The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

AfriForum warns that while the Intergovernmental Monitoring, Support and Interventions (IMSI) Bill aims to address persistent municipal and provincial failures, the new bill currently being considered in the National Assembly (NA) risks repeating past mistakes. The civil rights organisation therefore suggests in its official submission on the bill that meaningful reforms are essential for this bill to succeed in its purpose.

The IMSI Bill aims to give national and provincial governments clearer powers in cases where intervention is required in municipalities or provinces that are not fulfilling their constitutional or legal obligations. IMSI should, among other things, provide for: 

·more effective monitoring of provinces and municipalities regarding their executive obligations;

·the support to provinces and municipalities that require assistance; and

·the placing of a province or municipality under administration to restore service delivery or ensure financial stability if necessary.

In its comments submitted to Parliament on Friday, AfriForum emphasises that the organisation supports the goal of strengthening intervention mechanisms in cases where municipalities consistently fail to meet their constitutional responsibilities. However, the organisation warns that the proposed expanded intervention mechanisms alone will not restore good governance or service delivery.

“The collapse of local government across the country has shown that interventions that evade accountability and ignore structural reform simply do not work,” explains Morné Mostert, Manager for Local Government Affairs at AfriForum.

AfriForum further maintains that the bill does not adequately address the structural causes of municipal collapse – such as skills shortages, poor financial management, political instability and the absence of consequences management. Without compulsory structural reform, interventions run the risk of becoming temporary administrative takeovers that do not prevent further decline but merely delay it.

In its submission on the bill, AfriForum also criticises the absence of mandatory community involvement in the intervention process. IMSI approaches intervention as a matter that only concerns the different levels of government, even though communities have to bear the direct consequences of municipal failures.

“Community participation is not optional,” Mostert explains. “Interventions that occur without consulting residents undermine both democratic principles and the practical success of recovery efforts.”

According to AfriForum, competent civil society organisations should be formally recognised as partners in the support and implementation of interventions rather than limiting and diluting their involvement to that of mere advisors. For example, AfriForum has repeatedly proven that it provides effective support to communities with the restoration and delivery of water and electricity, refuse removal and other basic municipal services in cases where the government has failed to act.

AfriForum also opposes the IMSI Bill’s provisions for recovering intervention costs from municipalities. According to the civil rights organisation, this provision shifts the financial burden of failed governments onto residents and taxpayers. AfriForum also calls for strict requirements regarding transparency, public reporting on intervention budgets and independent post-intervention audits.

“AfriForum remains committed to constructive engagement with local government and stands ready to assist in the restoration of functional local government in a manner that protects communities’ constitutional rights and interests,” Mostert concludes.

Issued by AfriForum