Chairperson, hon Minister, members and guests, South Africa is one of the few countries in the world that enshrines in its Constitution the basic right to sufficient water, stating that everyone has the right to have access to sufficient food and water. However, much remains to be done in this instance.
South Africa is a water-stressed country and is facing a number of water challenges and concerns. Despite being a water-scarce country, South Africa faces high levels of water wastage and inefficient use. In municipalities, nonrevenue water is at more than 36%, on average, and in many municipal supply schemes this figure is even worse, with estimated losses of up to 90%. The President of the country, the hon Jacob Zuma, in his 2010 state of the nation address, stressed that measures would have to be implemented to halve water losses by 2014. Unfortunately, this did not happen. A study on the status of nonrevenue water by the Water Research Commission in 2012 found that only 132 usable data sets could be produced from the 237 local governments. The findings in the study were shocking. The study indicated that there has been a gradual increase in nonrevenue water over the last six years, with the figure now standing at 36,8%. Of this, 25,4% is considered to be lost through physical leakage, or real losses. In terms of loss in revenue, these losses account for more than R7 billion per year. That is enough money to build 14 state-of-the-art hospitals.
As it stands, municipalities are legally required to report and control their water losses as per the Water Services Act. Most of the municipalities are not doing this and, at the end of the day, the consumer pays the price. The need for serious intervention in municipalities is critical and of the highest priority in order to assist in replacing old infrastructure to balance the demands for and supply of drinking water.
Most municipalities are no longer in a financial position to maintain the infrastructure, due to corruption and maladministration. This is also confirmed in the budget report of the department, indicating that they had to support the local government water sector over the medium term by prioritising improvements in 42 water service authorities with Blue Drop risk ratings of above 50% and 55 water service authorities with risk ratings of above 70%; as well as completing 93 interventions to address the lack of water supply, poor water quality and pollution incidents in municipalities. This kind of intervention no longer works. No programmes are put in place to ensure that intervention will not be necessary again. Handing back a treatment plant into the same hands that caused the problem in the first instance is irresponsible and can be seen as a criminal offence.
As we all know, a coin has two sides. With water, it is the same - the delivery of clean drinking water and the treatment of wastewater, better known as sewer treatment plants. In this regard, 55% of sewer treatment plants, especially smaller ones, do not meet effluent standards and some do not even measure effluent quality. With the Blue Drop certification system for drinking water in place, government launched a Green Drop certification for municipal sewer plants.
As of May 2011, seven out of 159 water supply authorities were certified with the Green Drop - a mere 4% - and 32 out of 1 237 sewer treatment plants were certified with Green Drop status. This is only 2,5%. According to Bluewater Bio, an international firm specialising in wastewater treatment, there are 1 600 wastewater treatment plants in South Africa - not all of which were included in the Green Drop assessment - and at least 60% are not meeting compliance requirements. According to a study published in June 2013 by the Water Research Commission, in partnership with the SA Local Government Association, 44% of sewer treatment plants included in the sample used inappropriate and expensive technologies. There is a lack of funding for maintenance, and the absence of ring-fencing of revenue for the purpose of maintaining assets is one of the reasons that municipalities "run assets to failure".
The overall progress on a national scale can be summarised as follows: 440 plants showed progress by taking up lower-risk positions; 323 plants increased their risk levels; and 68 plants maintained their status of 2011. The majority of 241 plants are at moderate risk; 225 are at low risk; 212 are at high risk; and 153 are at critical risk.
Now, I would like to take the Deputy Minister - who had a lot to say about the Western Cape - to the ANC-controlled North West. One example of these critical-risk plants is the Rietfontein plant, which is under the control of the Madibeng Municipality, that was under section 139(1)(b) administration until 18 May 2011. Deputy Minister, that same municipality is, again, under section 154 administration.
Is there an improvement? No. Is this the good story that you want to tell? [Interjections.] The Rietfontein plant discharges water into the Swartspruit River, running into the Hartebeespoort Dam. The water was measured on 12 May 2014 and had an E.coli count of 820 000 particles/100 ml. The maximum count level allowed is 1 000/100 ml for sewer plants.
What is even more alarming is the fact that the previous Minister of Water Affairs, the hon Edna Molewa, stays on the estate where the sewerage is dumped - with her knowledge. It is the same Minister who declared the Brits water purification plant a crime scene in January this year, when four people of Mothutlung were killed for protesting for their constitutional right to clean water - and all we ever hear is, "We will investigate this matter."
The reason for these problems at Mothutlung, Rietfontein and Bloemhof, to name a few, is that South Africa experiences a brain drain and that it also affects the availability of qualified engineers in water and sanitation utilities. The number of civil engineers in municipalities has declined from 20 per 100 000 people staying within municipal boundaries in 1994 to 2,8 per 100 000 in 2009. According to a 2012 finding by the Human Sciences Research Council, one of the reasons is the official policy of cadre deployment, where persons loyal to President Zuma are being given jobs in different branches of government. [Interjections.] This process places party loyalty ahead of competence and demoralises Public Service employees. Skilled staff are concentrated at national and provincial levels, but there is a skills deficit at municipal level. South Africa can no longer afford the high levels of corruption and poor service delivery with yearly increases in water tariffs.
The national government is the custodian of water resources in the country, and government acts through the Minister to fulfil the constitutional mandate. If the Minister and the Department of Water and Sanitation are not going to act against municipalities to stop polluting the water resources, we will follow criminal procedure and use the full might of the law to prosecute those guilty of contaminating our water resources. The Minister, too, will then be held to account.
News headlines read: "Bloemhof's killer water leaves grief in its wake"; "E.coli bacteria in Bloemhof tap water kills infants"; "21 Bloemhof babies admitted to hospital"; and "Minstens 15 babas sterf al in Noordwes weens besoedelde water." [At least 15 babies have already died in the North West as a result of polluted water.]
Is this the ANC's "good story to tell"? [Interjections.]
In conclusion, Minister, the buck stops with you to act and secure South Africa's water resources. I thank you. [Applause.]