COGTA COMMITTEE DEMANDS MEASURABLE RESULTS AFTER YEARS OF INTERVENTIONS AT UTHUKELA DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY

COGTA COMMITTEE DEMANDS MEASURABLE RESULTS AFTER YEARS OF INTERVENTIONS AT UTHUKELA DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY

The Portfolio Committee on Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs of the KwaZulu-Natal Legislature concluded its Section 132 hearing on uThukela District Municipality with a clear concern that fundamental financial, governance, and service-delivery issues persist despite years of government intervention and support.

uThukela has received seven consecutive qualified audit opinions. The information before the Committee also reflected approximately R1.2 billion in gross consumer debt, R1.314 billion in accumulated unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, and water losses of 65%.

These are not simply figures in financial reports. They ultimately affect the municipality’s ability to deliver its most important responsibility – reliable water and sanitation services.

The Committee heard that communities continue to depend on water tankers where permanent infrastructure is inadequate or unavailable. We have therefore directed the municipality to provide a transparent water-tanker distribution plan showing which communities depend on tankers, how they are allocated and, importantly, what permanent solutions are planned.

The municipality must also provide quarterly targets for reducing the 65% water loss and report on the compliance status of each of the eight wastewater areas identified by the Auditor-General.

Another serious concern is revenue management. Of 982 accounts investigated for recording zero water consumption, all were found to be consuming services and 583 were incorrectly billed at zero. The Committee wants to know what has happened to those accounts, how many meters have been repaired, replaced or relocated, what work remains and what measures are being implemented to recover revenue lost as a result of zero billing.

We have also called for answers on the Ezakheni pumps, including the status of the criminal case, the current whereabouts of the pumps and the costs associated with their assessment and repair.

But one of the biggest questions arising from this hearing goes beyond individual failures.

uThukela has been subjected to successive interventions and support measures involving different spheres of government and institutions. These have included Section 139 intervention, intensified Section 154 support and the Section 63 intervention in water and sanitation.

The Committee has therefore asked CoGTA to explain the basis for moving uThukela from Section 139 intervention to intensified Section 154 support and, critically, to identify the single coordinating authority responsible for the various interventions and support programmes at uThukela.

We need to know who is ultimately responsible for ensuring that these interventions work together, that commitments are implemented and that progress is measured.

The Committee has also demanded a comprehensive account of consequence management, identifying who has been held accountable, the disciplinary action taken, financial recoveries made, matters referred to law enforcement and the outcomes of any prosecutions or other legal processes.

Governance must also function effectively. The Committee has requested a report on the effectiveness of Council oversight, including councillor attendance, the working relationship between Council and the administration, the handling of questions submitted by councillors and whether MPAC is functioning effectively as an accountability mechanism.

CoGTA must separately report on all Section 106 investigations relating to uThukela, including their findings, recommendations and outcomes, as well as reasons for delays where investigations remain outstanding.

The concern is no longer whether uThukela has received enough plans, support or intervention. There have been many.

The question is what has actually changed as a result.

After seven consecutive qualified audits, success cannot be measured by meetings held, committees established or action plans produced.

It must be measured by water losses coming down, wastewater facilities becoming compliant, revenue being correctly billed and collected, financial stability improving, wrongdoing resulting in consequences and communities receiving reliable services.

That is the measurable progress the Committee will now expect to see when the municipality and CoGTA report back on the resolutions arising from this hearing.