Department of Public Works on Community based Public Works Programme: briefing

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

Portofolio Committee on Social Welfare

JOINT MONITORING COMMITTEE ON THE IMPROVEMENT OF LIFE AND STATUS OF YOUTH, CHILDREN AND DISABLED PERSONS
10 October 2001
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ON COMMUNITY BASED PUBLIC WORKS PROGRAMME: BRIEFING

Chairperson: Mr S. L. Dithebe

Relevant Documents
Department of Public Works -Community Based Public Works Programme

SUMMARY
The Community Based Public Works Programme has budgeted for a sum of R20 million in the year 2002/2003 for projects in poor rural areas to assist communities to put up infrastructure to spur development in these areas. A further R20 million has been budgeted for the year 2003/2004.

The Community Based Public Works Programme has been allocated R5 million in the current financial year which has been applied towards community projects in various poor rural provinces.

The Committee was informed that the Community Based Public Works Programme was engaged in projects that result in reduced labour usage by communities such that the saved labour can be used for more productive activities. Such projects, he added, include water supply and crèches.

MINUTES
Briefing By Mr S Simelane; Director (CBPWP) National Public Works Programme
Mr Simelane said that the objectives of the Community Based Public Works Programme (CBPWP) were to create short-term employment opportunities for community members by means of construction of public assets.

By creating useful a community infrastructure, the CBPWP aimed at creating a sustainable employment opportunities through facilitating micro business opportunities associated with community assets.

Mr Simelane said that among the project categories his organisation was involved in were improving road access and facilitating community markets. Such projects, were ongoing and had resulted to sustainable employment such as agricultural food lots, small scale irrigation, recycling, waste collection, stock dams among other things.

The CBPWP also engaged in projects that result in reduced labour usage by communities such that the saved labour can be used for more productive activities. Such projects include water supply, crèches and the like.

The CBPWP also encouraged social cohesion by starting projects that bring people together, especially among the disadvantaged communities. Such project multi-purpose centres, sports facilities among others.

The CBPWP promotes the protection and preservation of the environment by managing soil erosion control projects, donga rehabilitation, re-vegetation and school sanitation and so forth.

Mr Simelane said that CBPWP runs other special projects, which are specially tailored as partnerships with specific stakeholders in order to achieve specific objective such as to target the Youth and the Disabled.

The projects his organisation runs spend 30% of the project budget on local labour which consists of 50% of women employees, 15% the youth and 1,5% the disabled.

At the implementation level the CBPWP has a contractual relationship with the implementing and monitoring agents to carry the projects through to satisfactory completion. CBPWP mostly relies on forging partnership with other relevant agencies for good results.

Local contractors are appointed and that such contractors are contractually obligated to hire local people on the community project.

His organisation was at the moment piloting the concept of the National Youth Service and at the same time making public buildings accessible to the disabled persons. This is done by the identification of targeted buildings from the national assets register in conjunction with the Office on the Status of the Disabled People (OSDP).

The other angle of the pilot project is the recruitment and selection of the Youth for participation, Youth Orientation and Life Skills training, Youth Technical Training and On Site Construction programme.

The Trade in which Training is being provided entails bricklaying, carpentry, plastering/tiling, painting, plumbing, roadwork, construction and paving carport constructor concrete.

In Life Skills the areas covered were goal setting, youth service, works ethics HIV/AIDS, gender and disability.

Mr Simelane concluded that CBPWP had been allocated R5 million for the current financial year. R20 million has been budgeted for the financial year 2002-2003 and another R20 million for the financial year 2003-2004.

Discussion
Ms Mahlangu (ANC) said that the picture painted by the Department does not reflect the situation on the ground. She asked why some of the projects enumerated by CBPWP are non-existent.

Mr Simelane replied that project location was the responsibility of the District Councils. The District Council by reason of logistics or/and convenience relocates some projects. At the moment the Department was taking stock of the programmes in progress in order to monitor developments thereon.

Ms Gandhi (ANC) asked who decided where certain projects should be located and why most projects that are put up fizzle out even before the communities benefit accordingly.

Mr Simelane said that the District Councils make the decision as to which projects are desirable and of priority. They are also in charge of sustaining such projects.

Mr Simelane acknowledged the fact that there has been a problem with the sustainability of projects especially the road networks. The reason why such infrastructure collapses soon after construction was that the District Councils do not make provision for maintenance in their budgets.

Ms Gandhi (ANC) asked what criteria the Department used to put up amenities for the disabled persons given that most of the structures are not suitable or are inadequate for the disabled.

Mr Simelane replied that the Department is guided in its decision to build structures for the disabled persons by the asset register. He added that in implementing the projects the Department utilises local labour and as much as possible local resources while at the same time ensuring that the quality of work done is up to acceptable standards.

Mr Da Camara (DP) questioned why only 30% of labour requirement is allocated to the youth that should be the main beneficiaries of such projects in the first place. The rate of unemployment affected the youth most and that there was deliberate policy to start projects at the community level to arrest the rural urban migration.

Mr Simelane agreed with MrDa Camara's concern but said that it has been rather problematic to get the youth involved in local projects. He added that even the 30% rate is achieved through some struggle.

He pointed out that one of the reasons the youth shunned local projects were the perception that the pay was very low. This issue was ongoing and that one hopes that with more persuasion the current rate would be raised.

Ms Witbooi (NNP) asked for the criteria used in deciding what project goes to what province.

Mr Similane replied that the indicators that guide the Department are the levels of poverty, infrastructure and the population density.

Ms Nkuna (ANC) said that the nature of projects target that is carpentry, plumbing and tailoring seem to favour male youth. She asked whether there were any female friendly projects.

Mr Similane said that to some extent what Ms Nkuna says appear to be true. He however, noted that most projects that the Department is involved in are infrastructure related and therefore involve a lot of construction.

He said that many women have been encouraged to participate and that the response was good. He said that there was, however, a sister project in Port Elizabeth worth R20 million, which deliberately has a women component.

Ms Cindi (ANC) asked whether there was any form of inspection on the projects that the Department had put up.

Mr Similane replied that projects are monitored at three levels. He said in the first place there was management monitoring information system which is an in-built District Council monitoring. This is done through gathering and keeping relevant information on projects.

He said the second level of monitoring was through the PSW where there were people who monitor and on the spot check and make reports to the Department and lastly, he said the Department has its own team at the National level who monitor these projects.

The Chair said that the issues that had emerged from the presentation was that there was a problem with the actual definition of disability and the fact that disabled people who are employed in these projects forfeit their right to disability grants even after the projects are terminated.

He added that the other challenge, which the Committee must grapple with, was the aspect of communication breakdown between the various stakeholders in the upliftment of the quality of life for children, youth and the disabled.

The meeting was then adjourned.

Audio

No related

Documents

No related documents

Present

  • We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: