Publications
Partners
Political leadership is the problem. It is predatory and united in plunder of municipalities, writes Mcebisi Ndletyana.
Fifteen years ago government alerted us to problems in municipalities. More than half could only manage to perform 50% or less of their functions. To remedy the problems, national government introduced what it called Project Consolidate.
This initiative entailed assigning experts to the 203 affected municipalities, out of 284 at the time. Dubbed “service delivery facilitators”, the experts were to be hands-on and possessed a range of technical skills.
I don’t know what the immediate impact of Project Consolidate was. What is clear today, however, is that municipalities have not improved. Now 15 years after we were first alerted to the problems, municipalities remain troubled, and may even have deteriorated.
Just a year ago Zweli Mkhize, then minister responsible for municipalities, told us that “only 7% of the country’s municipalities are classified as well functioning, with 31% being reasonably functional, 31% almost dysfunctional while the remaining 31% is dysfunctional”. In a nutshell, Mkhize told us that more than 90% of the country’s municipalities were functioning below par.
Last week Kimi Makwetu, the Auditor-General, effectively reported that we are facing an institutional decay.
Irregular expenditure stands at R25 billion, wasteful expenditure is a staggering R1.3 billion and only 19% of the municipalities could account properly for how they spent their budgets. Even more worrisome is that cases of wasteful expenditure are quite glaring.
Consider, for instance, two of the examples that Makwetu cited in his report. Metsimaholo Local Municipality spent R21.7 million claiming to build a sports complex.
When auditors visited the site, there was no structure, not even a foundation. Mahikeng claimed to have built a stretch of road.
On inspection, the length of road was actually less than what was initially budgeted for, it took six months longer to complete the little that they did, and yet they spent R4.2 million more than the initial budget. This could only mean that millions of rand disappeared.
If one looks at the institutional architecture of municipalities, however, one would not believe that they produce miserable results.
They have all manner of institutional mechanisms meant to detect and report malfeasance to the responsible authorities to initiate corrective action.
Metsimaholo Municipality probably has a ward committee, as legislation prescribes, which should have picked up that money meant for the sport complex was actually being stolen.
At the beginning of every financial year ward committee members know what is planned for their wards and how much is budgeted.
Throughout the year, the committee meets regularly – at least every month – to get reports and monitor if the municipality is fulfilling its commitments towards the ward. Because members reside in the wards, they are also able to verify the reports against what they see.
Two other bodies within councils assist ward committees with monitoring and oversight. These are the municipal public accounts committees (MPACs) and audit committees. The MPAC is made up of councillors, while audit committees comprise outside experts. Officials are obliged to report to the MPAC and the committee can summon reports and issue directives for remedial action.
In instances where they can’t make sense of numbers, experts in the audit committees come in to assist. Nothing untoward within municipalities should go undetected or persist without being corrected.
But, we know, and have known for 15 years now, that there’s a lot of wrongdoing happening in municipalities. And such wrongdoing is also allowed to happen, repeatedly. The checks and balance measures within government are simply a farce, meant to mislead us into thinking that the system works.
While seeming independent of each other, the manner of their operation suggests that these bodies actually have common interest to defraud the state. Maybe this is untrue of audit committees because they don’t have enforcement powers, but is it true of the two other bodies?
Ward committees, for instance, don’t operate independently. One of their duties is to ensure that ward councillors do their jobs.
But, councillors chair ward committees and meetings happen at their own discretion to discuss an agenda of their own choosing. Councillors can blunt effectiveness of ward committees, enabling them to evade scrutiny.
In some wards, they don’t even have to employ any tricks, but enjoy ready compliance from committee members. Serving in a ward committee pays a monthly income.
In Nelson Mandela Bay, council has just voted to double the monthly income from R1 000 to R2 000. Committee members also get cellphones with airtime.
And, they don’t just get any phones such as utilili (or “a starter-pack”) that thieves don’t even want to steal. They get Huawei phones that cost thousands of rand.
Service in ward committees, therefore, is coveted. It’s not uncommon for residents to fight over positions, and reports of elections being rigged are regular. Unscrupulous councillors take advantage of this desperation. They use their influence to ensure the election of allies into the committee.
In a ward that is controlled by the ANC, for instance, it’s unusual to have members of opposition parties serving in the committee. Often committee members are ANC branch members, not even any member of the community.
Instead of holding them to account, committee members become indebted to and uncritical of councillors.
It is not rare of people residing, or who even grew up, in the same community to exchange personal favours. Municipalities are a network of personal relations.
With regard to the provincial government, however, one expects an executive member to deal with municipalities in a dispassionate manner.
Their duties towards municipalities involve ensuring that they employ qualified staff and intervene in dire circumstances. In reality though it does not always happen that way.
Provincial governments allow employment of unqualified people and temporary appointments to go on for years, when the law prescribes only 90 days for an interim appointment.
Incompetence and temporary appointments are at the root of dysfunctional municipalities.
Some provincial governments, even when it’s evident that a municipality cannot self-correct, reject pleas to put it under administration. Ministers responsible for local government have not been much help either.
It may well be that the source of the decay lies not so much within the institution of local government. Rather, the danger comes from political leadership.
It is predatory and united in that vice. Instead of keeping check on each other, they are conniving.
Plurality of parties and uncertainty of re-election is the only thing that has staved off the collapse of all municipalities. That explains why municipalities in the Western Cape and, to a limited extent in KwaZulu-Natal, are doing relatively well.
The catalyst lies outside of political institutions, in the law. If and only when politicians are threatened with imprisonment will they do the right thing.
Courts took it upon themselves to make officials personally liable for legal costs, where it was unnecessary to litigate using public money. Now the Auditor-General can institute charges to imprison guilty officials and recover stolen or wasted public funds.
We are far from a solution though. We are dealing with predators. They will fight back through killings of witnesses and burning of government offices to eliminate evidence.
This is already happening, and is likely to intensify. Prepare yourselves!
Ndletyana is associate professor of politics at the University of Johannesburg
TALK TO US
Who do you think should shoulder the blame for the problems in our municipalities?
SMS us on 35697 using the keyword MUNICIPALITY and tell us what you think. Please include your name and province. SMSes cost R1.50. By participating, you agree to receive occasional marketing material
