2.5 DEVELOPMENTS IN THE SOUTH AFRICAN WATER AND
2.5.2.2 LOCAL GOVERNMENT LEGISLATION
Over and above the national regulating acts, local government legislation has also been tabled in the White Paper on Local Government (Mvula Trust 200 I a), which includes the vision to establish
"efficient viable municipalities with the capacity to deliver basic services, as well as the inclusion of community participation in decision making" (Mvula Trust, 2001a: 2).
2.5.2.2.1 The Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act (Act 27 of 1998) This Act has a profound impact on rural areas, as it stresses the implementation of ' 'wall to wall"
municipal boundaries to ensure that disadvantaged areas are incorporated into the financially sustainable municipalities which can deliver sustainable services to the communities. However, there are complications as the tribal authorities are questioning their role, if the functions are given to the municipalities.
2.5.2.2.2 The Local Government: Municipal Structures Act (Act 117 of 1998)
This act focusses on mechanisms for service delivery, as it determines new municipal structures to include capacity requirements for its efficient functioning. According to the Mvula Trust, (2001a) and the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry, 2001, the Category A municipalities (Metros) which extends from cities to the rural periphery, will perform all service provision functions. Category B (Local Councils), have small towns or large villages with sufficient capacity to deliver services. Category C (District Councils), comprises of a group of Category B municipalities (Local Councils), which is responsible for service delivery which include the provision of water services to its communities.
2.5.2.2.3 The Local Government: Municipal Systems Act (Act 32 of 2000)
This looks at the internal systems and functioning ofthe municipalities. It regulates organisational change, public, community and women participation in decision making and most importantly allows municipalities to enter into partnerships with water boards, Non Governmental Organisations (NGOs), and is supportive of Community Based Organisations (CBOs) for water services delivery (Mvula Trust, 2001a and the Department of Water affairs and Forestry, 2001).
2.5.2.2.4 The Division of Revenue Act (Act 16 of 2000)
Financial management that is allocated to and controlled by National, Provincial and Local Governments are administered by this Act, whereby annually raised revenue is distributed to the authorities, and the local authorities portion of revenue raised nationally is called the "Equitable Share" (Mvula Trust, 2001a). With regard to services provision, the act allows for new projects being implemented with an agreement between DW AF and the Water Services Authority (Mvula Trust, 2001a and the Department of Water affairs and Forestry, 2001).
However, there still seems to be an urban bias to service provision of water, operating and monitoring costs of existing services, rather than the aim of providing some water to all of its communities. After maintaining the existing infrastructure, there is little or no money available for new service provision especially to the rural poor.
2.5.2.2.5 General
Over and above the Acts and Regulations, Traditional Leaders are also important role-players in basic services provision, and policy is being developed according to the Mvula Trust (2001a), to define the roles and status of traditional leaders, with a vision that traditional leaders have an important role to play in the provision of services to communities.
Another important policy development is the institutionalisation of"6 000 litres of Free Water for All". As discussed previously in "The Free Water for all Debate or Debacle", there are many concerns to this debate as argued in Water Institute of South Africa (2001). Of concern here is that most rural municipalities do not have the resources to pay for free water and provide for other services and according to Holden (2001 cited in Water Institute of South Africa, 2001: 1), ''until national Government comes up with a realistic strategy for funding free water it will not be implemented in rural areas, or free water will mean no water." What is also unfortunate is that by promising free water with no corresponding budget it leaves the few water schemes for the poor in rural areas that are able to operate sustainably at a local scale vulnerable due to the committee that runs the scheme losing its only source of income. The argument is that the "Equitable Share"
given to local authorities could be used to offset this dilemma. However, one questions the size of the equitable share given to the local government and whether the intended use which is for subsidisation of services to the poor will be implemented. Another important argument, according to Still (2000 cited in Water Institute of South Africa, 2001: 25), is that "national and provincial government have had very little control over how the councils have chosen to use that money"
with respect to the equitable share and he therefore argues that at least this debate may force local government into leaning at least some of the equitable share for the support of rural water supply.
Irrespective of the debate, the national government have implemented this policy and it its up to all South Africans to make it work and according to Steele (2000 cited in Water Institute of South Africa, 2001: 10):
It costs the country approximately R4 billion every year to treat and cope with the effects of diarrhoea and dysentery.... if we can agree that a free lifeline supply should be considered an entitlement, then there should be no reason that national cross-
subsidisation and national tariff restructuring cannot form the basis of a viable alternative framework.