Date: 28/06/2004
Source: Ministry of Provincial and Local Government
Title: S Mufamadi: Provincial and Local Government Dept Budget Vote debate, NCOP
SPEECH DELIVERED BY MINISTER FS MUFAMADI TO THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES ON THE OCCASION OF THE BUDGET VOTE DEBATE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, 28 June 2004
Madam Chairperson,
Honourable Members and delegates.
Three days ago, members of the executive arm of government of our three spheres of government met at a special workshop in Pretoria. This was an occasion for us as government practitioners to reflect on our institutional circumstances and to orchestrate inter-sphere synergies, which are favourable to the realisation of a high growth economic trajectory.
As members and delegates will recall, apartheid exclusionary policies were based on the employment of the tropes of South Africa as a country of "nations", each with the possibility to develop along its own separate lines. The ideology of politico-economic exclusion and the domination was entrenched through a racially based tricameral parliament, 10 bantustants with feeble legislative and executive powers and functions, four provincial administrative entities and a racially segregated system of local government. The sinister legacy of that government system and its policies continue to define the social, political and economic challenges of present-day South Africa. As we speak, an intolerably high number of people live in households which:
* Are not electrified
* Are without sanitation
* Are without clean drinkable water or
* Are unable to access services for refuse removal.
Millions of people are without jobs and many able-bodied citizens have been reduced into recipients of social grants.
We came into government in 1994 inspired by a vision, which assigns to public institutions and policy the role of mobilising the economic resources of our country towards the betterment of the lives of all our people. In 1996, Parliament codified this - our vision - through the enactment of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. The Constitution establishes three distinctive, interdependent and interrelated spheres of government. Drawing from the reservoir of our 10 years of experience, we should be able to at least present some tentative perspectives on the best possible way of organising ourselves, in order to be equal to the tasks that are entailed in our entry into the second decade of freedom.
The experience of ten years has produced a balance-sheet which is at once a source of pride to our government and a source of optimism to millions of South Africans who for decades, were condemned to a life bereft of hope:
* Whereas in 1994 only 2,6 million people were benefiting from various social grants, by 2003, the number of citizens covered by our social net had increased to 6,8 million
* In 1996, 60% of the households had access to clean water. By 2001, the number of households with access to clean water had risen to 85%
* In 1996, 32% of households had electricity connections. By 2001, the coverage of electricity connections had been extended to 70% of our country's households, and
* Whereas in 1994 only 49% of households had access to sanitation, by 2001, the number of households with access to sanitation had risen to 63%.
On the basis of the foregoing experience, we understand that social consensus to which government must be responsive is mandating an improvement in the performance of the state. The state is being called upon to increase its own capacity for poverty alleviation and reinforcement of national pride. This goal can only be achieved through focused implementation of policy, better integration and alignment across spheres of government, and improved contact between government and the people.
Quite clearly, we need an Intergovernmental Relations Framework, which provides for greater opportunity to give practical effect to the government-wide Programme of Action. It must allow our three spheres of government the possibility to function more and more as an integrated and coherent unit. The synergies we call for must be manifest in the areas of strategic planning, budgeting and implementation of government policy.
In practical terms, all our three spheres of government must be single-minded in their pursuit of the goals of the moment:
* They must work together to ensure an improvement in the provision of basic services to our people, and to ensure a proper alignment between the policy on free basic services and our policy on indigence
* They must together, facilitate the provision of social grants to deserving citizens
* They must make it possible for line-function departments who are charged with the responsibility of providing electricity and clean water, to realise the agreed targets.
The plans of all the entities that comprise our spheres of government must indicate how they are all going to contribute to the task of providing more than 300 000 households with basic sanitation during the current financial year.
Madam Chairperson and Honourable Members, what I have just outlined are the immediate, short-term steps which need to be undertaken. In the medium to long-term, we have to craft a framework, which effectively responds to the Report of the Presidential Review Commission that was released in February 1998. The report concluded that:
* Improved information flows between and within sectors in all spheres of government are a matter of considerable importance;
* Intergovernmental relations between local government and the other two spheres of government are weak and will need to be strengthened;
* There is a strong need for the development of a coordinating mechanism at the national level and
* There is no institution assigned with responsibility for overall planning at either the national or provincial levels - this will need to be addressed.
Subsequent to the release of the Commission Report, government conducted an Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) Audit, which reached many conclusions and made a number of recommendations. The audit report was released at the end of 1999. Among other things, the report:
* Noted that there was a lack of interaction between local, provincial and national governments as they strategise for growth and development. Municipalities do not interact with provincial government in formulating Integrated Development Plans (IDPs), and likewise provincial budgets are compiled without reference local plans;
* Said there is a need to develop the capacity of organised local government and to facilitate the interaction between municipalities, provincial and national governments
* It also urged provincial government to budget for municipal support, monitoring and intervention.
By the end of the first term of democratic government, the Intergovernmental Relations system was clearly very young and it lacked coherence in many areas. However, with the establishment of the new local government system at the end of 2000, it became possible to conceive of the Intergovernmental Relations system more holistically and to focus on areas that are crying our for refinement.
As Honourable Members are aware, we have MINMECs which function as sectoral fora to co-ordinate work in areas of concurrent responsibility between the national and provincial spheres. The other two structures (the Budget Council and the Budget Forum) provide opportunities for provinces to and municipalities to work with national government on budgetary and fiscal policy matters. In addition to these, we established the President's Coordinating Council (PCC) in October 1999. The PCC is there for purposes of enhancing the ability of the provincial executive councils and the South African Local Government Association to impact on the elaboration of national priorities.
The above-mentioned experiments have resulted in marked improvements with regards to the promotion of inter-sphere dialogue and co-ordination. They enabled us to forge delivery-oriented partnerships around initiatives like the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme (ISRDP) and the Urban Renewal Programme (URP). These experiences bear on the future lessons to be taken on board as we implement the Expanded Public Works Programme and the Municipal Infrastructure Grant for which the respective amounts of R45 billion and R15, 6 billion have been allocated.
Madam Chairperson and Honourable Members, it is our intention to put before this House and the National Assembly, the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Bill. The Bill will serve in the next session of the House. We look forward to insightful contributions from Members and Delegates. The Bill is meant to take us to the next stage in the learning curve. Above all, it is meant to improve our collective capacity for serving our country and our people. We look forward to your co-operation.
I thank you.
Issued by: Ministry of Provincial and Local Government
28 June 2004
Source: Ministry of Provincial and Local Government
Title: S Mufamadi: Provincial and Local Government Dept Budget Vote debate, NCOP
SPEECH DELIVERED BY MINISTER FS MUFAMADI TO THE NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES ON THE OCCASION OF THE BUDGET VOTE DEBATE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT, 28 June 2004
Madam Chairperson,
Honourable Members and delegates.
Three days ago, members of the executive arm of government of our three spheres of government met at a special workshop in Pretoria. This was an occasion for us as government practitioners to reflect on our institutional circumstances and to orchestrate inter-sphere synergies, which are favourable to the realisation of a high growth economic trajectory.
As members and delegates will recall, apartheid exclusionary policies were based on the employment of the tropes of South Africa as a country of "nations", each with the possibility to develop along its own separate lines. The ideology of politico-economic exclusion and the domination was entrenched through a racially based tricameral parliament, 10 bantustants with feeble legislative and executive powers and functions, four provincial administrative entities and a racially segregated system of local government. The sinister legacy of that government system and its policies continue to define the social, political and economic challenges of present-day South Africa. As we speak, an intolerably high number of people live in households which:
* Are not electrified
* Are without sanitation
* Are without clean drinkable water or
* Are unable to access services for refuse removal.
Millions of people are without jobs and many able-bodied citizens have been reduced into recipients of social grants.
We came into government in 1994 inspired by a vision, which assigns to public institutions and policy the role of mobilising the economic resources of our country towards the betterment of the lives of all our people. In 1996, Parliament codified this - our vision - through the enactment of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa. The Constitution establishes three distinctive, interdependent and interrelated spheres of government. Drawing from the reservoir of our 10 years of experience, we should be able to at least present some tentative perspectives on the best possible way of organising ourselves, in order to be equal to the tasks that are entailed in our entry into the second decade of freedom.
The experience of ten years has produced a balance-sheet which is at once a source of pride to our government and a source of optimism to millions of South Africans who for decades, were condemned to a life bereft of hope:
* Whereas in 1994 only 2,6 million people were benefiting from various social grants, by 2003, the number of citizens covered by our social net had increased to 6,8 million
* In 1996, 60% of the households had access to clean water. By 2001, the number of households with access to clean water had risen to 85%
* In 1996, 32% of households had electricity connections. By 2001, the coverage of electricity connections had been extended to 70% of our country's households, and
* Whereas in 1994 only 49% of households had access to sanitation, by 2001, the number of households with access to sanitation had risen to 63%.
On the basis of the foregoing experience, we understand that social consensus to which government must be responsive is mandating an improvement in the performance of the state. The state is being called upon to increase its own capacity for poverty alleviation and reinforcement of national pride. This goal can only be achieved through focused implementation of policy, better integration and alignment across spheres of government, and improved contact between government and the people.
Quite clearly, we need an Intergovernmental Relations Framework, which provides for greater opportunity to give practical effect to the government-wide Programme of Action. It must allow our three spheres of government the possibility to function more and more as an integrated and coherent unit. The synergies we call for must be manifest in the areas of strategic planning, budgeting and implementation of government policy.
In practical terms, all our three spheres of government must be single-minded in their pursuit of the goals of the moment:
* They must work together to ensure an improvement in the provision of basic services to our people, and to ensure a proper alignment between the policy on free basic services and our policy on indigence
* They must together, facilitate the provision of social grants to deserving citizens
* They must make it possible for line-function departments who are charged with the responsibility of providing electricity and clean water, to realise the agreed targets.
The plans of all the entities that comprise our spheres of government must indicate how they are all going to contribute to the task of providing more than 300 000 households with basic sanitation during the current financial year.
Madam Chairperson and Honourable Members, what I have just outlined are the immediate, short-term steps which need to be undertaken. In the medium to long-term, we have to craft a framework, which effectively responds to the Report of the Presidential Review Commission that was released in February 1998. The report concluded that:
* Improved information flows between and within sectors in all spheres of government are a matter of considerable importance;
* Intergovernmental relations between local government and the other two spheres of government are weak and will need to be strengthened;
* There is a strong need for the development of a coordinating mechanism at the national level and
* There is no institution assigned with responsibility for overall planning at either the national or provincial levels - this will need to be addressed.
Subsequent to the release of the Commission Report, government conducted an Intergovernmental Relations (IGR) Audit, which reached many conclusions and made a number of recommendations. The audit report was released at the end of 1999. Among other things, the report:
* Noted that there was a lack of interaction between local, provincial and national governments as they strategise for growth and development. Municipalities do not interact with provincial government in formulating Integrated Development Plans (IDPs), and likewise provincial budgets are compiled without reference local plans;
* Said there is a need to develop the capacity of organised local government and to facilitate the interaction between municipalities, provincial and national governments
* It also urged provincial government to budget for municipal support, monitoring and intervention.
By the end of the first term of democratic government, the Intergovernmental Relations system was clearly very young and it lacked coherence in many areas. However, with the establishment of the new local government system at the end of 2000, it became possible to conceive of the Intergovernmental Relations system more holistically and to focus on areas that are crying our for refinement.
As Honourable Members are aware, we have MINMECs which function as sectoral fora to co-ordinate work in areas of concurrent responsibility between the national and provincial spheres. The other two structures (the Budget Council and the Budget Forum) provide opportunities for provinces to and municipalities to work with national government on budgetary and fiscal policy matters. In addition to these, we established the President's Coordinating Council (PCC) in October 1999. The PCC is there for purposes of enhancing the ability of the provincial executive councils and the South African Local Government Association to impact on the elaboration of national priorities.
The above-mentioned experiments have resulted in marked improvements with regards to the promotion of inter-sphere dialogue and co-ordination. They enabled us to forge delivery-oriented partnerships around initiatives like the Integrated Sustainable Rural Development Programme (ISRDP) and the Urban Renewal Programme (URP). These experiences bear on the future lessons to be taken on board as we implement the Expanded Public Works Programme and the Municipal Infrastructure Grant for which the respective amounts of R45 billion and R15, 6 billion have been allocated.
Madam Chairperson and Honourable Members, it is our intention to put before this House and the National Assembly, the Intergovernmental Relations Framework Bill. The Bill will serve in the next session of the House. We look forward to insightful contributions from Members and Delegates. The Bill is meant to take us to the next stage in the learning curve. Above all, it is meant to improve our collective capacity for serving our country and our people. We look forward to your co-operation.
I thank you.
Issued by: Ministry of Provincial and Local Government
28 June 2004
Advertisement
EMAIL THIS ARTICLE SAVE THIS ARTICLE FEEDBACK
To subscribe email subscriptions@creamermedia.co.za or click here
To advertise email advertising@creamermedia.co.za or click here
