Review Municipal Infrastructure Grant
Policy Framework Review - 2013
MIG Quarterly Workshop
4 – 5 June 2013
1
Municipal Infrastructure
Grant development since
1994
1994: RDP
EMIP
MIP
BSIG
LEDF
WSCG
CBPWP
BSRF
1996: Cabinet
decision
CMIP
UTF
MIG
INEP
2003: Cabinet
decision
2009
review
MIG
Cities
RHIG
RBIG
Present 2013
USDG
2013 MTEF
MWIG
Transition
New Conditional Grant
dispensation on how to deal
with municipal infrastructure
Does the quantum of funding available deal with the total value chain of sector
investment . e.g for water and sanitation it is around 30 billion over the MTEF.
Does municipalities optimally access funding?
Vision
•
The municipal infrastructure grant programme is aimed at providing
all South Africans with at least a basic level of service by the year
2013 through the provision of grant finance aimed at covering the
capital cost of basic infrastructure for the poor.
•
The MIG programme is a key part of government's overall drive to
•
alleviate poverty in the country and
•
employment is maximised
•
opportunities are created for enterprises to flourish.
Objectives of the MIG
programme
• Supplements the capital costs of providing infrastructure (basic/
appropriate infrastructure) improving basic services to poor
households.
• MIG is a multi-sectoral programme - Involves all spheres of
government including sector departments
• Implementation at Local level should integrate with provincial
and national priorities articulated within the IDP
• Due to limited funding and capacity of municipalities, encourage
municipalities to prioritise funding
• The grant is a key government’s overall drive to alleviate poverty
• Infrastructure should be provided in such a way that employment
is maximised and opportunities are created for enterprises to
flourish Enhance Local Economic Development spin-offs
4
Need for the review Background
•
First DoRA was first introduced in 1998, more than R165 billion in
infrastructure grants have been made available to municipalities or to national
departments 107 to spend on their behalf.
•
Concern that the substantial resources (R60b MIG since 2004) were and are not
being used optimally and that the pace of service delivery rollout suffers as a
result.
•
In response to this, infrastructure conditional grant transfers to local
government will be reviewed and reformed to maximise their effectiveness
2014.
•
This review will be coordinated by the National Treasury, using a collaborative
process that will include national departments, SALGA and the FFC, and
extensive consultation with municipalities.
•
In support to above processes the MIG policy Framework Review will bring
5
additional intelligence to the above-mentioned process.
Need for the review Background
• First DoRA was first introduced in 1998, more than R165 billion in
infrastructure grants have been made available to municipalities or to
national departments 107 to spend on their behalf.
• Concern that the substantial resources (R60 b MIG since 2004) were
and are not being used optimally and that the pace of service delivery
rollout suffers as a result.
• In response to this, infrastructure conditional grant transfers to local
government will be reviewed and reformed to maximise their
effectiveness 2014.
• This review will be coordinated by the National Treasury, using a
collaborative process that will include national departments, SALGA
and the FFC, and extensive consultation with municipalities.
• In support to above processes the MIG policy Framework Review will
bring additional intelligence to the above-mentioned process.
• The review of the conditional grant system should take cognisance of
the vision stated on services to the poor in the NDP
6
Need for the review – Current
status
• 2014 target for access to basic services:
– Water 100%
– Sanitation 100%
– Electricity 92%
– Refuse at 75%
• Access figures to basic services as at March 2013 are:
– Water: 95,1% (86% functional)
– Sanitation: 85%
– Electricity: 85% (not part of MIG)
– Refuse: 65%
7
Objectives of the review
• The MIG Policy Framework should be reviewed through a consultative
process with the focus on:
• Evaluating the vision, objectives, key principles, institutional
arrangements and whether it is still meeting government’s strategic
priorities as set out in the National Development Plan such as:
– meeting the national infrastructure delivery targets and thus closing
the infrastructure delivery gap;
– the delivery of sustainable infrastructure in the context of
establishing sustainable human settlements, this includes
infrastructure investments to cater for environmental
considerations;
– poverty alleviation; and
– local economic growth.
8
Objectives of the review
• Evaluating the:
– Targeting of the MIG; and
– Eligible categories of infrastructure to be funded by the MIG.
• Evaluating the:
– Grant design mechanism;
– Methods to divide funding between municipalities; and
– Any other divisions outside to that of municipalities.
• Evaluate the conditions applied to the MIG and the monitoring thereof.
• Evaluate the DORA requirements and propose best solutions for the
sustainability of infrastructure delivery.
9
Objectives of the review
• Evaluate the institutional arrangements across all three spheres of
government and propose the best solutions for the appropriate project
management, monitoring, reporting on and evaluation of the MIG
programme.
• The recommendations on the above and changes to the MIG Policy
Framework should include the views of stakeholders and a case study
of municipalities should be used to confirm and verify the issues
mentioned above. It is proposed that the case study be based on a
sample of thirty (30) municipalities using the categorisation used in the
Municipal Infrastructure Investment Framework.
– 6 in category B1(local municipalities)
– 6 in category B2 (local municipalities)
– 6 in category B3 (local municipalities)
– 6 in category B4 (local municipalities)
– 6 in category C2 (district municipalities)
10
Objectives of the review
• Coordinate consultative processes at the national, provincial and local
levels of government (e.g. workshops)
– Thoroughly document the consultative sessions.
– Note that the service provider will have to consider work already
completed or currently underway which pertains to the local
government fiscal and functional review process and the alignment
with the National Development Plan
11
Deliverables and timelines
Deliverable by service provider
Estimated dates
Appointment
July 2013
Briefing session with appointed service
provider
Submission of a project plan
1 week after appointment (5 working
days)
1 week after appointment (5 working
days)
1 Aug - 31 October 2013
Consultation sessions with stakeholders
ends
 National
 Provincial
 Local Government
Report with recommendations and first draft
of
the
reviewed
Policy
Framework
document.
Final draft of the reviewed Policy
Framework, supporting documentation and
notes.
Reviewed Policy Framework document with
supporting documentation and notes
1 - 30 November 2013
1 December - 31 January 2014
1 - 28 February 2014
12
Questions
13