Project topics and materials
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
CHAPTER 4 IMPLEMENTATION AND IMPACT OF THE IDP IN RURAL AREAS
Introduction
Since the establishment of municipalities in the year 2000 from the transitional local councils, the integrated development approach became a matter of reality. The first municipal election took place in 2001 under a high level of expectation from the communities and a high level of zeal from those who wanted to be elected into office first in a democratic process. In this regard, the first democratic local government elections were characterised by a high level of excitement from the electorates and political parties as well. Over the years to come, that proved to be one of the greatest challenges encountered by communities and political leaders equally, because at that time the focus was not upon the impact of the decisions they were making as electorates and political parties, but more on the sentimental aspects of the situation. This implies that the implementation of the IDP during the first years of democratic local government elections was not so effectively carried out, because all stakeholders were still excited about the dawn of a new democracy.
The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000 was very clear about what a developmental local government was required to do, hence municipalities embarked upon the development of the integrated development plans once the municipal councillors had been elected into office. According to the Local Government: Municipal Systems Act, 32 of 2000 as amended, “each municipal council, within a prescribed period after the start of its elected term, must adopt a process set out in writing to guide the planning, drafting, adoption and review of the integrated development plan”. This implies that after the election of the municipal councillors, the municipal council has a responsibility to determine the development programme through the IDP. It also means that the municipal council must make it very clear as to how the process will unfold, including activating participatory democracy.
According to the speech by Minister Sydney Mufamadi (2001:3) on the occasion of the budget vote for the Department of Provincial and Local Government “to date over 220 professional planners have been trained throughout the country at various centres. Over the next three months 560 councillors will be trained, 284 managers, 850 local government sector specialists and 300 national and provincial sector specialists”. This infers that municipalities in the country were taken through the process of training during the financial year 2000/01, so as to enhance the fulfilment of the legislative imperatives. This training was conducted by the University of Pretoria and the Institute of Democracy in South Africa throughout the country. It was facilitated by the then Department of Provincial and Local Government, which is currently known as the Department of CoGTA. As per the speech by Minister Sydney Mufamadi (2001:3) the first training focused initially upon senior councillors and officials, before rolling out to other councillors and members of the top management in municipalities. Just after the conclusion of the first training programme, municipalities were then expected to embark upon a process to develop the IDPs. Thus municipalities within MDM commenced the process during the 2001/02 financial year.
The focus of the analysis below will be upon the implementation of the IDPs within municipalities in MDM. The main focus will be upon the impact of the IDPs on access to basic services such as water, sanitation, electricity and refuse removal. Equally important is the impact of the IDPs upon economic development, which also includes income per household and unemployment rate. These will be considered as well. In this case the IDPs as approved by the respective municipalities will be examined in comparison with the 2011 Census by Statistics South Africa in relation to basic services.
In order to conduct an appropriate analysis on the implementation of the IDP within MDM, the IDPs of the local municipalities that constitute the district will be analysed individually. Thereafter, the district as an institution, rather than as an area, will be considered. The analysis will consider the approach utilised by the municipalities in resourcing the implementation of the programmes and projects outlined in the IDP of that municipality, with the sole purpose of determining the impact thereof in terms of sustainability. In the previous chapter the approach to community involvement was outlined, whereby it was observed that all municipalities did engage communities during the process of developing IDPs. What needs to be done now is to contextualise and translate those meetings into the actual inputs by the communities, and trace them back into the IDPs. In order to trace the impact of the IDP, particularly upon basic services, the financial management reports and the 2011 Census Report will be outlined.
Implementation of the IDP in Ba-Phalaborwa Local Municipality
In order to be precise when it comes to the implementation of the IDP of the BPM, it is crucial to have a better understanding of the powers and functions assigned to the municipality. Table 9 below outlines the powers and functions performed by the municipality as per the 2011/12 Municipal Demarcation Board Capacity Assessment Report (2011:5).
According to the table above, the allocation of staff against the allocated powers and functions by the municipality reflects that a high percentage of staff had been provided for community and social services at 41.1%, followed by waste management at 16.2% with the lowest being municipal health and economic development, both at 0.5%. This implies that the strategic focus of the municipality in terms of the table above is community and social services. In this regard, the distribution of human resources did not take into consideration the key strategic objectives of the municipality, as outlined in the IDP.
The distribution of the human resources within BPM does not assist the municipality in ensuring that basic services are provided in a sustainable manner. In this regard, municipal trading services will not be given the due consideration they deserve, leading to some inconsistent supply. This will in turn affect the revenue of the municipality, as even the paying customers might neglect their timeous payment, bearing in mind the limited capacity of the municipality to even enforce credit control. It is therefore important to ensure that there is a proper balance between what a municipality is required to do by law, and the resources that are meant to deliver such a service or function. The distribution of the human capital in BPM will certainly affect the implementation of the IDP, unless proven otherwise.
Services Required as Identified by Communities – BPM
The municipality embarked upon a process of community consultation prior to the final approval of the IDP and budget by the council for all the financial years, as outlined in Table 10 below. The 2014/15 financial year was not included in the table, due to the fact that the IDP’s and budget are still being implemented, therefore the current status will not have an effect upon the outcome of the study. The services as identified by communities constituted the IDP document of the municipality, which in turn has an influence upon the allocation of resources either capital, human or financial.
In terms of the table above, there were a large number of communities that identified all the services as listed above between the years 2006/7 and 2011. The exceptions were electricity and RDP houses that were only required in not more than 5 settlements. Again during the period 2006/7 to 2010/11, water services were a problem in 25 settlements, which was high, but was reduced to 5 settlements in 2010/11. From the 2011/12 period onward, electricity was never raised as an issue in any of the settlements of the municipality, which means that there was 100% provision of electricity within BPM from the end of 2011/12 through until the 2013/14 financial years.
Emanating from the table above, it is evident that the BPM has managed to improve the provision of electricity, housing, schools and water services, as per the needs of the communities, but not the services such as roads, refuse removal, health, site demarcation by local authorities, crime, library, community hall, fencing of graveyards and street lighting. Given the understanding of what basic services are, it can also be argued that only roads and refuse removal remain as challenges for the municipality.
Similarly the 2011 Census by Statistics South Africa also confirmed that access to water inside the dwelling was at 37.1%, inside the yard was at 45.5%, at a distance less than 200m from the dwelling was at 8.5%, at a distance between 200m and 500m from the dwelling was at 2.7%, at a distance between 500 m and 1 km was at 1.6%, at a distance greater than 1 km was at 1.6% and no access was at 3%. Considering the issues that the communities have raised over a period of time, and the outcome of the Census in 2011 over water, it can be concluded that the implementation of the IDP has been in line with the needs of the communities. However, what still remains to be seen on water provision is the extent to which the service has become sustainable. This is a matter to be considered when analysing the financial data.
Access to sanitation at or above RDP level was 58.9% and below RDP level was 41.1%. The access at or above RDP level simply refers to where there are waterborne sewers and the Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP), while below RDP level refers to a situation where there is no VIP, but the household has a pit for purposes of sanitation. In a nutshell the situation in the municipality when it comes to sanitation was a worrying factor, although as at the 2013/14 the situation seemed to have improved. According to the Annual Report for MDM for the 2011/12 financial year, the sanitation backlog in BPM was reduced to zero. This implies that at the end of June 2012, there was no sanitation backlog within BPM, which means that all households had received sanitation at or above RDP level.
The area of electricity is one of the success stories happening in the BPM. In terms of access to electricity, as per the Census 2011 by Statistics South Africa, access to electricity was 90.8% while the backlog was 9.2%. This is the service that is provided in collaboration with Eskom, owing to the license arrangements in the area. The municipality was responsible for the provision of electricity only in the Phalaborwa town, while the other settlements were being serviced by Eskom. Given the fact that Eskom was involved in the rural areas and urban settlements of the municipality, there was not much financial pressure upon the municipality.
According to Statistics South Africa (Census 2011), access to refuse removal within BPM was at 49.4%, while those without access were at 50.6%. In this regard the provision of refuse removal within the municipality is still a serious challenge, which ultimately has a negative impact upon the environmental management. This state of affairs is directly aligned to the number of settlements that have been demanding the service in their areas.
Given the 2011 Census Report by Statistics South Africa, it can be argued that out of the four basic services, BPM still has to deal with the challenge of refuse removal, just to eradicate the backlogs. What has not been proven throughout the analysis of the reports, is the maintenance of existing infrastructure. The municipality does not seem to have put any effort into maintaining the infrastructure that it owns, so as to ensure that there is no disruption of service. This is a worrying factor considering the need for sustainability as required by the legislative framework. For as long as there is no adequate maintenance of the infrastructure, there is no assurance that the provision of the service will not be affected.
In considering the example of water and sanitation services, if the pipelines and the meters are not maintained, it will result in disruption of water provision and incorrect billing, which will result in non-payment of services. On the other hand with sanitation, the sewer will spill into the streets and flow into the river systems, thereby causing serious environmental concerns. In the instance of the VIPs, the pit will become full and the household may not be able to utilise the facility anymore, and they will require a new one. In this regard the conclusion that can be made is that the impact of implementing the IDP in the municipality seems to have been positive only when it comes to the number of people benefitting, while the issue of sustainability was not considered. This conclusion will be well observed when dealing with the financial matters.
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
SUMMARY
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Motivation of the Study
1.3 Literature Review
1.3.1 The Global Overview: Integrated Planning for Service Deliver
1.3.2 Southern African Region Development Perspective: The Lesotho Highlands Water Project
1.3.3 South African Perspective: Integrated Development Plan
1.3.4 District Perspective: Integrated Development Plan
1.4 Problem Statement
1.5 Research Objectives
1.6 Research Methodology
1.7 The Method of Data Gathering
1.8 Limitations
1.9 Concept Clarification
1.9.1 Basic Services
1.9.2 Community
1.9.3 Councillor
1.9.4 Developmental Local Government
1.9.5 District Municipality
1.9.6 Integrated Development Plan
1.9.7 Local Municipality
1.9.11Public Administration
1.9.12 Public administration
1.9.14 Stakeholder
1.9.15 Sustainable Development
1.10 Framework of Chapters
CHAPTER 2 THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK THAT UNDERPINS PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION WITH SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The Historical Evolution of Public Administration
2.2.1 Development of Public Administration
2.2. 2 Public Administration in Context
2.2.3 The Generic Functions of Public Administration
2.2.3.1 Planning
2.2.3.2 Organising
2.2.3.3 Staffing
2.2.3.4 Directing
2.2.3.5 Coordinating
2.2.3.6 Reporting
2.2.3.7 Budgeting
2.3 Political and Administrative Structure of the Republic of South Africa
2.3.1 National Government
2.3.1.1 Functions of the State
2.3.2 Provincial Government
2.3.2.1 The Role, Powers and Functions of Provinces
2.3.3 Local Government
2.3.3.1 The Pre-Interim Phase: 1993 – 1995
2.3.3.2 The Interim Phase: 1995 – 1999
2.3.3.3 The Final Phase: 1999 – December 2000
2.4 Powers and Functions of the Different Spheres of Government
2.5 Intergovernmental Relations
2.5.1 Statutory Structures Supporting Intergovernmental Relations
2.5.1.1 The Presidential Co-ordinating Council
2.5.1.2 Minister and Member of Executive Council Committees
2.5.1.3 Premier’s Intergovernmental Forum
2.5.1.4 District Intergovernmental Forum
2.5.2 Technical Intergovernmental Forum Structures
2.6 The Categories and Types of Municipalities
2.6.1 Categories of Municipality
2.6.1.1 Category A Municipalities
2.6.1.2 Category B Municipalities
2.6.1.3 Category C Municipalities
2.6.2 Types of Municipalities
2.7 The Mandate for Local Government
2.7.1 Provide Democratic and Accountable Government for Local Communities
2.7.2 Ensure the Provision of Services to Communities in a Sustainable Manner
2.7.3 Promote Social and Economic Development
2.7.4 Promote a Safe and Healthy Environment
2.7.5 Encourage the Involvement of Communities and Community Organisations in the Matters of Local Government
2.8 Conclusion
CHAPTER 3 THE LEGAL FRAMEWORK GUIDING THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTEGRATED DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND THE APPROACHES USED BY MUNICIPALITIES IN STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Legal Framework for the Development of the IDP
3.3. The Process of Drafting the Integrated Development Plan
3.6 Developmental Outcomes of Local Government
3.7 The Legal Framework for the Involvement of Communities
3.8 Approaches used in Stakeholder Engagement
3.9 Conclusion
CHAPTER 4 IMPLEMENTATION AND IMPACT OF THE IDP IN RURAL AREAS
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Implementation of the IDP in Ba-Phalaborwa Local Municipality
4.3 Implementation of the IDP in Greater Giyani Municipality
4.4 Implementation of the IDP in Greater Letaba Municipality
4.5 Implementation of the IDP in Greater Tzaneen Municipality
4.6 Implementation of the IDP in Maruleng Municipality
4.7 Implementation of the IDP in Mopani District Municipality
4.8 District Wide Comparative Analysis
4.9 The Effects of Intergovernmental Relations on the IDP
4.10 MEC Assessment of the IDPs in Mopani District Municipality
4.11 Conclusion
CHAPTER 5 THE PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF COLLECTED DATA
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Research Findings, Interpretation and Presentation
5.3 Some of the Factors Impeding Sustainable Service Delivery
5.4 Selection of Participants
5. 5 Variables
5.6 Factor Analysis Results
5.7 Inferential
5.8 Findings
5.9 Conclusion
CHAPTER 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
6 Introduction
6.1 Findings of the Research Objectives
6.2 Commendations
6.3 Recommendations on the Findings
6.4 Proposed Integrated Development Planning Framework
6.5 Structural Arrangements
6.6 Concluding Remarks
BIBLIOGRAPHY
APPENDIX A: LETTER TO PARTICIPANTS
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE
APPENDIX C: DATA ANALYSIS
APPENDIX D: GENDER PROFILE
