Waterloo Green Petition

Meeting report

Opening comments:
The Chairperson welcomed all to the meeting and outlined the agenda for the day. She mentioned that after their most recent meeting with the Western Cape Region, Mr Emile Langenhoven, Councilor for Wynberg, stated to the media that the Committee held a meeting in caucus on how to manage the draft report. The Committee had dealt with many petitions. The Committee had previously made recommendations which Councilman Langenhoven did not agree with. The Committee was very upset and vehemently condemned the actions of the Councilman who went on to address the media in the manner that he did. This was unfair to the Committee because they indeed conducted a thorough analysis. When the community members brought forward the issue of drugs, the Committee would advise accordingly. It was therefore wrong to publicly accuse the Committee of caucusing. The Committee would request their Communications Officer to issue a public statement on how they felt in this regard. She felt that this matter had to be addressed. She again welcomed everyone and reminded them of what they would discuss.

She reminded all that the President had announced that the election date is 29 May 2024. All Members came from different parties but should still adhere to the election regulations and laws. The campaigns must be fair and not undermine others. It had been 30 years since the dawn of democracy in South Africa, and since then, the ANC has done so much for the country.

Noting no apologies from Committee Members, the meeting commenced. The Chairperson noted the late arrival of one of the Members. She was glad about his arrival as he had been sick at the previous meeting. She noted two Members were part of other portfolio committees so their participation may be minimal.

Report of the Portfolio Committee on Public Works and Infrastructure on a petition tabled by Mr IS Seitlholo, Democratic Alliance
Mr Shuaib Denyssen, Committee Content Advisor Committee, flighted the report. He informed Members of the process around the petition and ensured that the Executive be held to the recommendations put forward. It was important to discuss how to process petitions. He reminded Members that Mr I Seitlholo (DA) was the Member to lodge the petition. The Department [of Public Works and Infrastructure] was previously called upon to investigate the petitions of Waterloo Green and Wynberg residents in Cape Town.

Mr Denyssen began to read out the flighted document.

During the reading, he commented that the community was unaware that Parliament was bound by constitutional stipulations requiring them to manage their matters publicly. Committees promoted administrative justice in being reasonably fair and nothing would be left undecided. He continued reading until the end, where he emphasised that the recommendations were not made in secret; they were made publicly. The noted errors would soon be corrected.

The Chairperson welcomed the presentation of the report and opened the floor for questions and comments, especially on the actions of Councilman Langenhoven.

Discussion

Ms A Siwisa (EFF) warned of her poor network [PMG tried to capture the comments to the best of its ability]. She said the draft report’s contents were previously discussed when the petition was first presented. She reiterated her dissatisfaction with Councilman Langenhoven's conduct. In the media statement, it should also reflect that the Committee was never informed of the rehab centre within the vicinity. It should also be reflected that the Committee was an independent body which held people accountable for their actions. Councilman Langenhoven’s comments implied that the Committee was being influenced - this was not true of the Committee at all. In the presence of dishonesty, the Committee would not be able to hold the Executive accountable.

The Department should be informed that the Committee never received the documentation requested and is still awaiting the documentation. This was becoming habitual and resulted in missing information. The regional office of the City of Cape Town should be asked to explain the plan that was formed.

The statement should clearly reflect that the Committee was an independent entity. Disagreements should not result in the Committee being accused of caucusing. The issue brought up by Councilman Langenhoven came after the Committee recommendations were put forward. She agreed with Mr Denyssen that the media house which released Councilman Langenhoven’s comments should be condemned - they should have rather approached the Committee for a report on their deliberations. The Committee was trying its best and did not caucus. She demanded that Councilman Langenhoven be summoned to issue an apology for insulting the Committee, as he had dented their image.

Mr Seitlholo forewarned of his poor network. He agreed with the earlier raised comments. With the regional office's lack of communication, he was unsure how the Committee should proceed. SAPS once occupied the properties so they were not sure what to do. The Committee would face issues of abandoned and illegally-owned buildings. Was the Committee permitted to move ahead with the report without communication from the Department? The communication would assist the Committee in its recommendations to the regional office; the issue needed to be written explicitly and give confidence to the Department. Lack of communication was an issue. Perhaps the Committee would have to follow up with the responsible managers so they may resolve the issue.

Mr T Mashele (ANC) recalled the deliberations when the petition was presented last year. No one should be allowed to undermine the Committee. This was very disrespectful, and the recommendations were in order. The Department should assist the Committee with bringing information. The Committee had recommendations based on the petitions and the commentary from the Department. He suggested the report be adopted.  

The Chairperson said the Committee was responsible for handling petitions as they were submitted. This process could not be further delayed due to missing information. The verbal presentation of the Department was recorded and all the information was taken into consideration, so further delays should not be created.

She agreed with Ms Siwisa that the statement should include that Councilman Langenhoven withdraw his statement and publicly apologise. Now that the election date had been announced, the Committee was racing against time. The Committee demanded an apology from Councilman Langenhoven. The Committee was there to raise the issues as they arrived. The media was prone to writing inflammatory statements and suffered penalties as a result. It was wrong for the media to publish such without consulting the Committee first. She suggested the report be adopted.

The draft report was subsequently adopted.

The Chairperson asked Mr Denyssen to record what was raised in the meeting so that it may form part of the media statement.

Read full report here https://pmg.org.za/tabled-committee-report/5668/

Committee minutes
The minutes of 14 Feb 2024 were considered and adopted.
 
Committee announcements
A venue was secured for a meeting to take place on 28 Feb 2024. The Committee would receive a presentation from the Auditor-General as well as the Department.

The Chairperson said Members should make arrangements to be in Cape Town on 28 Feb. On the day before, there would be a virtual meeting. She was happy that they had secured the venue.

The Committee Secretary said the meeting would be held in Boardroom S35 which was in the NCOP building. The venue was not big; the others were already fully booked.

The Chairperson reminded the Committee Secretary to inform the Department of this meeting. She thanked everyone for their time and participation in the meeting. This was a very vibrant Committee which was irreplaceable. She noted that the Committee Secretary had already informed the Department of the upcoming meeting.

The meeting was adjourned.