Department of Water and Sanitation 2021/22 Annual Performance Plan; with Deputy Minister

Meeting report

Department of Water and Sanitation annual performance plan

The Chairperson made some opening remarks and invited the Deputy Minister to lead the presentation.

Mr David Mahlobo, Deputy Minister of Human Settlements, Water and Sanitation, made some opening comments and handed the presentation over to Ms Babalwa Manyakanyaka, Chief Director: Corporate Planning (DWS), and Mr Frans Moatshe, Acting Chief Financial Officer (DWS), who presented the Department's 2021/22 medium term strategic plan (SP) and annual performance plan (APP).

Ms Manyakanyaka showed the Committee a table outlining the revisions in the 2021/22 budget structure for three programmes, namely administration, water resources management and water services management. She provided detailed descriptions for each programme before proceeding to the revised 2020/21 to 2024/25 strategic plan, outlining the impact statement and the measuring outcomes. Finally, a presentation on the APP for each of the programmes was made.

Mr Moatshe took the Committee through an overview of the 2021/22 medium term financial estimates. He provided the 2021/22 estimates of national expenditure, and then informed the Committee of the budget allocated to each of the Department's three programmes. Finally, a presentation on the allocations for infrastructure programmes was made, focusing on the Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant (RBIG) and the Water Service Infrastructure Grant (WSIG).

(See presentation for more details)

Discussion

Mr S August (GOOD) asked why the WSIG and RBIG varied for each province. For example, the amount allocated to the Western Cape was significantly low, compared to other provinces.

Ms S Mokgotho (EFF) asked the Department to provide a summary of the risks associated with the water and sanitation goals, and the mitigation plan. The presentation did not address how the Department was going to help the Ekurhuleni Municipality to fix the dysfunctional sewer system in Ward 65.

Mr M Mashego (ANC) cautioned the Department not to make unrealistic commitments. The Department planned not to increase the salaries of employees in the next two to three years. This was detrimental, given the current rate of employee dissatisfaction. When was it going to appoint a permanent Director General and Chief Financial Officer (CFO)?

Ms M Mohlala (EFF) asked why the Department had reduced its branches from four to three. Did the change have an impact on its sub-branches? In addition, did the change have an impact on the budget allocation and the movement of personnel to different branches?

Compared to the past annual performance plans, the plan under review had more realistic targets. In light of the poor overall achievement of targets, and the 100 percent expenditure in the past, what plans had the Department put in place to ensure the attainment of targets? Had it incorporated budget allocations for previous years, accruals and payables in its budget? What was the net effect of these payments on its overall budget? How many litigation cases did the Department have, and what was the nature of the litigations?

Ms N Sihlwayi (ANC) said the presentation lacked detail. For example, in the presentation, the Department had identified a problem of water scarcity, but had not provided examples of areas facing this problem. It had mentioned that Mzimvubu was under construction, but needed to specify at what stage the construction was. The presentation had not referred to infrastructure development in the Eastern Cape. Several places, including Butterworth and Makana, were in need of infrastructure development. What was the difference between the direct and indirect infrastructure grant? The Department had talked about delays in the completion of certain projects. This showed it had not been monitoring and evaluating all active programmes sufficiently.

Ms N Tafeni (EFF) said the strategic and annual performance plans had forward-looking intentions. However, prior to the publication of these plans, had the Department made a regulatory impact assessment of each programme? In addition, had it ascertained the effectiveness of each programme?

The Chairperson said the lease agreement was costly for the Department. Did it have any intention to buy the buildings it was renting in order to reduce costs. The State of the Nation Address (SONA) had raised the issue of the lengthy administration of licences. Hopefully the Department was working on reducing the timeframes from 120 days to 90 days, as had been proposed. The Master plan did not address water management. Was the Department prioritising the recycling of waste water? The financial recovery plan had shown that the Department still faced the same problems it had in the past -- for example, wasteful expenditure. In addition, what were the reasons the Department’s target was 90 percent and not 100 percent? The timeframe for the amendment of the National Water Act was almost four years. What were the reasons for such a long timeframe? To ensure that all district development models were in line with the Master plan, the Department had to assess them. It had indicated that the municipalities would self-assess, which was concerning. Its prioritisation of the Vaal Intervention system was commendable, but it had not talked about the Rooi Vaal. What was happening with the people of Hammanskraal?

Responses

Ms Deborah Mochotlhi, Acting Director-General, DWS, responded on the absence of infrastructure development plans for the Eastern Cape, and said the plan had mentioned only the names of major projects. For the names of the other projects, the Department had to consult the entire APP document.

Mr Leonardo Manus, Chief Director: Infrastructure Operations & Maintenance, DWS, referred to the demand for the WSIG, and said the designs for projects in Butterworth were being finalised. The Department hoped to start the project during the current financial year.

The Western Cape having a lower budget compared to the other provinces was because the Department had allocated higher amounts to areas in dire situations.

The demand for the WSIG was determined by the business plans that the Department received from the water service authorities. The business plans indicated the projects that the water source authorities planned to implement. The Department had not received a lot of business plans from the Western Cape. In addition, most of the Western Cape water source authorities did not require bulk infrastructure. However, the Department was investing in the Western Cape through the Berg River Voelvlei Augmentation Water Scheme.

Deputy Minister Mahlobo added that there were two reasons the Western Cape had received a limited amount of the grant. The first had to do with the fact that the grants were being allocated to areas that did not have any infrastructure at all. The grants were being allocated to poor and vulnerable rural provinces. The grants were also being allocated in a manner that addressed historical disadvantages. In the past, infrastructure development had been directed to big cities and mining areas. The second reason had to do with an administrative error by the Department. The requirement for municipalities to submit business plans in order to get the grants had not taken into account small and rural municipalities which did not have capacity to produce them.

On the difference between direct and indirect grants, the direct grant was when the Department transferred money directly to the municipality, and the indirect grant was when the Department paid the invoice for the work done.

On the development of the Masterplans, the municipalities and district municipalities had a legal obligation under the Water Services Act to send them to the Department. For this reason, the Department was directly involved in the process. In addition, the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) was assisting with the development of Masterplans.

On water management, the Department was working toward educating communities on water recycling. However, the local municipalities also had an obligation to contribute toward this goal. In addition, the Department had a ground water strategy. It was also moving towards a water mix.

The Deputy Minister added that municipalities, led by the South African Local Government Association (SALGA), COGTA and the Department, had researched water management strategies with the assistance of the Water Research Commission.

Mr Manus responded on the dysfunctional sewer system in Ward 65, and said the Department was aware of the situation. Its regional office in Gauteng was providing assistance to the Ekurhuleni Municipality. Service delivery in the Emfuleni area had been interrupted by electrical failures.

The Rooi Vaal was the responsibility of local government, but the Department was intervening. There were challenges addressing the problems, but the Department was doing its level best. The Tshwane metro had made significant progress in addressing the problems in the Rooi Vaal.

The reduction of branches had to do with the budget structure that the National Treasury had adopted, but the Department had not reduced any of its programmes. Under the previous structure, there was a planning and information management branch for water resources, services and sanitation. In addition, there was a water infrastructure development branch that developed projects for water resources, services and sanitation. Finally, there was a water regulation branch that regulated water resources and services. The new structure separated water services from water resources. This had resulted in a change of the budget structure. The budget had become limited to those branches focused on water services and resources.

On the Department’s APP commitments, Ms Mochotlhi said the Department hoped to deliver on every key performance indicator (KPI).

The Mzimvubu Water Project was under stage 1 of construction, which had to do with advanced works. The Department was engaging the National Treasury in order to secure the remainder of the funding for the project.

Ms Sihlwayi asked Mr Manus to explain what stage 1 of construction encompassed.

On the Department’s target being 90 percent and not 100 percent, Mr Manus said it had to take into account that service delivery could be interrupted by droughts or floods.

To deal with the lengthy administration of licences, starting from 1 April 2022, the Department was going to reduce its timeframes from 300 days to 90 days. It had put in place systems to fast-track the processing of licences.

Mr Moatshe responded on the reduction in the compensation of employees budget, and said it had been earmarked for reduction by Parliament, through the National Treasury. To manage and mitigate risks, the Department had rationalised the structure and made sure there were processes to fill only critical posts. The impact of the reduction was that the Department was not going to be able to fill positions that it would fill under normal circumstances, because it had to remain within the budget adjustment.

The Minister added that there were discussions between the leadership of government and labour movements in order to avoid protests and increased employee dissatisfaction.

Mr Moatshe referred to efficiencies, and said the Department had ensured that the budget was rationalised and that there were cost reduction initiatives. He confirmed that the budget made provision for accruals and payables.

On the issue of office accommodation, the Department planned to have its own building. It had engaged the Department of Public Works and Infrastructure to assist with feasibility studies.

On litigation cases, the Department had a register of various cases related to various issues, including the recovery of funds to do with material irregularities and claims against the state.

Deputy Minister Mahlobo referred to the Department’s failure to finish some projects on time, and said this had to do with external factors, including vandalism and theft.

He said the Department would ask the Minister to indicate the timeframes for the filling of the positions of accounting officer and chief financial officer (CFO). However, the acting management had done a great job in addressing the audit outcomes.

The Chairperson said the validation and verification programme had not been performing well for the last three years. When the Committee engaged the provinces on transformational issues, they had indicated that the matter was at a national level, and there had been limited progress. Could the Department make a commitment to move quickly on the issue of transformation?

 In other meetings, the Department had raised the issue of the illegal construction of dams on streams that were supposed to take water into the dams -- for example, in Giyani. On the Rooi Vaal issue, the Committee welcomed the fact that the Department was working with Tshwane through the Department of Human Settlements. It also welcomed the Department’s transformation targets for youths, women and people with disabilities. Was the Department monitoring whether the distribution of the RBIG and the WSIG was resulting in the creation of employment?

The Deputy Minister agreed that the area of verification and validation required improvement. The verification and validation required the Department to conclude its catchment management strategies.

The Department would start reporting more often on job creation.

Mr Manus explained that the Mzimvubu Water Project had four stages. Stage 1 encompassed advanced works. Advanced works constituted the construction of bridges and roads required for site establishment. Stage 2 involved the construction of the Ntabelanga Dam, Stage 3 involved the construction of the bulk distribution network, and Stage 4 involved the construction of the Laleni dam.

The Chairperson made closing remarks.

The meeting was adjourned.