3. THE NEW LOCAL GOVERNMENT SYSTEM: CHALLENGES AND CHANGES
3.4 Participatory Governance
Lastly in this chapter, the new democratic requirements are examined. The post-apartheid system of
local government in South Africa also requires municipal councils to develop a culture of municipal governance that shifts from the strictly representative type of government to participatory governance.
Inessence this means that councils should decide with communities, rather than for them, thus creating a more active local democracy. The new system envisages a far greater involvement by residents than simply casting their votes in a municipal election once every five years. Rather, local communities should exercise their democratic rights to have their demands heard before final decisions are made.
In particular, the Systems Act contains specific provisions for community participation in local governance.92The Act makes it clear that residents have the right to contribute to the municipality's decision-making processes. There are three substantive aspects to the innovation of participatory governance: the definition of the municipality, ward committees and requirements for public participation. The first of these is in some ways the most remarkable and yet intangible. The Systems Act defines the municipality as consisting of the governing structures ( the elected councillors), the administration (the appointed staff) and the residents.93
The definition of residents as part of the municipality is claimed to be unique in the world, and establishes the grounds for greater involvement in municipal affairs. While the practical ramifications of this definition are not yet obvious, the conceptual, normative and potential legal ramifications seem considerable.
The second innovation, outlined in the Structures Act are ward committees for Category A and B municipalities only.94 Although not compulsory, the new system provides for committees to be established in each ward of the municipality. These are chaired by the ward councillor, the ten remaining members are elected from the local community. They are intended to reflect a "diversity of interests in the ward" and women have to be "equitably represented" in a ward committee. Ward committees may make representations on any issue affecting a ward to the ward councillor, the mayor or a committee of council. Itcan also exercise any duty or power delegated to it by council.
The third and final innovation is effectively a set of requirements for public involvement in various decision-making processes. These requirements emerge in both the Structures and Systems Acts, examples of which are as follows:-
Firstly, the following provisions are contained in the Structures Act
Section 4: The Council ofa Municipality ... has the duty to "encourage the involvement to the local community," and "consult the community about (i) the level, quality, range and impact of municipal services provided by the municipality... and (ii) the available options for service delivery."
Section 5 (1) stipulates that members of local community have the right to "(i) contribute to the decision-making processes ofthe municipality; and (ii) submit written or oral recommendations, representations and complaints ...."
Section 6 requires that a municipality's administration must "be responsive to the needs of the local community," and "facilitate a culture of public service and accountability amongst staff."
Secondly, the Systems Act details the procedures municipalities must adopt to promote community participation.95 These include the receipt, processing and consideration of petitions and complaints lodged by members of the local community; notification and public comment procedures, where appropriate; public meetings and hearings convened by the municipal council and other political structures and political office bearers ofthe municipality; consultative sessions with locally recognised community organisations and, where appropriate, traditional authorities; and report-backs to the local community.
Participatory governance in South Africa is a new concept and municipalities are faced with huge challenges in their efforts to design and implement an effective public participation strategy.
Community participation ideally entails the involvement ofall the residents in decision-making on, for example, a development issue. This issue may be the building of a clinic, a library or it may be an anti crime initiative. As public participation is aimed at enhancing the quality of decisions, it is important that these strategies and procedures are structured and that municipalities develop their internal capacities to manage these processes. Failure to do so will lead to apathy amongst residents towards future endeavours by the municipality to involve communities in municipal decision-making. Success however, may also have its problems, and central here is the likely cost to the efficiency of decision- making. This potential dilemma is explored in the next chapter.
REFERENCES
1. Heymans, C.:Local Government transition and beyond: Observation and suggestions, Development Bank of Southern Africa, March 1994, p.1.
2. Ibid
3. Ibid.
4. Roome, P.: Comments on the Local Government: Municipal Systems Bill. In proc. Institute for Local Government Management ofSouth Africa Conference, Bloemfontein, 7 to 9 June
1999, p.3.
5. Republic of South Africa: The Constitution ofthe Republic ofSouth Africa, 1983, (Act 180 of 1983), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1983.
6. Kinghorn, J.: The Theory of Separate Equality: A Critical Outline of the DRC's position on apartheid. InChristianity in South Africa, M. Prozesky, Bergvlei, 1990, pp. 57 - 80.
7. Republic of South Africa: The Group Areas Act, 1950, (Act 41 of 1950), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1950.
8. Dennis, P.: Transformations in a South African town: Pietermaritzburg (KwaZulu-Natal) from the colonial time to the introduction ofdemocracy. University of Natal
Pietennaritzburg! Catholic University of Lourain, p.lO.
9. Sutcliffe, M.: Matters affecting Local Government, Development and civic affairs in the Durban Functional Region: Towards an urban development policy. Inproc. Critical aspects ofLocal Government Administration in a post- apartheid South Africa Conference,
University of Durban-Westville, 16 -17 September, 1992, p.71.
10. Ibid.
11. Sutcliffe, M.: The road to good government. The Natal Mercury, Durban, 10 February 1992.
12. Thompson.:A history ofSouth Africa. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
1990, p.123.
13. Ibid
14. Du Toit, T.:State Building Democracy in Southern Africa: A comparative study of Botswana, South Africa and Zimbabwe. H SRC Publishers, Pretoria 1995, p. p. 296-297.
15. Stadler, A.: The political economy ofmodern South Africa, David Philip, London: Croom Helm, 1987, p.88.
16. Ibid.
17. Posel, D.: The making ofapartheid 1948 -1961. Conflict and Compromise. Oxford:
Clarendon Press, 1991, p.39.
18. Marndani, M.: Citizen and Subject, Contemporary Africa and thelegacy oflate colonialism, Cape Town, Fountain Publishers, 1996, p.23.
19. Ibid.
20. Ibid.
21. Stadler, Ibid., p.89.
22. Ibid.
23. Ibid.
24. Ibid., p.103.
25. Republic of South Africa: The White Paper on Local Government, Pretoria, Government Printer, 1988, Section A.
26. Ibid.
27. Ibid.
28. Thompson, Ibid., p.164.
29. Du Toit.: Ibid., p. p 296 -297.
30. Posel, Ibid., p. 76.
31. Carneron, R.G.: Democratisation ofSouth African Local Government. A Tale of Three Cities, lL.Van Shaik, 1999, p.76.
32. Posel, Ibid., p.79.
33. Ibid.,p.80.
34. Cameron, Ibid.
35. Ibid.
36. Carneron, Ibid.
37. Republic of South Africa: The White Paper on Local Government. Pretoria, Government Printer, 1988. Section A.
38. Republic of South Africa: The Bantu Affairs Administration Act, 1971, (Act 45 of 1971), Pretoria, Government Printer 1971.
39. Ibid.
40. Mabin, A.: From Hard Top To Soft Serve: Demarcation of MetropolitanGovernment in Johannesburg. InCameron, op.cit., p.l62.
41. Cameron,Ibid., p.78.
42. Ibid, p.77.
43. Ibid, p.78.
44. Ibid
45. Natal: The Local Authorities Ordinance, 1974, (Ordinance 25 of 1974), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1974.
46. Republic of South Africa: The Public Health Act, 1977, (Act 63 of 1977), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1977.
47. Republic of South Africa: The Regional Services Councils Act, 1985, (Act of 1985), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1985.
48. Breytenbach, W. 1.: Regional Services Councils, Problems and Potentialities,Journal of Public Administration, Vol.22, n02, June 1987, pp.44 -55.
49. Ibid 50. Ibid 51. Ibid
52. Natal Witness: Pietermaritzburg, 5 December 1990. p.l.
53. Cameron,Ibid, p.165.
54. Ibid, p.l66.
55. Ibid., p. 84.
56. Republic of South Africa: Local Government Transition Act.1993, (Act 209 of 1993), Pretoria: Government Printer, 1993.
57. Cameron,Ibid, p.85.
58. Republic of South Africa: The Local Government Municipal Demarcation Act, 1998, (Act of27 of 1998), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1998.
59. Republic of South Africa: The Local Government Municipal Structures Act, 1998, (Act 117 of 1998), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1998.
60. Republic of South Africa: The Local Government Municipal Systems Act, 2000, (Act 32 of 2000), Pretoria, Government Printer, 2000.
61. Republic of South Africa: The Constitution ofthe Republic ofSouth Africa, 1996, (Act 108 of 1996), Pretoria: Government Printer, 1998.
62. Ibid, Section 152 (1).
63. Cameron, Ibid, pp 227 - 230.
64. Act108of1996.
65. Republic of South Africa:Local Government Municipal Finance Management Bill, Pretoria, Government Printer, 2001.
66. Legislative Development of Local Government Structures in South Africa. In Voice: Official publication ofthe South African Local Government Association, January/February 2004,
p.15.
67. Dennis, Ibid., p.24.
68. Heyneke, T.: Successful combating non-payment for service delivery by implementing suitable systems for credit control and revenue collection within, your local government to improve your financial stability. Inproc.Institute for International Research: 5thLocal Government Symposium 2001, Johannesburg: 26 and 27 March 2001, p. 20.
69. Republic of South Africa: The Division ofRevenue Act, 1999, (Act 30 of 1999), Pretoria, Government Printer. 1999.
70. Republic of South Africa: The Constitution ofthe Republic ofSouth Africa, 1996, (Act 108 of 1996), Pretoria, Government Printer, 1996, Section 153 (b).
71. Act 108 of 1996, Section 40.
72. Ibid., Section 156 (2).
73. Atkinson, D, Buso, N, Pienaar, D. and Makoba, S.: Lessons Regarding Municipal Restructuring in on-metro Areas. InHologram newsletter - Municipal Restructuring in Non-Metro Areas, p.2.
74. Ibid.
75. Ibid.
76. Ibid., Section 154 (1).
77. Mc Cann, M.: Intergovernmental Relations and Co-operative Governance. Perspectives on Decentralisation and New Developmental Municipalities. InHorizontal Learning Network.
The Best ofHologram , Nolwasi, Cape Town, 2003, p.p.l-l3.
78. Ibid.
79. Steytler, N.:Socio-economic Rights and Basic Municipal Services, Local Government Bulletin, 5 (5).
80. Ibid.
81. Ibid.
82. Ibid.
83. Carrim Y.: Bridging the gap between ideal and practice: Challenges of the new local government system,ANC Journal, Umrabulo, N°lO, March, 2001, p.2.
84. The White Paper on Local Government, Section C.
85. Act 32 of2000, Section 2 (b).
86. Act 108 of1996, Section 155 (1).
87. Act 117 of1998, Sections 8 -10.
88. Act 117 of1998, Section 60.
89. Ibid., Section 56.
90. Woolridge, D. Gotz, G. and Duvenhage, J.: Municipal Governance inpolitical
Administrative Interface. In Horizontal Learning Programmefor Local Government, April 2003, p.l.
91. Ibid.
92. Republic of South: The Local Government Municipal SystemsAct, 2000, (Act 32 of2000), Pretoria: Government Printer. 2000, Chapter 3.
93. Ibid., Section 2 (b).
94. ActJJ7 ofJ998, Section 72.
95. Act 32 of2000, Chapter 4.
CHAPTER TWO
DECISION-MAKING IN LOCAL GOVERNMENT: THE PROBLEM, THE OBJECTIVES AND THE HYPOTHESIS.
INTRODUCTION.
InChapter One, an attempt was made to highlight some of the features of local government as it existed during the apartheid era. This was presented as a background against which the transfonnation of local government and the new changes and challenges facing local government could be addressed. The democratisation of local government and the requirements which this process placed on municipalities coupled with the statutory requirements for decision-making structures and processes to be efficient, are the key factors which gave rise to this research. InChapter Two, I build onto the contents of Chapter One by, firstly identifying the problem and thereafter fonnulating the objectives in the light of theoretical reflections on democracy. Once this has been achieved I will provide a case for the hypothesis and sub hypotheses.