White Paper on Local Government: SECTION D

2.1 What is a Metropolitan area?
2.2 Why have metropolitan government in metropolitan areas?
2.3 Metropolitan government institutions
2.4 Managing the transition process in metropolitan areas
2.5 Anticipating the future in metropolitan areas
2.6 Concluding comment

2.1. What is a metropolitan area?

Metropolitan areas are large urban settlements with high population densities, complex and diversified economies, and a high degree of functional integration* across a larger geographic area than the normal jurisdiction of a municipality. Economic and social activities transcend municipal boundaries, and metropolitan residents may live in one locality, work in another, and utilise recreational facilities across the metropolitan area.

Metropolitan governments are governments whose area of jurisdiction covers the whole metropolitan area. Where there is no metropolitan government, the metropolitan area is divided into many municipal jurisdictions.

2.2. Why have metropolitan government in metropolitan areas?

There are three compelling reasons for the establishment of metropolitan government:

(a) Metropolitan government creates a basis for equitable and socially just metropolitan governance

In the absence of metropolitan government, municipalities within a metropolitan area seek to maximise their per capita tax base through:

Exclusionary practices (i.e., excluding low-ratable forms of development in their jurisdiction and excluding residents who would cost the tax base more than they would contribute to it).

Protecting their tax base from claims beyond their borders (i.e. ensuring that their tax base does not contribute to the costs of servicing areas outside their jurisdictions).

The result is that the urban poor are pushed to the metropolitan peripheries or into spatial "pockets of poverty", which are expensive to service and far from job opportunities and recreational and social amenities.

Urban apartheid provided a legal framework for white municipalities to effectively exclude the largely black majority of the urban poor and ensure that high-ratable commercial development fell within their jurisdiction. Although the consumer and labour power of township residents contributed to the tax base of white municipalities, services in the townships were not funded from this tax base.

Metropolitan government provides a mechanism for addressing this dynamic of inequity, and ensuring that everyone who contributes to the tax base benefits from it. Where the Metropolitan Council has sufficient fiscal powers and effective mechanisms to enable redistribution across the metropolitan area, metropolitan government can significantly enhance equity and promote social justice in the city.

A more equitable and socially just form of metropolitan governance not only benefits the urban poor, but in the long-term benefits all metropolitan residents. Numerous studies have shown that the overall economic prosperity of metropolitan cities is greater where there is less inequity between constituent parts of a metropolitan area. Social justice and equity are not merely desirable ends in themselves, but also make good economic sense.

(b) Metropolitan government promotes strategic land-use planning, and coordinated public investment in physical and social infrastructure

Municipalities in metropolitan areas are embedded in a continuous urban area that extends beyond their boundaries. Urban economic, social and spatial dynamics inevitably play themselves out at a scale larger than the boundary of any particular embedded municipality. However, municipalities exercise their planning powers and functions within their particular areas of jurisdiction. This mismatch between the scale of municipal boundaries and the scale of economic and social activity in the metropolitan area often results in irrational land-use planning decisions. Given that planning frameworks are intended to guide public investment (for example, investment in infrastructure and transport systems), poor planning tends to result in the less than optimal use of public funds.

Public investment in physical and social infrastructure may also result in negative spillovers and externalities* in metropolitan areas where there is no metropolitan government. Services (such as roads, bulk infrastructure and communications infrastructure) may be funded from one municipal tax base, yet consumed predominantly by residents from other tax bases. Some services (such as art galleries, reference libraries, museums and so forth) are likely to be located in the central city but utilised by all metropolitan residents. The provision of such services is usually costly, and, in line with the principle that services should be paid for by the urban residents who consume them, the costs of such services should be shared across the metropolis.

The city-wide jurisdiction of metropolitan governments enables more integrated development planning which is able to respond to and influence metropolitan-wide spatial, social and economic trends, and helps to minimise negative externalities.

(c) Metropolitan government is able to develop a city-wide framework for economic and social development, and enhance the economic competitiveness and well-being of the city

Metropolitan areas are often assessed as single entities for purposes of determining their investment attraction potential. Metropolitan government is able to market the city as a whole, and direct investment in line with an integrated development plan. In the absence of metropolitan government, municipalities may compete excessively for investment, and create negative perceptions through separate and uncoordinated international marketing strategies. The aggregate (cumulative) effect of economic policies which protect narrow local interests can damage the overall economic well-being of the metropolitan area.

Metropolitan government creates the basis for metropolitan development that is socially just and equitable, as well as spatially and economically integrated across the metropolitan area.

2.3. Metropolitan government institutions

2.3.1. The context

The choice of institutional arrangements for the municipalities which will govern South Africa's metropolitan areas is a key policy issue which not only impacts on the lives of millions of metropolitan residents, but is central to the economic well-being of the nation as a whole. Metropolitan areas, which are densely concentrated centres of economic activity, generate the bulk of the country's gross domestic product. However, they are also home to a large (and increasing) number of citizens who live in dire poverty, often lacking secure and decent shelter or access to basic services. The form of urban governance adopted in metropolitan areas will therefore be a critical factor in determining the future economic prosperity and social stability of the nation.

Over the past year, national government has facilitated an inclusive and intensive process of debate on the issue of metropolitan government systems. What has become clear is that the fragmentation of metropolitan areas into separate municipal governments will perpetuate inherited economic inequities and social divisions, and therefore cannot be favoured as an option for the future.

Equally, it has become increasingly clear that the existing system of metropolitan government, designed as an interim mechanism to unite the plethora of racially-based municipalities within metropolitan areas, requires careful rethinking. If the benefits of a metropolitan government system are to be consolidated, it is essential that the Metropolitan Council has sufficient powers and functions to fulfil the roles defined for it and sufficient flexibility to consolidate potential efficiency gains through vertically integrating or decentralising service functions.

2.3.2. Roles and responsibilities of the Metropolitan Council

In any system of metropolitan government, it is envisaged that the Metropolitan Council will fulfil the following key roles:

City-wide spatial integration and socially inclusive development

The concentration of the commercial and industrial tax base combined with the extreme spatial and social segregation along class and race divides within our metropolitan areas demand that particular attention is given to promoting spatial integration and socially inclusive forms of development.

Metropolitan governments should utilise their land-use planning and regulation functions to promote integrated spatial and socio-economic development. Land-use planning and regulation is not simply a technical instrument for ordering physical space. If combined with other functions such as transport planning and bulk-infrastructure planning, land-use planning may facilitate the development of a particular kind of urban living environment. Metropolitan governments should use their integrated development plans to articulate a vision for the kind of urban environment in which citizens wish to live, and translate that vision into reality through the combined exercise of land-use planning and other powers. In this sense land-use planning can become an instrument of social equity, which challenges the existing spatial location of poverty, and redirects market dynamics in line with the aspirations of metropolitan residents.

The Metropolitan Council should have powers over land-use planning, transport planning and bulk infrastructure planning. The Metropolitan integrated development plan should guide the development of the whole metropolitan area.

The promotion of equity, social justice and economic prosperity

The economic and social viability of our metropolitan areas is closely linked to addressing existing inequities and creating a stable environment for the attraction of capital investment. The former requires redistribution across the metropolitan area; the latter requires a clear, transparent and predictable framework in which redistribution can occur.

To effectively promote equity and facilitate redistribution between developed and underdeveloped parts of the city, Metropolitan Councils require strong fiscal powers.

The promotion of local democracy

The promotion of local democracy should be seen as a central role for any municipal government - it is given particular attention here because the scale and complexity of metropolitan areas require specific mechanisms to promote local participation and democracy.

The local sphere is an arena where citizens can participate in decision-making to shape their own living environments, and exercise and extend their democratic (social, economic and political) rights. It is often seen as critical for enhancing participative democracy because citizens may have greater incentives to participate at the local level and fewer disincentives. An individual is more likely to exercise some influence over a policy decision in a smaller, local institution, close to home. It is sometimes argued that the smaller the institution, the greater the participation. However, in the South African context of vast intra-metropolitan inequities and racially-divided cities, it cannot be assumed that smaller political institutions with maximum autonomy will necessarily enhance everyone's democratic rights.

Metropolitan residents should have a voice in decisions which affect them at their work, at home and at places of recreation. As in all democratic systems, there is a need in metropolitan systems to ensure that the exercise of the democratic rights of some groups does not infringe on the economic, social or political rights of other groups. This requires a metropolitan system where no constituent Council which represents only part of the metropolitan community has the autonomy to act in ways which limit the rights and opportunities of other metropolitan residents.

At the same time, a metropolitan government with a large jurisdiction may be perceived by residents as a distant form of government, and discourage their active participation. Our metropolitan areas include diverse communities, with different histories, priorities, needs and aspirations. Metropolitan governments need to be responsive to these diverse needs, and ensure that all citizens are able to contribute effectively to the governance of their communities. This requires smaller forums which effectively represent the diversity of interests within the metropolitan area.

Given the social geography of our major cities, it is likely that forums small enough to facilitate direct citizen participation will reflect existing racial divisions in the city. If these forums are independent municipal Councils, there is a danger that they will encourage race-based local politics.

The need for smaller representative forums can be accommodated at the same time as the concerns that no one Council should be able to act in ways which disadvantage other metropolitan residents, and that statutory divisions between parts of the metropolitan community should be avoided. Smaller political forums could be constituted as committees of the Metropolitan Council, thereby removing the need to create statutory divisions between parts of the city. The Metropolitan Council would need to decentralise powers and functions to these committees to ensure that they act as forums for meaningful participation and interaction with elected representatives, and do not become "talk-shops".

The provision of affordable and efficient services

Efficient delivery mechanisms require the decentralisation of certain functions, and the vertical integration of others. Not only is flexibility required with respect to the degree to which specific functions are decentralised within any metropolitan government -flexibility is also required between metropolitan governments. Factors such as the location of existing centres of municipal administrative capacity and infrastructure, population distribution patterns, and the existence of public utilities in some metropolitan areas, implies that effective delivery systems will require different degrees of administrative centralisation and decentralisation between metropolitan areas.

A two-tier system with a rigid division of powers and functions between tiers of independent municipalities can only allow for this type of flexibility where the allocation of powers and functions is locally negotiated. A legislated allocation of powers and functions between tiers imposes a standard allocation of functions on all metropolitan areas. However, experience from the past two years suggests that it is exceptional for the local negotiation of powers and functions between independent municipalities to result in an operationally optimal split of functions between tiers, and that political considerations generally tend to override administrative concerns.

Maximum flexibility with respect to differing administrative arrangements between and within metropolitan areas is best achieved through empowering each Metropolitan Council to decide on the extent of administrative decentralisation required for each function. This can be facilitated through vesting all municipal powers and functions at the metropolitan level, and making provision for the Metropolitan Council to decentralise functions as required. This system will enable different administrative arrangements to emerge in different metropolitan areas, based on a consideration of municipal capacity and infrastructure and end-user needs in each area. It will also allow for administrative arrangements to change over time to respond to changing needs, or to incorporate "best practices" from other metropolitan areas.

It has the added advantage of creating a single employer body, thereby facilitating parity in the conditions of service of municipal staff within the metropolitan area, and allowing for the deployment of staff across the metropolitan area as appropriate.

2.3.3. Metropolitan government systems

Two types of metropolitan government are proposed. In terms of Section 155(5) of the Constitution, provincial legislation must determine the type of metropolitan municipality to be established in that province.

Metropolitan government with Ward Committees

Metropolitan governments with Ward Committees are Category (A) municipalities that consist of:

A Metropolitan Council which exercises the complete range of (legislative, executive and administrative) municipal powers and duties.

Ward Committees, which are area-based committees whose boundaries coincide with ward boundaries. Ward Committees have no original powers and duties. They are established as committees of the Metropolitan Council, and their powers and functions must be delegated from the Metropolitan Council. They may have advisory powers and the right to be consulted on specific issues prior to Council approval. They may also correspond to decentralised service centres which bring the administration closer to residents.

The Metropolitan Council will establish a Ward Committee for each ward falling within its area of jurisdiction. Ward Committees should be chaired and convened by the councillor elected to the ward. Each Metropolitan Council must develop procedures and rules to govern the membership and proceedings of Ward Committees, provided that membership rules are applied consistently across the metropolitan area and do not unfairly discriminate against any individual or institution. The central role of Ward Committees is the facilitation of local community participation in decisions which affect the local community, the articulation of local community interests, and the representation of these interests within the metropolitan government system.

Ward Committees provide a structured channel of communication between geographic communities within the metropolitan area and their political representatives at the ward and metropolitan level. Well-functioning Ward Committees will provide every metropolitan resident with a local point of access to municipal government and strengthen the accountability of ward councillors to local residents. The establishment of Ward Committees should go hand in hand with strengthening support to ward councillors and building accountable and effective local political leadership.

The powers and duties delegated to Ward Committees must be determined by the Metropolitan Council. Metropolitan Councils can utilise Ward Committees effectively through the delegation of powers, such as:

A strong role in determining local needs and priorities which form the basis of the metropolitan integrated development plan.

Advisory powers with respect to policies impacting on the local area.

The right to be consulted on specific issues prior to Council approval.

In this type of metropolitan government, the Metropolitan Council may decentralise administrative functions as required. Decentralised administrative units do not need to correspond to ward boundaries, and may service any area determined by the Metropolitan Council. This will allow maximum flexibility with respect to the administrative arrangements adopted by the Metropolitan Council.

Metropolitan government with Metropolitan Substructures

Metropolitan governments with Metropolitan Substructures are municipalities that consist of:

A Metropolitan Council with original (legislative, executive and administrative) powers for all municipal functions.

Metropolitan Substructures. The powers and functions of Metropolitan Substructures must be devolved from the Metropolitan Council. They will have advisory, supervisory and decision-making powers.

Metropolitan Substructures will consist of all ward councillors elected to wards that fall within the Metropolitan Substructure's area of jurisdiction, and additional members of the Metropolitan Council allocated to serve on each Metropolitan Substructure. The allocation of additional members maintains the proportionality of votes cast for each party within the Metropolitan Substructure's area of jurisdiction.

This type of metropolitan government is intended to facilitate a structured correspondence between political and administrative decentralisation. Metropolitan Substructures are intended to:

Act as representative forums to enhance local democracy.

Facilitate the effective oversight, management and coordination of municipal functions within part of a metropolitan municipality's area of jurisdiction.

The Metropolitan Council will decentralise powers and functions to Metropolitan Substructures, including decision-making powers with respect to specific functions or components thereof. However, the powers listed in Section 160 (2) of the Constitution may not be decentralised.

Metropolitan Councils may approach the establishment of Metropolitan Substructures in various ways:

One approach is to establish Metropolitan Substructures as the key interface between local government and local communities, with the Metropolitan Council playing a supportive and enabling role. Powers and functions which involve direct interaction with the local community will be devolved to Metropolitan Substructures. Powers and functions which relate to either bulk supply or the establishment of policy frameworks which enable delivery by Metropolitan Substructures will be retained at metropolitan level. This approach could result in an allocation of powers and functions where Metropolitan Substructures are responsible for sewage disposal and the reticulation of services such as water and electricity, while the Metropolitan Council is responsible for the bulk sewage system and the bulk supply of water and electricity.

In addition to these shared powers and functions (where both the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Substructures assume responsibility for aspects of the same function) some functions (such as environmental management and traffic control) can be managed at Substructure level, with the Metropolitan Council playing a coordinating role in so far as these functions affect more than one Metropolitan Substructure. Functions which involve a high degree of interaction with local communities, such as the establishment of local amenities, business licensing, cleansing, billboards and advertising, the control of public places and so forth could be completely decentralised to Metropolitan Substructures.

In some metropolitan areas shared powers and functions may not be desirable, as the vertical integration of particular services may result in efficiency gains. For example, both the bulk supply and reticulation of water could be managed by the Metropolitan Council. Other functions such as local planning decisions, environmental control, public amenities, cleansing, business licensing, billboards and advertising, etc. could be decentralised to the Metropolitan Substructures, giving both the Metropolitan Council and Metropolitan Substructures a role in directly interacting with end-users. Substructures would retain a key role in compiling integrated development plans, including formulating inputs and strategy formulation.

Whichever approach is taken, the metropolitan municipal budget should be structured in a manner which ensures that Metropolitan Substructures have adequate revenue to fulfil the functions which are decentralised to them.

2.4. Managing the transition process in metropolitan areas

Both types of metropolitan government can be accommodated within a Category (A) model and allow for a phased implementation process which will minimise disruptions to service delivery. As an interim measure, Metropolitan Councils will be able to ensure continuity by delegating powers and functions in a way which will reproduce the existing metropolitan government architecture. Over time these can be adjusted to better suit the operational and efficiency requirements of the metropole. The establishment of a single tax base and common conditions of employment for all metropolitan staff will facilitate this process of restructuring.

The flexibility allowed by these models with respect to administrative and political decentralisation will create space for different systems of metropolitan governance to emerge within different metropolitan areas, without compromising any of the key objectives of metropolitan government. As systems of metropolitan governance are consolidated, best practices with respect to different aspects of metropolitan government will emerge. When appropriate, the legislative framework for metropolitan government may be revisited to incorporate the best practice models which develop over the forthcoming years. Organised forums of metropolitan governments can facilitate this process.

2.5. Anticipating the future in metropolitan areas

It is impossible to accurately predict the future industrial, commercial and residential development patterns of South Africa's metropolitan areas. What is certain is that continued urbanisation, the lifting of apartheid restrictions, new government policies and programmes, and South Africa's entry into the global economy under Gear will result in far-reaching changes. Metropolitan institutions and boundaries need to be flexible enough to accommodate changing development patterns and needs.

Where urban growth outstrips the metropolitan boundary, and encompasses a number of metropolitan or municipal areas, there may be a need for special mechanisms to address the spillover effects and potential inequities that may arise between areas experiencing rapid economic growth and functionally integrated residential areas or urban cores which fall within a different municipal jurisdiction.

In these circumstances it may be necessary to equalise across adjacent municipal tax bases, thereby maximising the locational efficiency of both households and businesses. Fiscal equalisation measures would involve two or more adjacent metropolitan or municipal Councils, and should be based on a rational formula linked to either Regional Services Council levies or property rates. National government will investigate appropriate mechanisms to introduce fiscal equalisation measures where necessary, and will carefully monitor patterns of urban growth, investment and development in this regard.

2.6. Concluding comment

South Africa's metropolitan areas require systems of metropolitan government which:

Provide a basis for spatial, economic and social integration.

Provide sufficient flexibility for each Metropolitan Council to develop efficient service delivery systems geared to local circumstances.

Accommodate diversity within a framework of social justice for all metropolitan residents.

White Paper Contents | Top of page

3.1. The need for district government
3.2. Roles and responsibilities of district government
3.3. Category (B) municipal institutions
3.4. Concluding comment

3.1. The need for district government

Historically, the only form of local government outside metropolitan areas was found in small market towns and Regional Services Councils. Here, municipalities could stabilise their costs around a geographically contained population, and an economic base of protected agricultural and mining industries. As in the metropolitan areas, groups who would draw more from municipal resources than they would contribute to the municipal tax base, were legally excluded. The bulk-service needs of farmers, which were difficult and costly to provide, were externalised to Joint Services Boards and Regional Services Councils. The service needs of the vast majority of South Africa's non-metropolitan population, including labour reserve populations in small dormitory townships attached to white towns, farm workers, and people forcibly settled in bantustans, went largely unheeded. A new system of local government will need to change this pattern.

Local government outside the country's metropolitan areas faces a diverse set of challenges. These include the need to:

Build appropriate municipal institutions in areas which have no existing administrative capacity, which are unlikely to attract strong local government personnel, and which have little or no financial base to support staff complements and sustain service delivery.

Respond creatively to changes in local economies. This includes kickstarting development in areas where economic potential has not been realised, partly because of the high production and distribution costs imposed by poor municipal infrastructure; initiatives to manage decline in many small market towns and some regional service centres; and measures to anticipate and manage the effects of rapid growth in others.

Anticipate shifts in settlement patterns, especially with large numbers of people leaving commercial farmland, and with informal settlements rapidly growing on vacant land in agricultural areas and on the edges of towns.

Provide for the basic needs of people living in historically derived settlement patterns which are difficult and costly to serve. These include settlements on communally owned land where dispersed homesteads are the norm, and in denser areas of "displaced urbanisation" on the borders of former homelands.

Rapidly build capacity so that municipalities can respond to new opportunities, including the availability of national funding for infrastructure investment, the devolution of national and provincial functions, and a range of sectoral and spatial initiatives.

Some of these challenges can only be dealt with at the local level, and require strong and effective primary-tier local government. Other challenges play themselves out on a larger scale, and clearly demand regional attention through some form of cross-municipal authority. A system of district government is therefore proposed to address regional challenges, and assist in the development of local municipalities.

While new district governments will build on the capacity of the transitional district government system which is in place, it is envisaged that it will assume new roles and responsibilities.

3.2. Roles and responsibilities of district government

District Councils are very different entities in various parts of the country. Given the numerous different settlement types within district jurisdictions, this is not a bad thing. While a measure of consistency is necessary across all district governments, a measure of flexibility needs to be built into the system. A variable district government system is envisaged in which districts exercise different sets of powers vis-à-vis their areas and the local municipalities that comprise them, depending on local circumstances.

It is envisaged that the district governments will fulfil the following key roles:

District government should be reorganised around a set of standard planning and development regions and given key responsibilities for district-wide integrated development planning, including land-use planning, economic planning and development, and transport planning.

The role of district governments as infrastructural development agents should be continued through the retention of Regional Services Council levies. District government should also provide bulk-services where required.

The ability of district government to provide on-demand assistance, as well as systematic capacity building to municipalities will be promoted. The capacity-building role of district government should be focused on increasing the capacity of Category (B) municipalities to assume municipal functions.

In areas where municipalities with inadequate administrative capacity are established, the capacity of district government to provide and maintain appropriate levels of municipal services will be legally permitted and actively fostered.

Each of these roles is further explained below.

3.2.1. Integrated development planning

The Local Government Transition Act currently makes the formulation and implementation of integrated development plans by District Councils subject to the approval of municipalities within the district. In the new system, district integrated development plans will be a statutory requirement of all district governments.

District-level integrated development planning requires that district government boundaries need to be re-demarcated to reflect the most appropriate areas within which district-level integrated development planning should be exercised. Such boundaries must take into account linkages within a regional economy, existing and potential land usage and transport planning, economies of scale for infrastructure development, and future industrial, commercial and residential development. They should also consider the most appropriate areas within which other sectoral functions might be exercised (regional health services, water resources management, and so forth). As far as is possible, the planning areas of provinces and national departments should coincide with these regions.

District-level integrated development planning has both a horizontal and a vertical dimension:

On the one hand, the integrated development plans legally required of each municipality must be reconcilable with those of neighbouring municipalities. Two sets of plans which counteract each other will detract from development in each locality, for example, when two adjacent municipalities choose to promote very different forms of industrial growth. District integrated development plans must be informed by local objectives set by municipalities. At the same time, district integrated development plans must rationalise municipal development objectives if these contradict each other.

A number of national and provincial departments intend to decentralise functions to local government level. Some form of vertical coordination between local government and various sectoral departments is essential. It is most rational for this coordination to be focused at the district level. This is because many of the planned service areas for decentralised functions cross municipal boundaries. It is also not cost effective for departments to always interact with each municipality directly. District government provides an appropriate level for vertical integration to occur through district integrated development plans.

District integrated development plans should provide guidelines for the local development objectives of each municipality, and for the planning and programmes of departments with decentralised field offices in the area.

The role of district government in transport planning may also be enhanced. The Department of Transport is proposing to designate municipalities or collections of municipalities as transport authorities. These transport authorities will provide comprehensive transport planning, public transport systems, subsidised services and capital infrastructure development in line with national and provincial guidelines. In many parts of the country district governments should provide the appropriate planning scale, as well as the existing administrative capacity, to become transport authorities.

As district governments assume responsibility for integrated development plans, their ability to impact on regional economic development will increase. There is wide potential for district governments to play a more active role in promoting economic development within their areas, through, for example, the provision of labour market information services, or supporting the entrepreneurial efforts of non-governmental organisations, community development corporations, training organisations, small business coalitions, etc.

3.2.2. Infrastructural development

District governments continue to be the most appropriate site from which to plan and develop bulk infrastructure in non-metropolitan areas. Apart from the clear redistributive possibilities of Regional Services Council levies, there are economies of scale in managing large infrastructure projects at a more regional level. It is envisaged that Regional Services Council levies will continue to be a core source of income for district governments, and their expenditure on infrastructure a key function. Provision will have to be made, however, to ensure that Regional Services Council levies are indeed contributing to infrastructure development and not going solely to maintaining staff and systems.

In some areas district governments will play a role in the direct provision of bulk and regional services. Many District Councils have developed systems to manage bulk functions like waste water and sewerage, and where appropriate this role should be strengthened. The role of District Councils in the planning and provision of infrastructure and regional services must occur within the policy and legislative frameworks put forward by national government, such as the Water Services Act (1997).

3.2.3. Technical assistance to municipalities

Some District Councils already provide technical assistance on demand to administratively weak municipalities, mainly in the form of town clerk and treasury functions. This role is likely to continue and possibly even expand. District governments may provide meaningful technical support to municipalities in the following areas:

Facilitating the sharing of specialised capacity and equipment between municipalities, particularly computer systems.

Assisting in the development of cooperative relations between municipalities which save on overall service costs (joint ventures, cooperative purchasing agreements, etc.).

Planning and legal services.

Assistance in the preparation of budgets, consolidated municipal infrastructure programme applications, tenders, draft by-laws, and so forth.

Some national departments also provide technical assistance to municipalities, for example, the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry provides direct assistance in the areas of contract guidelines and model development plans.

District governments could also provide a point of coordination for national and provincial capacity-building programmes and the location of support and training infrastructure.

3.2.4. Direct service provision at local level

While the capacity of Category (B) municipalities to deliver municipal services should be enhanced to meet local needs, there are some areas which do not warrant the building of fully-fledged municipal administrations. Although these areas have insufficient population numbers and densities to justify the establishment of a municipality with a full administration, municipal services still need to be provided. District government should supplement the administrative capacity of Category (B) municipalities in these areas, by providing financial and administrative capacity where it is lacking, or directly providing municipal services where required.

3.3. Category (B) municipal institutions

Three alternative options for Category B municipalities in areas with District governments are proposed:

Urban municipalities

The first are urban municipalities, which will have a full range of municipal powers and functions (with the exception of Regional Services Council levies), and are best suited to cities and larger towns. Although it is envisaged that urban municipalities will not have boundaries which extend to incorporate rural hinterlands, this does not imply that the existing boundaries of Transitional Local Councils should not be altered. In many instances the boundaries of cities and larger towns do not encompass even the full extent of the continuously built up urban area. This is particularly true where large informal settlements have begun to spring up on the urban fringe, or new industrial and commercial development has sought to take advantage of lower property rates in the rural areas immediately outside of the Transitional Local Council. Densification* and proper planning of our larger towns and cities demand that the boundaries of urban Councils enclose at least their urban fringe.

Amalgamated urban-rural municipalities

The second are amalgamated urban-rural municipalities. They can be established through the amalgamation of existing rural and urban municipalities, or by an urban municipality extending its boundaries into a rural hinterland. Amalgamated municipalities are appropriate for small and medium-size towns which have clear social and economic linkages between urban and rural settlements. Many countries have pursued this option as a way both to cut the costs of multiple Councils operating in the same area, and to enhance service delivery in rural areas. Almost all the evidence suggests that although the costs incurred by the town naturally increase, there are significant delivery gains in rural areas with positive economic spin-offs for the area as a whole.

In many area the amalgamation of rural and urban municipalities areas will:

Greatly reduce the cost of government by overcoming duplication of municipal structures, thereby increasing efficiency of resource allocation.

Broaden the tax base of the new municipalities.

Improve the scale economies* of service delivery.

Facilitate access to public services by rural communities.

Ensure that rural residents who contribute to the urban tax base share the benefits derived from that tax base.

Promote integration of rural and urban development.

Improve the financial and administrative capacity of smaller municipalities by combining existing capacities.

Enhance intergovernmental financial and technical assistance due to reduced competition for resources.

Concern has been raised in some quarters that amalgamation of rural and urban areas will set back the development that committed and innovative rural Councils have made in recent years, and that rural interests will be prioritised below urban ones in budget allocations. One option to ensure dedicated attention to rural development matters is to establish a rural committee of Council, which would operate as a rural chamber for the municipality.

At present many District Councils provide direct administrative support and services to representative Councils in their areas. There is a danger that the extension of urban boundaries would transfer the cost of this support to amalgamated Councils. This can be avoided through regulating the allocation of Regional Services Council levies in line with district integrated development plans, or even through a formula-based allocation, if required.

Rural municipalities

The institutional design of rural municipalities needs to recognise the diversity of rural settlement patterns, and the variations in existing municipal capacity and service demands across rural areas. It is proposed that rural municipalities are allocated a minimum of executive and legislative powers, but are able to "draw down" powers from the district government as they demonstrate sufficient administrative and financial capacity to administer the power.

In some areas rural municipalities could immediately assume a number of additional powers and functions. In others, particularly in very sparsely settled areas, the rural municipality may assume relatively few powers, and those over a protracted period as capacity increases. The varied allocation of powers and functions between Category B municipalities and district governments will provide the flexibility necessary to cater for the diversity of rural contexts and needs. District government will play an important role in the provision of municipal services where rural municipalities lack administrative capacity.

National legislation will provide for a mechanism to facilitate the allocation of powers and functions between Category (B) and (C) municipalities. This mechanism will be applied by provincial governments, in consultation with the affected local governments, subject to national oversight.

It is envisaged that a system of Category (C) and Category (B) municipalities (i.e. district government with urban municipalities, urban-rural amalgamated municipalities and rural municipalities) will apply in all non-metropolitan areas. However, there are a few exceptional, very expansive sparse settlements in the country where no municipal services are provided, and no sustainable Category (B) municipality is possible. In these areas, district governments would need to assume responsibility for all municipal functions. Special electoral arrangements will be required where this option is exercised to allow the few citizens in these settlements to have representation at the district level.

3.4. Concluding comment

A flexible system of government is required in non-metropolitan areas to accommodate the diversity in settlement types and administrative capacities. District government should provide the consistency across the country, and have variable relationships with local municipalities based on the circumstances in each locality.

White Paper Contents | Top of page

4.1. The role of traditional leadership at local level
4.2. Policy directions
4.3. The relationship between traditional leaders and local government
4.4. Concluding comment

The relationship between traditional leadership and elected rural local government requires clarification in the White Paper on Local Government. Chapter 7 of the Constitution provides for the establishment of elected local government across the country, while Chapter 12 of the Constitution recognises traditional authorities and states that national legislation may provide for a role for traditional leadership as an institution at local level on matters affecting local communities.

This White Paper addresses the relationship between traditional leadership and local government. It is important to note that other issues affecting traditional leadership will be addressed in the White Paper on Traditional Affairs to be drafted by the Department of Constitutional Development, the Department of Justice (customary law and courts) and by the Department of Land Affairs (communal tenure and land trusteeship).

4.1. The role of traditional leadership at local level

At present, traditional leaders have responsibility for a number of functions.

Their functions include, among others:

Acting as head of the traditional authority, and as such exercising limited legislative powers and certain executive and administrative powers.

Presiding over customary law courts and maintaining law and order.

Consulting with traditional communities through imbizo/lekgotla.

Assisting members of the community in their dealings with the state.

Advising government on traditional affairs through the Houses and Council of Traditional Leaders.

Convening meetings to consult with communities on needs and priorities and providing information.

Protecting cultural values and providing a sense of community in their areas through a communal social frame of reference.

Being the spokespersons generally of their communities.

Being symbols of unity in the community.

Being custodians and protectors of the community's customs and general welfare.

Their role in the development of the local area and community includes:

Making recommendations on land allocation and the settling of land disputes.

Lobbying government and other agencies for the development of their areas.

Ensuring that the traditional community participates in decisions on development and contributes to development costs.

Considering and making recommendations to authorities on trading licences in their areas in accordance with law.

It must also be acknowledged that there are traditional authorities which have a stake in rich mineral deposits. Through these resources they contribute to development.

4.2. Policy directions

The White Paper process on Traditional Affairs is underway. In that process the following issues, among others, will be dealt with:

The structure and role of traditional leadership and institutions.

Principles relating to remuneration.

A national audit of traditional leaders.

The role of women.

The role of traditional leaders in politics.

The future role of the Houses and Council of Traditional Leaders.

The rationalisation of current legislation dealing with traditional leadership and institutions.

The Department of Justice has indicated its intention to establish community law courts. These courts will take cognisance of the advantages of customary law courts such as the fact that they are cheap, speedy, informal, conciliatory and accessible. Traditional leadership will enjoy special recognition in the new community law courts which will operate in rural areas.

The Department of Land Affairs is looking at various options of land tenure.

Some of the functions set out above do not overlap with the constitutional functions of local government. Local government does not, for example, lend itself to judicial functions, nor can it speak on traditional affairs or act as the custodian of customs and culture. In some respects, however, the current responsibilities of traditional authorities and municipalities do overlap. This has been a source of tension and has hampered development in certain rural areas. Traditional communities will be entitled to vest the responsibility for general administration and the allocation of their land in the institutions of their choice, which may include traditional authorities.

There is no doubt that the important role that traditional leaders have played in the development of their communities, should be continued. However, where Chapter 7 of the Constitution allocates a function to a municipality, the municipality has sole jurisdiction over the matter. On issues such as development, for example, a cooperative relationship will have to be developed. Tensions which arise in this respect will have to be addressed through dispute resolution mechanisms. These mechanisms are being applied by certain communities.

4.3. The relationship between traditional leaders and local government

A cooperative model for rural governance

During consultations with traditional leaders and their communities, local government and other stakeholders, a number of suggestions have been made regarding a suitable model for rural local government in those areas falling under traditional leadership. Proposals range from traditional authorities becoming the primary local government in their areas, to a clear and exclusive division of powers and functions between elected local government and traditional authorities. The model being proposed must, however, be in line with the Constitution.

The proposal put forward here attempts to combine the strengths of various approaches within a model which is consistent with the Constitution and recognises the positive contribution that both elected structures and traditional authorities can make in the overall development of traditional areas and communities. The proposed model ensures cooperation, communication and consultation between local government and traditional leaders and institutions.

It is proposed, in accordance with the Constitution, that there will be elected local government in all the areas falling under traditional authorities. Traditional leadership should play a role closest to the people, and their role should therefore be defined principally in relation to Category (B) municipalities, although larger Kingdoms covering an entire district will clearly require similar relationships with district governments. Their role will include attending and participating in meetings of the Councils and advising Councils on the needs and interests of their communities. In this regard traditional leaders will have representation on such Councils. Whether traditional leaders should exercise voting rights alongside the elected councillors, as well as other matters relating to this model, needs to be determined after further consultation and research into constitutional provisions. These functions are in addition to those identified in item 4.1. Traditional leaders are also empowered to discuss issues relating to the development of their areas with other spheres of government.

Within the broad scope of this role a number of additional functions can be included. However, the exact nature of such functions will differ from area to area. In this regard, provincial government and legislatures will play a role in determining additional functions of traditional leadership within the national framework provided by this model. In addition, provincial government and legislatures will need to determine the precise circumstances in which the model would apply.

Both district and local municipal Councils must inform and consult traditional leaders regarding municipal projects or programmes within the traditional leaders' area.

The authority responsible for demarcating municipal boundaries should take the existing boundaries of traditional authorities into account when demarcating new municipal jurisdictions.

4.4. Concluding comment

There is no reason why African customs and traditions should be seen to be in conflict with the demands of modern governance. What is required is an innovative institutional arrangement, which combines the natural capacities of both traditional and elected local government to advance the development of rural areas and communities. The cooperative model proposed here provides a constructive role for traditional leadership at local level in the governance and development of rural communities.

White Paper Contents | Top of page