Postponement of North West Section 139 interventions

Meeting report

The Chairperson asked the MEC for Social Development in the North West, Ms Boitumelo Moiloa, to explain why the municipalities were not present in the meeting.   

MEC Moiloa thanked the Chairperson, colleagues, administrators and the district Mayor from Bojanala. She wanted the Chairperson to ask the HOD to let the Committee know why the municipalities were not present.

Mr Phihadu Motoko, Head of the North West Department on Cooperative Governance, Human Settlements and Traditional Affairs, said the invitations were sent to the municipalities and was expecting them join this platform for the present meeting, but his office had not received any apologies from the municipalities on why they could not attend.

The Chairperson reiterated how it was very strange that not even one of them could join. Out of 13 municipalities that the provincial government had put under administration, none of them were part of this meeting.

Adv Monnapula Motlogelwa announced his attendance.

Ms Z Ncitha (ANC, Eastern Cape) asked the accounting officer to not address the house whilst his car was moving, because the feedback was disruptive.  

The Chairperson asked that the administrator take care of this aspect and that participants turn off their video when they are driving.  

The Chairperson stated that the Department must forward to his office copies of all invitations to all municipalities so that the Committee can understand the situation better and find ways to effectively intervene.

The Chairperson stated that none of the municipalities have the right to undermine the invite from Parliament. If they fail to attend, or undermine an invitation, the municipalities will be subpoenaed and forced to go to the courts, as these meetings are important.  Parliament must be respected. The starting point to deal with this is therefore that the Department must send the Select Committee copies of the invitation that were supposed to be part of this meeting. The Chairperson invited MPs to provide comments.

Mr E Mthethwa (ANC, KZN) was concerned that the Select Committee only just received the 72-page document. The province had been given two weeks to compile this document and provide it to the Select Committee. The North West province is not taking the Committee seriously if they expect the Committee to be able to engage with a document such as this one in such a short amount of time. He also noted that the municipalities affected are not at the meeting. He supported the Chairperson that something must be done about the North West province and that the Committee cannot continue to deal with them with kid gloves. They are undermining the NCOP and disrespecting the Select Committee. This meeting cannot be continued and a new one must be set up before which the Committee can go through the document and prepare itself with questions to ask at the next meeting.

Ms Ncitha stated that the Committee had asked the municipalities and the Executive Members when they will supply the Committee with the section 134 report, and an account on what they have done regarding consequence management on the report. In the short amount of time that the province gave the Committee to read the report before the meeting, she has not picked up anything related to consequence management in it. She agreed with Mr Mthethwa that the Committee cannot consider this report in today’s meeting and that the meeting should be rescheduled and that the report that she has asked for to be included.  

Ms S Shaikh (ANC, Limpopo) thanked the Chairperson, Ms Ncitha, and Mr Mthethwa, stating that they have covered most of the points she wanted to make. However, she reminded the province that there is a constitutional obligation under section 139, where the Select Committee is required to review each intervention. The province needed to prepare appropriately and to provide the Committee with information well in advance. She agreed with the previous speakers that she did not believe the Committee has been taken seriously on this matter. She agreed that the meeting should not be continued, but that the province should inform the Committee on progress with the forensic report, and why it has not been sent to the Committee yet. 

Mr G Michalakis (DA, Free State) stated that he has been covered by his colleagues on whether the meeting should be continued, but he also asked for clarification on whether this Department is also under s100 administration. He believed it was. If the Department is under a s100 administration, he believed the national department should also come to the next meeting and give a briefing. If the departments under the province are also under administration, the Committee cannot entrust reporting to the Department only. He also agreed that it is not suitable to continue this meeting under current circumstances.

Mr I Sileku (DA, Western Cape) contributed that some of the Members of the Select Committee were not welcomed by the North West. He could not be sure it was the North West province, but believes it was them who were rude to the Committee when the Committee wanted to address the province. A council meeting was arranged but the province was rude to the Committee. Mr Sileku believed that the North West province is therefore getting off scot-free for the second time, undermining the Committee. What guarantee does the Committee have that all 14 of the municipalities that the Committee were meant to integrate at this meeting will attend the next one? It is unacceptable for the municipalities to not even acknowledge an invite from the Committee. The Committee’s interventions are not having the desired effect and the Committee must make an example of the North West province. The Committee must show the municipalities that they are serious, and that it is not acceptable to not put the interests of the people first.

Ms C Visser (DA, North West) told the Committee that as a person from the North West, she is embarrassed on behalf of the province. This is not acceptable behaviour. There is a tendency in the North West for all councils to provide the agenda of the meetings as participants walk into the meetings. The reports are always late, and the Committee has allowed them for consecutive years to refrain from completing their statutory obligations. There is a tendency in the North West to not comply with constitutional obligations. The fact that the province sent a 72-page document ten minutes before a meeting cannot be allowed. Ms Visser highlighted that the province has the worst performing municipalities in the country and this can now also be seen in the provincial legislature. Ms Visser agreed with her colleagues that the report should be sent back and the province should return when they are better prepared. If the mayors must be at the meeting, they must be at the meeting. If the Committee has requested this, then the mayors must comply with that.

The Chairperson invited the two MECs to specifically address the Committee on the matters raised by the MPs. There are three key issues. The first is why the report was only served to the Committee an hour before the meeting. General practice for these meetings is four or five days beforehand. He reminded the Committee that this meeting was already postponed in June, and all the municipalities were invited at that time. The meeting for the Eastern Cape was postponed on the very same day in June, and yet the Committee engaged properly with the Eastern Cape last week. The North West province was well aware that the municipalities must attend.

The Chairperson’s second issue was a clarification on why the report was only served just before the meeting when he thought the report had been ready in June.

The third issue from the Chairperson was why the report for the Bojanala municipality was not part of this meeting, including the forensic report. He remembered that the Minister of Finance had promised the report to the Committee within two weeks of completion of the investigation. It is therefore fair and proper that the Committee be informed on when the investigation was completed and why the NCOP has not received that report. The Chairperson explained that the Committee will decide how to proceed based on the province’s responses to the above three points.

Ms Motlalepula Rosho, North West MEC for Finance, apologised for the delay in responding. Due to load shedding, she had had problems with establishing an internet connection and maybe others were also having the same problems. She addressed the issue of the forensic report. The forensic report was concluded around the end of June. She was presented with the report in mid-June, and after the presentation, the Premier was briefed.

Ms Moiloa apologised for her technical issues.

The Chairperson replied that the Committee will address Ms Moiloa’s points once Ms Rosho had finished.

MEC Rosho continued that the report had not been submitted to the NCOP, but it is ready and complete. She has briefed the Council of Bojanala, so the report is now in process, and she will be able to bring that report and keep everyone up to date with what is happening at the next meeting. The report was concluded around July and the Hawks requested the report, so the report is also with them. The disciplinary processes are working on this parallel to the work in this meeting.

MEC Rosho apologised for not following up. The section 139 engagement has not yet been concluded, but she will be able to send the Bojanala report immediately after this meeting.

The Chairperson considered this to be a long outstanding matter, which is very important to the Committee.

MEC Moiloa firstly apologised for submitting the report late, as this is not in her nature. She promised to follow up on this and apologised to the Committee. She agreed that there is no way in which they cannot respect the Committee and understood the importance of the Committee’s oversight of them. She said she would check with the office of the head of the Department on why it was so late. She agreed it is not right to process a report received this late.

MEC Moiloa also stated that the Department must get its house in order and follow up on letters that the Department has sent to the municipalities to check why the municipalities did not attend the meeting today. The report on the invite can be published to the Chairperson’s office today or tomorrow, 2 September. In this meeting she highlighted that there are only the administrators of the municipalities, and the mayors have not attended. She said she would follow up on this. She said it would never happen again and apologised to the Chairperson.

The Chairperson conceded that the municipalities under administration are many. Out of the eight municipalities, this Committee has recommended that four of them must be out because the Committee has received unsatisfactory audits and unqualified reports. When the province represented before this Committee, the Committee was satisfied that progress had happened. 13 is a big number. Out of the 22 municipalities in the North West, this means over two thirds of them are in a crisis situation, under section 139. The Committee expects the province to take this very seriously. How the province does its business in relation to the municipalities should exercise and demonstrate that the province is committed to resolving problems of the municipalities.

The Chairperson added that this does not inspire confidence. This is the last province that the Committee has engaged with and the Committee had to postpone this issue based on clashes of meetings, the court was not ready, and that the passing on of the MEC made it challenging.

The Chairperson also stated that it is quite important that the NCOP finalise the report as it cannot be delayed by one province. It is very serious that the Committee has had to postpone this meeting because of the inability of the North West province to provide their work on time. It is very difficult for the Committee to postpone meetings, which have been properly scheduled and convened. The programme of the Committee is going to be seriously disrupted in order to resolve this issue.

The Chairperson proposed the following. First, the Committee must receive the notice that was sent to all municipalities that shows they were invited, by Friday 4 September. The second proposal is that, within seven days, the Committee must negotiate with Parliament to come up with a new date for the postponed meeting. The third proposal is that the forensic report on the Bojanala situation will be forwarded to the NCOP by Friday and distributed to Members. In the seven days between the meeting, availability of the provincial government and the Premier must be confirmed. If the Premier is not available, two MECs would be permissible, along with the Heads of Department. In addition, all administrators in the municipalities where there were interventions must be present, the 13 municipalities, as well as the mayors and municipal managers. The Committee expects feedback at the next meeting on why they did not attend the meeting today. In the next meeting, the Bojanala issue, and the section 139 interventions will be considered. Both Departments will have to brief the Committee on progress to date dealing with these matters and speak to the forensic report, highlights, findings, conclusions and recommendations. The municipalities will also have to address the Committee on consequence management, since the report was tabled to the Council, any civil or criminal matters included, and what to do with those matters, followed by a consideration of section 139 interventions.

The Chairperson stated that he could not specifically tell the Committee when the next meeting would take place, but it would be early next week. The meeting will be critically important, and long overdue. The Chairperson added to Ms Visser’s comments that he is also from the North West and was embarrassed by the province.

The Chairperson then concluded the meeting and thanked everyone in attendance, especially those delegates from the North West province, led by the two MECs.

The meeting was adjourned.