families.
4.1.5 Responses by the provincial department
·
The current administration inherited the projects with
challenges from the previous one. In an attempt to address this concern, a
decision had been taken to reduce the number of projects allocated per
contractor from 16 to four projects per contractor. However, a further
challenge experienced by the department related to contractors operating under
different names and thus being awarded multiple contracts in different
municipalities. It was difficult for the department to trace such contractors.
·
The department indicated that a team of service
providers was appointed to conduct an assessment in all areas affected by
disasters. The department undertook to make the report, which will indicate the
number of houses partially destroyed and those that were completely destroyed, available
to the Committee at a later stage.
·
The department informed the delegation that the province’s
disaster backlog dated back to 2008 and that those figures continued to
increase as disasters continued to hit the province. More than R133 million had
been allocated to deal with disasters.
·
The department used shared services from COGTA and the
national Department of Human Settlements in ensuring credible housing chapters.
·
The department had commissioned the Special
Investigating Unit (SIUs) to verify matters when issues relating to fraud and
corruption were raised.
·
It was indicated that this might have been due to the
time frame within which the national Government expected the province to have
spent the funds. The EIA was reported as
one of the obstacles in the delivery of houses. However, some of the latter
challenges had been resolved in February 2011.
Some of the delegation’s concerns and questions were not answered. The
delegation requested the province to respond in writing by the end May 2011 to the
following:
·
Reasons for the housing backlog in the province,
including the number of blocked projects and reasons for such blockages;
·
The number of households that benefited from the
voucher scheme and the cost, criteria
used and location of such beneficiaries;
·
The extent of housing support provided to child-headed
families.
Day 2: 28
February 2011
4.2 Meeting
with the
4.2.1 Overview of presentation
The municipality had a population of 4 million. It was 60% rural, 30% urban
and 10% informal in its form. The current employment rate ranged between 18 – 24%.
About 382 of the 500 informal settlements in the city of
The number of houses built per year had increased from 16 000 to 23 000.
The estimated housing backlog was 379 000 houses, which included informal
settlements, backyard shacks and traditional dwellings. Approximately 440 000
people were in need of accommodation in the city and 42 % of the population were
living in inadequate housing. The municipality had provided 145 000 houses over
a period of 10 years. Water was provided within a radius of 200 metres from
where a family resided. Basic services stand pipes and ablution blocks were being
rolled out. A total of R24 million had been set aside to pilot the installation
of services in seven informal settlements in the city. Approximately 240 000
families were in need of water and sanitation in informal settlements. In relation
to the
There was continual migration to the city due to the infrastructure
developments, such as the construction and upgrading of stadiums, ports and
other related facilities that were used during the 2010 World Cup. The city contributed
R300 million towards the provision of housing from its budget in addition to the
R800 million annual budget allocation from the provincial government. Due to
the terrain, the city was unable to upgrade the roads, specifically in the
surrounding rural areas where the landscape was mountainous. During the period
when the Inanda Dam was constructed, people were temporarily accommodated in
tin houses. There were people who still continued to live in these tin houses,
as they were used as temporary relocation areas (TRAs).
The city raised a concern about the very slow accreditation process as the
city believed that it had the capacity to deliver. A total of 293 old houses were
collapsing. These houses were built prior to 1994 and had been handed over to
the beneficiaries. A process of densification in areas such as
Deliberations and interactions on the
presentation
Members of the delegation raised a number of concerns and questions
following the presentation:
Response by the city
The city responded as follows:
The delegation requested the city to forward the outstanding report on
the beneficiary list management.
Presentation on the Cornubia Project
Cornubia was regarded as KwaZulu-Natal’s first integrated sustainable
human settlement. It formed part of the
It was envisaged that the project would accommodate more than 50 000
units and house 200 000 people. It is also envisaged that there would be 15 000
units to cater for households earning less than R3 500 per month and 7 000 to
10 000 units for households earning between R3 500 and R15 000 per month (gap
market). The estimated project value was R25 billion. During phase 1 of the
project, 500 government subsidy units would be constructed to unlock the wedge
of the development in duplex style. The project was expected to create 43 000 new
permanent jobs and 140 000 to 280 000 construction jobs sustained over a 15 to 20
year period. A total private sector investment of approximately R17 billion was
also envisaged.
Key challenges included the funding of bulk infrastructure at a total
cost of R2.59 billion. Subsidised units (15 000) amounted to R2.3 billion and
non-subsidised ones to R2 billion. In addressing this challenge, an intergovernmental
relations (IGR) forum had been established within the housing development
sector. IGR protocols met on a monthly basis.
4.3 Site
visit to Cato Crest
The
project which formed part of the Slums Clearance Programme comprised in-situ upgrading. This project was
inherited by the
The delegation was informed that there were approximately 4 500 shacks
in the area and approximately 20 families had been relocated to a transitional
camp. The original site had 1 500 sites according to the town plan layout. The
process of densification had begun and the department had built double-storey
houses due to insufficient space. The building of double-storey houses was
costly as each house needed an additional amount of R20 000 because of the
decking that had to be fitted between the lower and upper floors. One hundred
and eighty double-storey houses were built.
A challenge was experienced with the subsidy amount that had not changed.
Communities were co-operative even though the rate of delivery was slow.
The ward councilor informed the delegation that a challenge was experienced
with backyard dwellers that could not be properly quantified, as their number
continued to fluctuate. There were people in the gap market, such as nurses and
teachers, who were not accommodated in the low-cost housing programmes.
Therefore, there was a need to disburse R1 billion that had been set aside to
serve as a guarantee to banks when people from the gap market applied for home
loans. The councilor also stated that it would be appreciated if the employers
could play a meaningful role in assisting their employees to access housing
finance.
4.4 Site
visit to transitional camp with mobile ablution facilities
The transition camp was established in 2003. Families in the camp were temporarily
accommodated from various areas, and the camp currently hosted 600 families. Some families were relocated due to construction
of their houses and others due to unsafe living conditions in their informal
settlements. The camp accommodated people
only for an 18-month period, but some people had been there for over three
years. There was no electricity installed at the camp. Ablution facilities were available and in
good condition. The units were constructed from corrugated iron, which was very
hot in summer and very cold in winter. An
amount of R7.5 million was set aside for cleaning of ablution facilities and
cutting of grass.
The delegation visited one of the units, where an old man had been staying
for more than three years. There were no
windows; the room was extremely hot and dark. The occupant indicated that in 2008
he was promised that windows would be inserted. However, this did not materialise. The ward councilor informed the delegation
that the room used to be a storeroom. For this reason, it did not have windows.
The residents alleged that there were rats and wild pigs that were biting
infants and destroying their groceries. This was due to garbage that was all
over the area. The garbage was not collected regularly, the place was dirty and
the grass was very long.
The delegation cautioned the
municipality to seriously consider the lives of the people. The restoration of the people’s dignity was
very important. The municipality was requested to urgently install windows,
address the issue of the wild pigs and clear the area of long grass.
4.5 Site
visit to
The project was spear-headed by First
Metro Housing Company, which was the first social housing company
in the city of
The entire project had 261 units. The first metro houses constructed
were 48 units, with two bedrooms. The project
accommodated people earning up to R3 500.
An amount of R125 000 per unit was received from the national department
and R53 000 from the province. Similar projects were replicated in other areas
in the province. Applicants were screened upfront, and the company conducted its
own rent collection.
4.6 Site
visit to
The area was in the process of being densified and planning was due for
completion within two months. Communities in the area were classified according
to their needs, and it was confirmed that approximately 90% of the population
was unemployed. About 577 families would be relocated to the Cornubia project
once it had been completed. The issue of the beneficiary list still had to be
addressed by the municipality.
4.7 Site
visit to KwaMashu hostel upgrading
The project has 916 flats, each measuring 60 square metres in size. The flats
contained two, three or four bedrooms, and those people who are sharing a flat were
paying R58.70 for a bed, while families were paying R370 towards rental. It was
stated that the community residential units (CRUs) used to be under the
administration of the province, but were later transferred to the municipality in
2007.
Challenges encountered in the project:
The delegation advised the municipality to cut the grass in the area.
4.8 Site
visit to eMtshebeni project (Inanda)
The project comprised 604 units. People started to move into the houses during
July 2010. Each house had two bedrooms, a
toilet and a shower, but was without a washing basin. The delegation was
informed that the solar heating system would be implemented in the near future.
The municipality was advised to assist with the installation of basins in
bathrooms.
A section 21 project was constructed adjacent to this project, where 16
square metre-sized houses were built. This particular project required rectification.
The community raised concerns that the houses were too small to accommodate large
families. The ward councilor also confirmed that the living conditions were
unacceptable. The municipal management advised the delegation that the project
was also identified for rectification.
4.9 Site
visit to
The project was part of the pilot projects funded by the province and
had been identified for implementation under a Memorandum of Understanding
(MOU) signed between the national Department of Human Settlements and a
non-governmental organisation (NGO) called the Federation for Urban and the
Poor (Fedup). Fedup looked after the interests of unemployed communities, as
well as people who did not have proper housing. It was indicated that 96 sites
had been set aside to be developed by Fedup of Utshani through PHP as a pledged
subsidy. Utshani would build houses of 50 square metres on its sites. It was
reported that 30 houses were completed out of the envisaged 96. The delegation
was informed that members belonging to Fedup used their savings to enhance the
subsidy amount provided by the government towards a PHP house.
4.10 Meeting
with leaders of Abahlali baseMjondolo (two groups)
The uMfeladawonye wa bahlali baseMjondolo briefed the delegation about a
range of issues that had been taking place in their organisation. Mr Patric
Magebula, President of Fedup, indicated that the organisation was established
during the period when the late Minister of Housing, Hon Joe Slovo, had still
been in office. Fedup had committee representatives throughout the nine
provinces. It was stated that provincial governments gave funding towards the
development of housing projects, while the Free-State and
Furthermore, there had been a lack of policy shift, which demonstrated
that people were still struggling to access proper housing. During the tenure
of Minister Mahanyele, the former Minister of Housing, the organisation was institutionalised
and turned into a section 10 housing project. Fedup started to build 10 houses
in 2004. The organisation was given a R10 million revolving loan fund, and
uTshani fund was established. Almost 16 000 houses were built by the Federation
under uTshani nationally through co-operatives.
Fedup as an organisation trained and built its own capacity by training
people and giving them skills in construction. However, the period for houses
to be built took a little bit longer and in the process one would find that
project members were always mobile as people were always looking for jobs. This
made it difficult to retain skilled members and hindered progress. There had
been complaints that the Cornubia project was not communicated. Fedup would
have liked to become part of this big project by being given the sites on the
green field for their housing developments.
The challenge was that some councillors did not believe in the PHP.
There were no sites set aside nor serviced land available for the organisation.
Technical assistance was provided by Government. Fedup was also engaged in
other social activities such as indentifying people who did not have identity
documents and enabling them to receive tenure.
Deliberations
The delegation enquired whether Fedup was a registered construction
company, how it generated income, and whether there were stipulated criteria
for people to join. On the issue of land ownership, the delegation wanted to
understand who the landowners were and how the organisation accessed land. The
issue of accountability, especially in relation to finances, was also raised.
Fedup informed the delegation that to generate a sustainable income for
the organisation, it planned to develop the recycling of refuse material.
Members also contributed towards the monthly savings. Fedup had not been
registered as a construction company but the uTshani fund was registered as a
section 21 company. The organisation also received international donor funding.
With regard to the structure of the organisation, the uTshani board consisted
of the President (Mr Magebula), a Secretary based in the Free-State province,
and two committee members in each province.
The presentation by Mrs Nxumalo from kwaSiyanda informal settlement
claimed that the community had been residing in the area for 22 years. During
the construction of the MR 577 road, people were removed to create space for
the construction of the road. There was a concern that road construction led to
a situation where many people were forcibly removed from their shacks. People
joined the aBahlali baseMjondolo in 2009. These were people who had been unemployed
and who had little or no source of income. The area did not have proper
services (lighting, water and sanitation and access roads) but eventually the
municipality started interacting with the community. This interaction had since
ceased. There were 614 families in the informal settlement. Mrs Nxumalo pleaded
with government to assist them. The municipality had started the discussion on upgrading
the informal settlement, but this was suddenly stopped. The community was trying
to engage with province to chart a way forward.
The community raised concerns that there was neither water nor access to
roads. Children had to cross the MR 577, and this could pose a danger to them.
The municipality promised people land, which was later sold to a private buyer.
There were four informal settlements that had been planned for piloting, but this
did not materialise. It was reported
that there are also transit camps in the area that were being misused.
The community observed that government perceived them as the opposition,
and yet they needed assistance with service delivery. There was no consistency
in delegating officials to work closely with the community. It was stated that
officials continually changed. At some stage the community would be informed
that the officials had resigned, which resulted in progress being compromised. Councillors
convened meetings as political gatherings. The community later discovered that
issues discussed in such meetings were addressing issues of development. NGOs
and faith-based organisations (FBOs) were perceived as organisations that were taking
over the duties of government officials when the intention was to assist with
community development.
The community suggested that people should be involved in the initial
stages of developments that took place in the community. They also indicated
that they found it difficult to secure meetings with the municipality. However,
the province had begun a process to interact with communities involved, which
was led by Mr E Cele who confirmed that the matter was being addressed. Mrs
Nxumalo informed the delegation that the effort undertaken by the province gave
hope and encouragement that their frustrations could be addressed.
The delegation emphasised the importance of community participation in
its developments. Self-build was also part of the option that the department should
consider. It was also important for government to honour commitments made to people
to limit unrest. The delegation confirmed that it understood the challenges
faced by the community. The delegation thanked the community representatives
and advised them that the Committee would communicate their report to the
province and would receive the feedback from the provincial department.
Day 3: 1
March 2011
4.11
The following overview was provided:
The municipality was of the view that housing and bulk infrastructure
should be aligned. There was a concern about poor planning, such as the poor
alignment of housing plans within the district. Land acquisition in Ixopo was a
major challenge and was limiting potential investment. In Sisonke landowners were reluctant to
release land. There was also a shortage of skilled personnel in the area.
The municipality has a sanitation backlog of 25 000 toilets, of which 4
000 had been built in 2008. The next
phase would be implemented in the following financial year. The municipality was
at high risk of floods and disasters. The
district inherited two major housing projects from the
The municipal manager indicated that the municipality had a backlog of 9
000 toilets in rural areas that required funding in the amount of R58 million.
Thubalethu village was experiencing challenges related to water and sanitation.
Mariathal experienced challenges related to water. Land had been donated by the
Roman Catholic Church for housing development but it had water challenges.
Mziki Agri village, the water project, was planned incorrectly.
Mahehle Housing Project
The
Mahehle Housing Project was located in the
During the
start of the project, land availability for housing development was a challenge.
However, negotiations were initiated between the municipality and landowners.
The major breakthrough was made when Mr Dlamini agreed to avail his land for
the project.
However,
there were additional delays before the project could be kick-started,
including the introduction of wall-to-wall municipalities in 2000 and the
limited capacity of newly-elected councillors. The project also had to be
implemented within the legislated framework of the Development Facilitation
Act. As a result all these factors, including the lack of political will, led
to the delay of the project, which only commenced in 2004. The construction of
phase 1, comprising 500 units, started in September 2005 and has since
progressed very well.
The
Mahehle project delivers 1 500 square metre stands with a 45 square metre top structure,
with additional 15 square metre floor slab (to be completed by households
themselves) to make the complete foundation floor slab 60 square metres. This was
done to encourage the PHP initiative. The roof construction was designed in a
manner that allowed the extension into the 15 square metre area and made it
very easy should the owner wanted a complete 60 square metre house. Each site was
serviced with road access, metered water supply, and a VIP toilet. The project
has been prioritised for the Local Electrification Plan. The Committee would follow
up on the figures presented by the municipality on the delivery of stands.
The
project has delivered the following to date:
Employment opportunities and
economic empowerment for the community
To date,
491 community members had been directly employed. The labour pool was being
rotated on a 13-week basis to enable people to be exposed to work opportunities
and enhancement of their skills. The wage bill was currently R2.5 million. The
workforce comprised 130 women, 150 men and 150 youth. Persons with disabilities
also formed part of the project.
The
people’s entrepreneurial talents have been unearthed by the project, with one
reported case of a Mr Khumalo who owned a close corporation, MC Construction.
The company manufactured the VIP toilets and supplied the sites. More than 200
toilets have already been supplied and the company employed six people on a full-time
basis.
The
project manufactured its own concrete blocks from the block yard established by
the implementing agent, Net Project CC, which was an in-house supplier. A total
of 24 well-trained individuals produced a minimum of 2 400 blocks daily. The
block yard ownership was earmarked for transfer to the community once phase 1
(500 units) of the project had been finalised. The municipality has since
secured the commitment from the implementing agent that phase 2 of the project would
be supplied by the same block yard, even after ownership has been transferred
to the community.
In Underberg an amount of R120 million was needed to eradicate the sanitation
backlog. An additional R20 million was needed for a small treatment plant. The
theft of livestock was a challenge. In Gqumeni, the sanitation backlog required
R5 million.
The municipality had a backlog of 15 000 toilets, however 5 000 units have
been delivered to date. In Bulwer a
project plan to construct a dam was in progress, while Tarsevalley and Donny
Brook experienced challenges in terms of water and electricity.
Greater Kokstad
Infrastructure was collapsing due to population growth in the town. Farmers
continued to evict farm workers, and almost 40 000 workers had been evicted to
date. The situation placed more strain on the municipality as these communities
were vulnerable. Some workers had been recruited by farmers from neighbouring
countries. Therefore, the municipality found itself under pressure to provide
shelter, of which resources are very limited.
Makhoba was a farm area with 15 to 20 farms and situated on communal
land. There was a settled land claim, but the Agri-village development plan had
been delayed due to bulk infrastructure approval. A business plan had been approved but funding
from the municipal infrastructure grant (MIG) was awaited. The amount of R25 million was approved by the Department of Water Affairs (DWAF) to start a
water project by April 2011.
In
Deliberations
The delegation required clarity on:
·
whether any of the projects were initiated by the previous
municipal administration;
·
time frames for projects to be completed;
·
the status of the presidential project that was
started in 1996 in Mahehle.
Concerns were raised about the housing backlog in the district, projects
due for rectification, the settlement of land claims, social housing, the upgrading
of informal settlements, job creation initiatives, land acquisition and the
role of the Housing Development Agency (HDA).
It was reported that the annual capital budget was R220 million, funded
primarily through the conditional grant and equitable share.
The challenge with water was that water resources developments were limited,
and the present government had not built dams in the area. In terms of job
creation, all projects were labour intensive. When awarding contracts, there was
a clause which catered for job creation and utilisation of small contractors
through sanitation projects. Small
contractors also played a role in the maintenance of small schemes and were
supported by established contractors.
4.12 Presentation
by Development Bank of
The DBSA was invited by the municipality to make a presentation on
progress and initiatives in collaboration with the Sisonke municipality. It was
reported that there were two types of funding, ie loans and development funding.
Since the DBSA did not pay tax, it did not charge any interest on its loans.
There were two divisions: (i) Sustainable Community Division which dealt with
community facilitation and (ii) Rural Development – this programme involved
communities to participate in the development and planning stages. The DBSA also
funded planning and facilitation. In terms of the cycle, development was characterised
by the involvement of various stakeholders which finally promoted and enhanced Integrated
Development Plans (IDPs). The DBSA had introduced a number of programmes for
municipalities by employing specialists.
The DBSA had been involved in housing development programmes, such as in
Grabouw in the (
Key challenges
The following key challenges were mentioned:
•
Frustration was experienced at national government
level due to the fact that clear objectives, legislation and sound policies had
been developed and significant financial resources had been made available, but
were not adequately utilised by municipalities.
•
Inadequate level of involvement by and expertise of
public and private institutions in developing and implementing models for
integrated sustainable development.
•
Facilitating integrated interaction with key
government departments and agencies through concrete partnership projects.
•
The increased competition for development finance and
the need for the DBSA to carve its niche within that space very early during
project development and create a comparative advantage.
Deliberations and comments
The delegation emphasised the critical element of integrated planning
which involved the provision of social and economic amenities. To address the
issue of water shortages, water harvesting was regarded as crucial. The Mahehle
housing project required urgent attention. The availability of land was not
only a problem in Sisonke. However, it was time to effect the Expropriation Act
in order for government to fast-track development to its citizens. While there was
legislation that protected workers, farmers continued to evict workers from
their land and destroy ancestral graves for purposes of commercial farming.
Such acts demonstrated disrespect for these farming communities.
The delegation indicated
that it would request the Portfolio Committee on Human Settlements to interact
with the Portfolio Committee on Rural Development and Land Reform to further
investigate the issue in Kokstad.
It was reported that the DBSA seconded officials to municipalities to
assist in addressing issues of incapacity. The delegation was concerned about
the limited information provided by the district as it was only focusing on
bulk infrastructure and projects that were currently not active. The delegation,
therefore, required an overall picture of all current and active projects,
including the number of upgraded informal settlements and those due for
upgrading, as well as projects due for rectification.
4.13 Site
visit to
The project was initiated in 1997, with the aim of constructing 2 000 units.
During this period, the housing subsidy was R16 000 per unit. A total of 1 000 units
were to be constructed in two phases. However, in 2006, the project became blocked
due to a lack of funds. To date, a total
of 270 units have constructed, of which 30 are not suitable for habitation. In
the past, a number of residents were employed at a nearby timber factory, which
has since closed down. A considerable number of people have since left the
community. This required that the beneficiary list had to be revisited to
identify the actual number of people who were in need of housing in the community.
It was reported that despite several attempts by the
4.14 Site
visit to Clysdale project (PHP)
In 2005, approval was granted for the construction of 900 units. These units
would be developed as a PHP initiative. Units were 40 square metres in size and
included two bedrooms and space for a toilet, but the toilet bowl and doors
were not installed. It was observed that units were poorly constructed and the
majority of units were without sanitation facilities. In some instances, occupants
installed their own sanitation facilities, which are inadequate. The delegation
raised a concern about the absence of doors leading to bedrooms, which ultimately
compromised the occupants’ sense of privacy.
The province informed the delegation that the NHBRC had conducted an
assessment of 608 units, of which 529 houses would be demolished. The provincial
department confirmed that houses that would be demolished would be
reconstructed according to the current housing specification of 40 square metres.
The township register was established and about 529 transfers had been
registered with the Registrar of Deeds. More than 200 sites had been affected
by land invasions and in some instances a single beneficiary had invaded up to
five or more sites.
4.15 Ibisi
Project
The delegation did not visit the project as it was informed that the
Ibisi project had similar challenges as those identified in Clysdale and had
been earmarked for rectification. The project started in 2004 with the
construction of 636 units. The units were 40 square metres in size. A sewer
system was not installed, and the project was blocked during March 2007. In
order to install the sewer system, as well as house connections, the district municipality
should first attend to upgrading the existing bulk sewer line, which had
collapsed.
To date, none of the sites have been transferred to beneficiaries, since
the location of the Eskom power line
servitude that run across the farm prohibited the individual transfer of the
sites from the province to the beneficiaries. The town register was not yet
opened.
Day 4: 2
March 2011
4.16 uMgungundlovu
District Municipality
Overview
of presentation
The
An
overview of projects was provided. There were considerable delays in the
implementation of projects, at times for periods exceeding 10 years. The
following projects were currently being implemented in the district:
·
The uMshwathi Slums Clearance project consisted of 3 000 units. The first phase required
the installation of bulk services and the construction of sewer pump stations
and sewerage works (estimated at R20 million). The bulk link pump station and storage
reservoir required R5.5 million, while funding for the taxi route was estimated
at R15 million. The general status of the uMshwathi project was at the feasibility
stage. This initiative would address the clearing of the slums within the municipality.
The EIA public participation process had been undertaken, while the application
for the ROD was in the process of being drafted.
·
Amanda’s Hill consisted of 40 units.
The project required bulk water estimated at R2 million.
·
St Bernard consisted of 360 units.
The project required bulk water estimated at R4 million. Stedone was appointed as the
implementing agent and was in the process of planning.
·
Mkhambathini (Poortjie) consisted of 481 units.
The project required bulk water and a sewer upgrade estimated at R10.7 million.
The MEC had approved the expropriation of land, but it was subjected to a legal
challenge by the owner. Feasibility studies were in the process of being
conducted.
Stockdale consisted of 250 units.
The project required bulk water and a sewerage upgrade estimated at R6.6
million. The acquisition of the Stockdale project land was transferred by the
Department of Rural Development and Land Reform to Mkhambathi municipality and was
awaiting approval.
·
Ward 7 Premier Flagship
programme. A planned 25 000 housing units
would be constructed over the next five years, starting in 2011/12. The project
required bulk water supply, as well as ventilation improved pit (VIP) toilets for
the area. The cost implication for the project had yet to be finalised.
·
Umngeni (Khayelisha) consisted
of 1 575 units. The project required
an upgrade of the Mphophomeni sewerage works in order to accommodate phases 2
and 3 of the project. DFA Tribunal made
part of the ROD for only phase 1 to proceed.
Phase 2 and phase 3 were intended for an upgrade. The entire project
required R40 million. The project site was assigned to the contractor on 19
January 2011 and the civil infrastructure construction was currently in progress.
·
Sewer pump station: the site required R4.5
million.
·
Bulk storm water and pump
station: the
project required R3.5 million.
·
Cedara consisted of 1 000 units.
The reservoir needed to be constructed and was estimated at R2.5 million. The link main required R4 million and the
upgrade of sewer treatment works required R5.2 million. The status of the
project was at the planning stage. The implementing agent was awaiting the ROD.
The DFA had given an in- principle approval, subject to the ROD approval and
the resolution of the outstanding issue of the access road.
·
KwaNxamalala: VIP toilets were required
for the Nxamalala or Inanda area. The cost associated with the VIP toilets would
be determined in accordance with the norms and standards of the Department of
Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF). The project had received stage 1 approval. Planning activities were underway.
4.17
Since
1996, the
Breaking
New Ground (BNG) projects currently planned included 6 423 sites. There were also
3 2000 flagship projects and an additional 7 500 rental and private units.
A total of R43.3 million, however, remained unspent for various reasons. The
application for 2 500 units has been submitted for conditional approval. A total
of 1 000 units was submitted to the Department of Human Settlements in November
2009, but the project did not appear in the Medium Term Expenditure Framework (MTEF).
A further 1 923 units were awaiting EIA approval, while 1 000 had received a response
on conditional funding and another 1 000 had been planned for the future.
The
municipality managed a total of 32 000 flagship projects, which included a rural
housing project in Vulindlela (amounting to 25 000 units). The application was
submitted to the Department of Human Settlements in June 2010.
A total of
7 500 sites were planned for rental and private accommodation, of which 5 000 were
planned as future projects. About 1 500 sites were reported to be administered
by the Municipal Housing Association (MHA) for rental housing projects. The
remaining 1 000 sites located in the central business district (CBD) were currently
under discussion.
Unspent funding
as at 30 June 2010 constituted approximately R43.4 million, which accounted for
16 projects. The projected completion date of the projects was between 2011 and
2014.
The following
challenges were identified:
Deliberations
In response to concerns raised about the number of blocked projects,
rectification, poor spending and inadequate co-ordination between the province,
district and the local municipality, it was indicated that the presentation by
the municipality was not a true reflection of the situation. For example on the issue of non-cooperation by
the province, it was indicated that most of the projects were approved.
However, it was discovered that those projects were not incorporated in the IDP.
Meetings with the Umsunduzi municipality were held monthly to deal with issues
of legislative requirements, etc. Unspent funding affected about 54
municipalities and the province was in the process of consulting with each one individually.
The unspent funds needed to be transferred to areas in need of funding.
4.18 Site
visit to Imbali 1 – Ward 19
The site previously served as a hostel, accommodating males working in
nearby factories. Hostels were dilapidated, and people were moved in without any
measure of control. There was a lack of information in respect of who occupied
which unit and where monthly rent payments were made. There was some concern
about unemployed people occupying the hostels.
The delegation visited a unit occupied by a woman who was critically ill
and bedridden. The unit she occupied was previously utilised as an office, but she
was accommodated by a sympathetic councillor. The occupant indicated that she
had been living the unit, together with her nine children, for a period of nine
years.
The delegation observed that the
family was socially vulnerable. As such,
the occupant required support from health and social service practitioners. Home-based
care workers should be assisting in this regard. The provincial department committed
itself to interact with the municipality to find adequate shelter for the
family as a matter of priority.
The delegation also encountered a group of residents who raised grievances
about the hostel units they were currently occupying. The units’ function
changed from single male shelter into family occupancy. Some people were given
title deeds, but another person would come along to claim ownership and force
the family to vacate the unit.
Another resident indicated that his father used to live in one of the houses
for more than 20 years, but people came with a gun and forced his family to evacuate
the house. Some houses were illegally sold without even notifying the occupants
of such sale. The price paid for some units amounted to approximately R55 000. Occupants
reported paying rent of R7.50 per person per bed, and furnished the delegation
with receipts as proof of payment. Copies of these receipts would be made by Dr
Bheki Shabane from the provincial department, while original documents are to
be returned to the owners. The provincial department was further requested to safeguard
copies of receipts for further enquiries.
The delegation was dismayed by the
selling of such dilapidated units and recommended that the Special Investigating
Unit conduct an investigation into this issue.
4.19 Site
visit to Imbali Unit 13 - phase 4
The project started in 1997 as a flood relief programme. There were 450 double-storey
units, and four families were accommodated per block. The original project was
a wire-wall project, but was phased out due to a number of challenges. The
project experienced financial constraints and was refinanced in December 2010.
While the delegation was informed that the completion of the project was
due on 31 March 2011, it was evident during the site visit that there was no
contractor on site and structures were left incomplete. The community indicated
that the site office was closed during October 2010 after the contractor
(Amawela) left. The delegation was not furnished with an adequate explanation for
the closure of the site office. Residents were relocated to transit camps
constructed by Amawela. However, the transit camps were vandalised, which left many
families with no alternative than to
illegally occupy the partially finished units. It was alleged that the contractor
was not paid and that this had resulted in the project being abandoned.
The delegation requested a
comprehensive report from the provincial department, detailing what happened with
this project and why the contractor was not paid.
4.20 Meeting
with the Registrar of Deeds
The Registrar of Deeds formed part of the Department of Rural
Development and Land Reform. The Office’s
function was to maintain a public register of land, preserve all the records
and provide information to the public. The duties of the Office were derived
from the Deeds Registrar Act (No. 47 of 1937). The Registrar of Deeds used a
land registration system known as Casadral, which entailed the identification
of land parcels and the registration of ownership.
A major challenge to maintaining an accurate and updated system related to
the fact that transfer of ownership only took place on registration. Information
was not automatically updated when an individual’s marital status or marital
regime changed, for example. In December
2001, the Registrar of Deeds launched an electronic system, ie the Deeds Office
Tracking System (DOTS), which enabled the Office to scan deeds into different
tracking points. The data preparation took six days to finalise, unless there was
a document missing and rejected. Government-subsidised
houses were processed in three days. The conveyancers dealing with subsidised projects
should apply to the Deputy Registrar of Deeds prior the registration in order
to be awarded priority. In such instances, a red stamp is affixed onto the
deeds indicating state-subsidised housing, and consequently expedited.
The Housing Act (as amended) was not considered by the Registrar, since the
province had not requested it. This could be a challenge, since
state-subsidised houses were sold almost every day, despite such transactions being
illegal.
The challenge was poor conveyancing with regard to state-subsidised
housing, hence there was no indication that the house was in compliance with an
eight-year or pre-emptive clause. The missing information in a batch ruined the
entire process of registration.
The Committee advised that in
future, the province pro-actively inform the Registrar of upcoming projects to
allow for proper planning.
4.21 Site
visit to Tamboville: North East Sector
Councillor Dladla of ward 34, an area under
4.22 Site
visit to Mpumelelo
The project was located in ward 18 and was established more than 10 years
ago. The following observations were made: walls were cracked, water pipes had burst
and water was flowing freely down the street for more than two years, and drains
were blocked. It was also evident that the community was sharing a single tap.
Toilets had been installed, but were not connected to water. Given these
circumstances, the community was obliged to carry buckets of water in order to flush
the toilets. When the outside container was filled, residents were obliged to
hire people with chemicals to disinfect it, while those who could not afford
this would empty containers in nearby bushes.
4.23 Site
visit to
The delegation was informed that owners sold their state-subsidised houses,
while others were renting for approximately R150 to R200 a month. It was alleged
that the councillor was forging eviction orders to defaulters and selling their
houses. The councillor had circulated a fraudulent letter to evict one of the
occupants. The letter was handed over to the province for safe keeping.
4.24 Site
visit to Oribi
The owners of state-subsidised houses were not known and the tenants
were tired of paying rent. The rent ranged
from R252 to R500 a month. Some tenants seemed to have no idea nor understand
that there was a waiting list in the municipal offices where they could submit their
names. Residents asked the municipality to transfer the houses to them so that
they could effect renovations.
Day 5: 3
March 2011
4.25
The district comprised five municipalities, namely: eMnambithi,
Umtshezi, Okhahlamba, Imbabazane and Indaka. The following water and sanitation
programmes were approved and funded to the value of R252 million by DWAF as
well as through the MIG.
There were four sanitation projects: two have been
completed while the rest were still in progress. Eight new sanitation projects
have been introduced to the value of R7 million for the 2011/12 financial year.
The sanitation projects were funded by DWAF. The Zakheni sewer project has been
put on hold.
Okhahlamba
LM – The municipality consisted of 13 wards, with a total population of
151 446. The number of households totalled 28 508. The water backlog as at
2010 was 6 413. There were three water projects: one has been completed
while two were still in progress. Two sanitation projects were still in
progress while another was awaiting AFA approval. With respect to new
sanitation projects, a contractor has been introduced in one project while in
the other remaining four a contractor has yet to be introduced.
A total of five sanitation projects have been
implemented: three have been completed and two were still in progress. There were
three new sanitation projects. A contractor has been introduced for one project,
while contractors for the other two would be appointed in the near future, The
municipality was still awaiting new business plans.
Challenges facing uThukela
·
The district was experiencing a drought, ie about 50% of
boreholes were dysfunctional and dams had dried up.
·
Water and sanitation infrastructure had been vandalised
by the residents.
·
Power supply was interrupted as a result of lighting that
struck one of the power stations.
EMnambithi LM
The municipality was located in a storm belt corridor, which made it
susceptible to storm-related disasters. The 2006-2011 IDP focused on urban
renewal, of which an application was made to the department in 2007. Confirmation
of R50 million was received and the project was earmarked to be a presidential project.
However, the province subsequently reported that there was no policy to allow
the funds to be released. In 2007, the President visited Zakheni and emphasised
that the urban project would proceed. In 2008, the area was struck by floods
and storms, and in 2009 a business plan was submitted to the Department of
Human Settlements. An amount of R18 million was released for immediate relief
by the province, but this amount was inadequate. The storm struck the area
repeatedly and the situation deteriorated considerably. The municipality was in the process of
reviewing its business plan.
The municipality has a slum clearance programme in accordance with the
MDG targets. The department has only approved 1 500 beneficiaries for this
propramme.
Progress overview
Rectification plan programme
In 2007, a business plan was submitted to the province. In 2010, the MEC announced that R300 million
would be released to deal with relief housing and storm damage. Since then
nothing has happened. The NHBRC demanded that projects be registered with it by
the province or municipality and indicated that late registrations would be rejected.
Disasters
Most towns and villages were affected by disasters. Seven people had lost
their lives and 534 houses were smashed to the ground. An amount of R35 million
was set aside for disaster-affected areas. The area was susceptible to lightning,
and therefore lightning conductors should be installed in order to alleviate
the problem.
Land
In most areas, landowners were not residing on their land while others were
deceased. This made it difficult to trace the owners. Tenants were also negatively
affected.
Rural housing
It has been a challenge to deliver rural housing since most of the land
in the area was managed by the iNgonyama Trust. However, the situation was improving
since discussions to release land were in progress.
Contribution by farmers
Farmers had contributed land for housing developments.
Comments by the delegation
·
A concern was raised about the number of business plans
presented.
·
The HDA should be involved in issues relating to land,and
assist in tracing the landowners.
·
An amount of R300 million made available by the MEC should
be followed up.
·
Conditions should be stipulated to consultants in
respect of projects and should include time frames for completion.
·
An update was required on the R2.6 billion identified in
the state-of-the-nation address intended for water and services in
·
Clarity was required on the R800 million that was readily
available for disaster relief.
4.26 Site
visit to St Chads
The project was located in a peri-urban community and consisted of 3 000
units. However, an additional 500 units were still required. The project was divided
into two sub-projects: the first one related to in-situ upgrading, while the second one was in regard to green field
development. One aspect of the project was
rural in nature (sites are larger in size), while the urban component consisted
of smaller sites. It was reported that people originating from outside the area
benefited first, while the initial beneficiaries were still on the waiting
list. The area was located far from social amenities. However, the Department
of Arts and Culture provided a mobile library.
A community centre, which was completed during October 2010, was
situated in close proximity of the project.
To date, the centre had not been made available to the municipality and
there was some concern that it faced the risk of vandalism.
4.27 Site
visit to Section E slum clearance
The project originated as an emergency project and consisted of 642
units. The dwellings were constructed from mud, and bulk infrastructure had yet
to be established. There was also no running water available. The site was
properly planned and included access roads.
The delegation advised the
municipality to construct an apron to prevent rainwater from penetrating.
4.28 Site
visit to Thembalihle disaster project
There was no bulk infrastructure and the area was not considered suitable
for human habitation. Mud houses had
been washed away while others had collapsed.
4.29 Meeting
with
The district
consisted of the following local municipalities:
The following
additional information was provided as follows:
Housing plans in
Thirteen informal
settlements were located in the area. The housing waiting list at the time constituted
34 000 beneficiaries. Provision was made for a total of 20 housing projects. Eleven
were existing projects while an additional nine were planned for the future. The
slum clearance project was intended to deliver 1 400 houses, but instead delivered
1 388 units.
Osizweni
Phase 1
project – All 450 units were delivered. Section F phase 2 – All 500 units were delivered.
Mopheme – A
total of 500 units were planned but none were delivered.
Standsfordhill
– A total of 5 000 units were planned and 4 169 were delivered.
Emadadeni –
A total of 1 141 units were planned and 1 140 were delivered.
Amehlesizwe
Phase 3 – A total of 670 houses still have to be delivered.
Amathukuza
rectification – The NHBRC was appointed to assess houses, and R175 million was
allocated.
Khatide –
A total of 1 000 houses required rectification.
Charlie’s Town
– A total of 1 500 units had been planned.
Siyahlala
la – A contractor for the 1 000 houses had been appointed.
Emawozeni
– A total of 200 houses had been planned. It was a project for people with
disabilities. The project was run by the Department of Social Development and specific
programmes were put in place to specifically serve their needs. They also needed
to be placed in an area where they were able to access their places of work and
other activities in which they were involved.
JBC
housing project – The municipality purchased land for R5 million. The challenge
was that the project was still awaiting the title deed from the Department of Rural
Development and Land Reform.
Ingogo
project – A total of 7 500 units had been planned.
Challenges
·
Poor workmanship.
·
No green fields.
·
All projects were slum clearance projects.
·
Unresolved land claims.
·
Under-mined areas.
·
Deceased beneficiary delays.
·
Bureaucratic tendencies stifled progress.
Water focus in eMadlangeni
The
feasibility study for bulk infrastructure has been finalised and phase 1 was approved
at a cost of R13 million. A total of R1 million was allocated in the middle of
the 2010/11 financial year. The objective of the project was to eradicate the water
backlog in an estimated 4 312 households in the municipality.
Implementation of the Amajuba
District Household Sanitation Project: Dannhauser
It was estimated
that a total of 17 235 households would be served at a cost of R85 million. A
total of 600 VIP latrines were planned in areas such as Clerafarm, Eastbourne,
eMafuathela, Fulathela, Mafahlawane, Phillip Farm,
Key challenges
Deliberations
In
response to questions raised, the municipality indicated that social housing had
not been planned and that this was an area that required future focus. On the
management of the waiting list, it was previously differentiated according to
race. There was a list for Coloureds, Indians and Blacks. However, since 2009 there
had been a single list for all beneficiaries that was reviewed every two years.
To minimize poor workmanship, the province was not allowing any project that
was not registered with the NHBRC.
On the
issue of land, owners were reluctant to allow the community to bury their relatives
on privately-owned land. Some owners were reluctant to release land to the Department
of Human Settlements for development. Two separate cases were reported where
the department had to expropriate land for development.
Day 6: 4
March 2011
4.30 Site
visit to Dannhausser (Strijbank) blocked project
The project was initiated in 2000. The private developer had constructed
houses of poor quality and would frequently disappear from the site. The land
used to be owned privately by smallholdings. While the deed of sale was signed
and paid for, the land had yet to be transferred. The municipality recommended
that the developer’s contract be terminated. The MEC decided to offer the
developer a second opportunity, but closely monitored the situation. However,
due to continued poor workmanship the developer’s contract was terminated. After litigation, the developer won the case on
technical grounds. Since then the infrastructure has continued to deteriorate.
A total of 247 houses has been completed and handed over without any electricity. There was no intention to develop the
remainder of the units. Water plans would be rolled-out in within two weeks.
The delegation expressed concern
about the land technically still being under private ownership. In this regard,
the municipality should fast-track the transfer of the land. The delegation articulated
its concern about the conditions of access roads and required further clarity
on the role of the Extended Public Works Programme (EPWP) in the area.
4.31 Site visit to kwa-Mathukuza
Approximately 1 300 houses were due to be demolished. The EIA was a challenge
in the area.
4.32 Meeting
at uPhongolo
uPhongolo was
one of the five municipalities in the district of Zululand and consisted of 14
wards. The municipality estimated the population size to be 11 900. The housing
backlog stood at 55 000 units.
The following overview was provided:
Incotshane Housing Project
Housing
delivery was initiated in 1997 and resulted in the Incotshane Housing Project
with 215 units completed in 1998. These units were 32 square metres in size and
included two bedrooms and a kitchen/lounge. The toilet was located on the outside
and all units were equipped with a waterborne sewage system. Building blocks
were produced by the local community under the supervision of a project
manager. The material used was sub-standard. The Nu-Tec roofing was too light
and could not withstand hailstorms.
The
beneficiaries had been occupying the houses for a period of about 13 years
without such houses being transferred. The reasons for this were that the opening
of the township register and mineral rights had not been resolved. The
municipality communicated with the Ingonyama Trust on several occasions without
any success.
Ncotshane Housing Project No:
K20020045
The Ncotshane
project was initiated in 2001/2002. The project initially provided for 1 100
sites, but it was later reduced to 1 054 sites due to the rocky land
topography. To date, 250 units have been completed and a further 32 units were
in varying stages of completion.
The project started in 2005 and was later put on hold in 2006 due to the
disagreement between the implementing agent and the uPhongolo Municipal Council.
The council obtained bridging finance in the amount R3.2 million to finalise the
250 houses that were not completed in order to prevent them from being
vandalised. A new implementing agent was appointed to package the application
for submission to the Department of Human Settlements. The council reported
that there was a severe hailstorm that hit the municipality and most of the
houses were severely damaged. The beneficiaries of the housing project were
approved and were ready for their houses to be built.
Gumbi low-income housing project
The municipality
was preparing for the new project in ward 1, which was the result of the land restitution
and land redistribution programmes from the following areas: Candover (350
houses), Cottlands (70 houses), Bethel (70 houses), and Hlamanyathi (70 houses).
The above-mentioned
communities have displayed an interest in having state-subsidised houses
constructed. Consultation was ongoing with the Department of Rural Development
and Land Reform to determine the ownership of the land. This was critical for
ensuring that the correct instrument of the subsidy would be used in these
projects. The project was in the preparatory stage.
Challenges affecting municipal housing
delivery
5. Observations
made by the delegation
The following observations were made by the delegation in respect of its
oversight visit to
6. Recommendations
The Committee recommended the following:
1.
The Special Investigating Unit should urgently be
commissioned to investigate the Imbali phase 1 hostels and phase 13 double-storey
houses (wire wall). The department should report back to the Committee by June
2011 and submit a comprehensive report explaining exactly why contractors were
not paid, which resulted in them leaving the site unattended. Progress report on Imbali Phases should reach
the Committee by August.
2.
The HDA should focus on addressing the land situation in
3.
The Department of Human Settlements should visit all areas visited
by the Committee in
1. Engineers who signed
fraudulent geotechnical reports should be investigated and prosecuted.
2. In all state-subsidised
housing, the materials used should comply with the standards of the South
African Bureau for Standards (SABS) in an attempt to stop contractors from
using low-quality building materials.
3. The provincial department
should address the issue of sanitation in Impumelelo settlements within the
next two months.
4. The province should be
requested to release the state-owned land in Tin-town for housing development.
5. The department should be
assertive in addressing poor workmanship and regularly report to Parliament on how
it dealt with transgressors.
6. The issue of disaster
management must also be prioritised by the province.
7. The People’s Housing Process
must be promoted by the province and housing co-operatives should be afforded priority.
8. The period of 18 months of
hosting people in transit camps must be adhered to by both the municipality and
the province.
9. The UThukela Water Board must
address the issue of water shortages. The municipality and the eThekwini
municipality should interact with uThukela to address the water challenges.
10. Municipalities should
undertake initiatives to make provision for adequate temporary relocation units.
To Parliament:
1. The Portfolio
Committee on Human Settlements should convene smaller groups to conduct follow-up
visits on a quarterly basis.
2. The Portfolio Committee
on Human Settlements should develop a template that would be used by local and
provincial governments when reporting on information requested by the Committee
3. The Department of Rural Development
and Land Reform should address the issue of farm evictions and the destruction
of graves in Kokstad.
Report
has been considered and adopted by the Committee. Therefore, the Committee recommends that the
report should be considered by the House.