Category

Archive

Sep 07
Love0

“We are poor, but not hopeless”: Youth mobilisation in Orange Farm, Johannesburg

By Archive, FEDUP, News, Resources, Youth No Comments

Collaboration Saving Scheme (on behalf of FEDUP)

One of the landmark projects of the collaboration youth saving scheme is the street naming project in Orange Farm, Johannesburg. We have taken upon ourselves to name streets in our community. The naming of streets project is a response to the difficult of navigating the settlement. This project is important to us and the community as it give police, emergency services and the general public a way of locating and referencing properties. This project is a product of our youth mobilisation in Orange Farm, in which we have decided as young people to come together to address common challenges.

Most of us have been living in Orange farm for a very long time but still even today our streets are nameless. It is worse when it comes to letters and parcels sent to our people because most of the mail gets lost.  In a place like Orange farm it is very much possible for two sections to have the same number..… since our townships is constantly growing, street naming is crucial to bring order. People have died while waiting for emergency service provider e.g. like fire service and police emergency teams because they couldn’t identify location to render quicker response.

We can’t always wait for government to think for us in terms of what will be good for us.The street naming project is the best innovation that can be even adopted elsewhere. The collaboration youth saving scheme has engaged with the City of Johannesburg municipality, where we have suggested that this initiative be supported in the municipality. The youth also went on an exchange in Nairobi to share experience and learn from a youth in Nairobi. This youth is doing a numbering of structures project.

Youth members of Collaboration saving scheme identifying and naming streets in Orange Farm.

Collaboration saving scheme

Members of collaboration saving scheme draw their inspiration from Thusanang Saving Scheme, a federation (Fedup) group of mamas in Orange Farm. It is through this group that we have learned about savings, the culture of federating and other Fedup rituals such as data collection, partnerships, and projects. Some of us, at some point we even participated in the Thusanang saving scheme as a result we have first hand experience from the mamas. 

Collaboration Saving Scheme brings different young people who had travel different directions but faced similar challenges. Some us had spent time seeking for employment with no luck due to limited work experience. Some us had tried going to further our studies but because of our financial status we struggled to access our dreams. As a result, we decided to come together and start our own saving scheme separately from the mamas because we face particular problems that are particular to us as young peopl. 

Our youth group consists of savers and young entrepreneurs ages 16-35. We are very experimental and we are always prepared to push boundaries, but we rely on the guidance of our mamas due to the experience that they have. One of the strongest examples in how we approach savings is introducing different kind of music and dancing in the federation. We are actively involved in small projects and businesses ranging from furniture making to music production. In addition to saving, we eagerly engage the community’s youth through drama, dancing, and sports like soccer. 

Collaboration Saving scheme engaging in different activities.

What we want to achieve

One of the thing we strive to achieve is to alleviate poverty and we believe that this can be done through education. We know that this is an ambitious goal but it is something that we strive towards achieving. For example, we have life skills programme that we have recently started, called “learn4life”. In this programme we encourage young people from Orange Farm to meet on a weekly basis to share knowledge and opportunities. This space is important in the development of our community because the type of knowledge that we get to share is necessary in day-to-day life situations ranging from health, business or environmental topics to social skills and personal development. The learn4life programme also offers curricular activities like acting, drama, choir and dancing.

Fedup has unleashed our hidden talents, it has created space for us to test our potential. Our community is struggling, and many young people are involve in substance and drugs abuse, violence and teenage pregnancy like many other townships in South Africa. Lack of education is another factor, some kids drop out of school. They do not see any value in education because with education you can only see the fruits of your success in the long term. Another contributing factor is lack of leisure activities as a result many young people a lot of free time on their hands which contributes to them engaging in criminal or violent activities. We are trying to change how young people think. We want to shift the thinking that define young people as only leaders of tomorrow – into a thinking that young people can be leaders today and can make change now.

Pipeline projects

As a saving scheme we have agreed to mobilise young people in all informal settlement around Gauteng. We have also decided to engage on projects such as internet café, day care centre, street naming, catering (small l& big events). One of the initiative in this regard include spending Mandela Day doing community work at Little Angels Day Care Center. The youth group immediately thought of Little Angels because it is one of the biggest day cares in Orange Farm and has been running for 11 years. We played with and cooked for the kids so that the teachers could take a break. 

Collaboration saving scheme members visit to Little Angels Day Care Center.

May 05
Love0

Whose Land is it Anyway? Unity and Divisions in the Development of Joe Slovo

By Archive, CORC, FEDUP, News, Resources, SDI No Comments

By Evelyn Benekane (on behalf of FEDUP) and Kwanda Lande (on behalf of CORC)

The “land issue” is probably the most debated topic in South Africa today. This is after a motion was passed by the parliament of South Africa to establish an ad hoc Constitutional Review Committee, to “review and amend section 25 of the Constitution to make it possible for the state to expropriate land in the public interest without compensation”. Currently, debates are reduced to land expropriation and neglect related issues such as land management challenges.

In this piece we share what some of these land management challenges look like for FEDUP in the Eastern Cape, where the Joe Slovo community has been struggling to access land for housing. In particular, the Federation experience highlights how conflicting interests around the Joe Slovo Communal Property Association (CPA) acted as a major impediment for Joe Slovo community members to access houses and title deeds.

“For the past 20 years the community of Joe Slovo was divided between two groups contesting the status of the Joe Slovo CPA. This left people without houses. People are struggling to buy electricity because they are not registered owners due to maladministration. There are no individual title deeds…”

(Evelyn Benekane)

This piece is an outcome of desktop research and interviews with Evelyn Benekane (FEDUP regional coordinator), who also wrote down the original content for this piece. She has been a community activist in Joe Slovo since the beginning of the settlement and she led the mobilising process to acquire land for housing since in 1995. Evelyn Benekane also acted as a signatory on behalf of the community when the Joe Slovo Community Property Association (CPA) was established in 1997 as part of the land restitution programme of South Africa . She was also elected as a spokesperson of the land committee, a platform for negotiating with the landowner and the municipality.

Joe Slovo Context and Its Development History

Joe Slovo is a settlement established in 1995 by organised members of the FEDUP. The settlement started as an informal settlement and was later developed into a formal housing (RDP) settlement. It is located on the outskirts of Port Elizabeth CBD and in proximity to the small CBD of Dispatch. The Joe Slovo community has attracted new residents over the past 21 years, mostly coming from the nearby rural areas in the hope of finding a better life in the city.

Taken in 2016 by Joubert Loots, this panorama picture of Joe Slovo demonstrate some of the housing typology and infrastructure.

Taken in 2016 by Joubert Loots, this panorama picture of Joe Slovo demonstrate some of the housing typology and infrastructure.

The idea of establishing Joe Slovo began in 1994, when residents of Veeplaas (an informal settlement in Port Elizabeth) became aware of the idea of coming together to save. This was a result of an exchange organised by FEDUP in the Eastern Cape to bring different informal settlements in Port Elizabeth to share experiences to alleviate poverty. In this meeting FEDUP introduced savings as a pivotal tool for alleviating poverty and accessing housing. In 1995 Injongo Zama Afrika savings scheme was started by informal residents of Veeplaas with the objective to acquire land and build housing by using their savings.

One of the important moments in the existence of the Injongo Zama Afrika savers was in 1995 when they identified 263 hectares of land. This land, owned by Sunridge Estate and Development Corporation (a big land developer that owned land in the area), had been lying unattended for 50 years. As a result, Injongo Zama Afrika members decided to occupy the plot and then, establish their shacks on it. In parallel, members formed the land committee as a platform for negotiations with the owners and Evelyn Benekane was elected as group spokesperson. Sunridge Estate and Development Corporation priced the land at R2million, a price that was too high for the community.

In the meantime, the municipality wanted to evict the people living in the settlement but they managed to stay since they had already started negotiating with the landowner. As the community did not have money to purchase the land, it was assisted by People’s Dialogue (a support organisation to the Federation at the time) that made contact with the Department of Land Affairs (DLA). The community had developed a Residential and Agricultural Plan that they  submitted and which was accepted by DLA. The outcome of this process was the formation of a Communal Property Association named by members as the Joe Slovo CPA.

Community Led Development in Joe Slovo

In 1997, a deed of transfer was granted by the DLA to the Joe Slovo CPA with Evelyn Benekane as the chairperson and signatory on behalf of the CPA. This encouraged the community to start designing their layout plan and, with the support of People’s Dialogue, hired Ulwazi Engineering services to formalise the plan and submit a proposal for housing and infrastructure development. This comprised water and sewer installation, and a total of 1940 houses, which were to be built in different phases. The members wanted to demonstrate how much could be done with little money in a short period of time, as the municipality did not make further plans for development.

The Joe Slovo community meets in 1997. Pictured in the white shirt on the left is community leader Evelyn Benekane.

The Joe Slovo community meets in 1997. Pictured in the white shirt on the left is community leader Evelyn Benekane.

In order to start phase one, Injongo Zama Afrika members accessed R1 million from uTshani Fund in 1997 to finance water and sewer installation for 340 structures. In the same year, the land was rezoned for township and agricultural use. The funds for bulk infrastructure and high mast lights were also approved by uTshani. To assist in paying this loan, the community decided to negotiate with the National Department of Human Settlements and Department of Land Affairs. This was after the community began experiencing some difficulties in repaying their loan to uTshani Fund. 

After 2000, the Injongo Zama Afrika saving scheme struggled to encourage members to save, as the ward councillor convinced people, that the development of Joe Slovo should be taken over by the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro. By this time, the infrastructure for the 340 sites was already installed for phase one but not complete. Struggling to pay back the borrowed money for the infrastructure development, the savers decided to approach the National Department of Human Settlements (DHoS). They explained that the municipality had not made immediate plans for infrastructure development for Joe Slovo. The request was for the community to be given money to install infrastructure as there was no agreement with the municipality to install infrastructure.

Subsequently, the DoHS considered a policy that says all communities that were given land through CPAs must be given money to install infrastructure for the duration that there is no agreement with municipalities. By the time an agreement would be reached with municipalities, including approval of plans to install infrastructure, the money allocated can then be given back to the DoHS. As a result, the R1 million borrowed from uTshani Fund was paid back by the DoHS. Nevertheless, uTshani Fund decided to plough the money back, so that the installation of phase one – water and sewage – could be completed.

Divisions in the Community

Since then, internal conflicts in the Joe Slovo CPA have created challenges. Since 1999, the community became more divided. On the one hand there was a group, led by CPA members that pushed for the CPA to go forward with applications for housing and title deeds. On the other hand, there was a group led by a local ward councillor that wanted to dissolve the CPA and hand over responsibilities for the land and housing project to the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Municipality. 

Meanwhile, in Joe Slovo, the CPA had already negotiated for phase one infrastructure and pursued agricultural projects. By 2000 the application for service installation in the second portion of the 1600 sites was already complete. However, the remainder who had not received services were getting impatient that it would take a long time to access services through loans. Instead they wanted the municipality to do the installation. This was fuelled by a promise from the local ward councillor that the municipality would install services only after the Joe Slovo land was transferred to the municipality. At one point the community even stopped saving, as word got around that government was giving away free houses.

At the time, the CPA had already applied for Provincial Institutional Subsidies to fast track housing delivery for those that had not received houses. An institutional subsidy is a government grant designed for institutions that provide the option of tenure arrangements to beneficiaries instead of immediate ownership. This housing subsidy was in the process of being approved, but the community did not accept it, because they wanted immediate ownership of their houses with title deeds. After the community had amended their initial application, they applied for People’s Housing Process (PHP) housing in the year 2003, which was approved. PHP is a process where beneficiaries are actively involved in the decision making over the housing process, product and make a contribution towards the building of their own houses.

Taken by Saga, in 2016 shows one of the agricultural project in Joe Slovo and incomplete houses.

Taken by Saga, in 2016 shows one of the agricultural project in Joe Slovo and incomplete houses.

In 2004, when the members of the CPA were preparing to implement phase two of the housing project – conducting beneficiary administration, dividing sites and preparing the community for development – the councillor opposed the initiative. His reason was that he wanted the development to be run by the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro municipality. He argued that the community would lose out on development provided by the municipality, as the community privately owned Joe Slovo. In the community people increasingly believed what the local councillor was saying. This was compounded by the fact that there was an increasing number of new residents in Joe Slovo, who did not understand the history of community organising through savings in Joe Slovo.

Joe Slovo CPA vs. Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Court Case

It was clear by 2005 that there had been a shift of power/influence in the settlement. As a result there was a growing voice demanding the handover of the Joe Slovo land to the municipality. This culminated in community dialogues that were initiated and facilitated by mediators employed by the municipality. A report conducted by the mediators concluded that the community approved that land should be given to the municipality in 2005. This statement, however, did not include the voices of the original founders of Joe Slovo and CPA members who refused to hand over land to the municipality. Additionally, members questioned the neutrality of the municipality-employed mediators.

Soon after the report was published the municipality requested hand over of the title deed, but some members of the CPA refused. Due to these events, the municipality took the refusing members to the Eastern Cape High Court in 2006. Accordingly, the CPA members required support and assistance from Legal Aid for representation. As Legal Aid advised the community, they prepared a memorandum detailing reasons for the refusal as well as a clear statement that members would only release the title deed for the sake of progress of development without letting go of their land.

The High Court welcomed the handing over of the title deed and ruled, however, that both the CPA and municipality would need to follow a process to hand over land. This would mean that CPA members must sign for de-registration of the CPA, however, this never took place. By the time the court case was closed, the councillor was appointed as chairperson of the CPA.

The Aftermath of the Court Case

The local ward councillor in Joe Slovo, as the chairperson of the CPA, further advocated for hand over of the land to the municipality. However, he was faced with a contradiction that made it difficult for him to sign for deregistration of the Joe Slovo CPA. The contradiction was that he was accepted and embraced by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform as someone who can sign on behalf of the CPA since he was a member of the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro council.

Additionally, the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform requested that if the Joe Slovo CPA elects a new committee it must not only have new members. The request was that the chairperson must add five more people to the top executive from the outgoing committee for continuation. But this was not done. It seemed the councillor was not interested in building the Joe Slovo CPA. 

Between 2005 and 2010 the Joe Slovo CPA did not convene any general meetings. This means that the community did not receive any formal feedback about the CPA. As a result, it became clear later that the local ward councillor did not succeed in deregistering the CPA as a result of the contradiction he was faced with. One can assume that the reason why there was no reporting back to the community by the local ward councillor/chairperson was because he did not want to tell people that he did not succeed in deregistering the CPA.

In 2009 it was evident that not everyone on the beneficiary list had received a house. As a result, FEDUP engaged with the Eastern Cape Department of Human Settlements and, via uTshani Fund, submitted an application for subsidies for beneficiaries on the housing list. Some members’ subsidies were never approved, as they needed an agreement of sale from the landowner. At this stage it was not clear to the community who owned Joe Slovo land, between CPA and Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, since there was never a community report back about the status the CPA.

Nevertheless, FEDUP approached the local ward councillor to seek assistance and clarity. The ward councillor replied by referring FEDUP to the municipality as the “owner” of the land. Based on the property register database of the municipality, FEDUP was told that the Joe Slovo land was never transferred to the municipality and that it is still owned by the CPA. Indeed, a copy of the original title deed received from the deeds office in Cape Town demonstrates that the land belongs to the CPA.

Governemental subsidy housing in Joe Slovo picture: saga

Governemental subsidy housing in Joe Slovo picture: Saga 2016

Uniting a Divided Community

Today in Joe Slovo there are people who have not received title deeds. Some never had a chance to receive houses and subsidies to build their houses. This is a direct consequence of conflicting and opposing interests in the Joe Slovo CPA, which are coined by two opposing parties, contesting the status of the Joe Slovo Community Property Association. Despite immense pressure to hand over the land to the municipality, the community was able to retain land ownership in Joe Slovo, which is legally registered under the Joe Slovo CPA.

The main problem in Joe Slovo today is political rather than legal. The question therefore is: How do you ensure that people are supported to access housing and title deeds? Today the community of Joe Slovo believes that this question can be answered by building a united community. Presently, there is a new ward councillor in Joe Slovo and this opens up new opportunities to support community led initiatives.

FEDUP is planning to conduct a community survey and the councilor is providing assistance. This community led survey will involve everyone who was a role player as a step to unite the community. It will show the houses that have been built and who built them. It will reveal who received the house, because some of the people living in these houses are not the owners. 

There is a case whereby provincial housing subsidies were approved and given to Thubeletsha Homes, which was a government-housing agency mandated to build low-cost housing. However, Thubeletsha Homes is no longer building houses and was taken over by the Housing Development Agency (HDA) due to being in “financial distress”. The community survey is the first step towards conducting a follow up on subsidies given to Thubeletsha Homes. The new ward councilor has arranged for the team from the office of the MEC of Human Settlements to provide some assistance in this regard.

Based on the meeting that was held between the community and officials from the office of the MEC of Human Settlements there was a general suggestion to request presidential intervention, since the community has engaged both local and provincial structures with limited success.

Conclusion

The Joe Slovo housing development project has existed for over 20 years. The experiences to date provide vital lessons especially in the current time, where the “land issue” is the most debated topic in South Africa. In the debate of amending laws the experience of FEDUP does not dispute the debate of legal instruments as impediment to access land/housing. However, FEDUPs experience contributes to the debate by demonstrating that there is a political layer which can be an impediment to accessing land/housing. This means that it is not enough to concentrate only on legal instruments and that there is a need to also understand the role of socio-political dynamics on the “land issue”.

Apr 25
Love0

Improving service delivery through partnerships: Lessons from Nelson Mandela Bay Metro

By Academic, Archive, News, Partnerships, Publications, Resources No Comments

By Kwanda Lande (on behalf of CORC)

Partnerships as an approach to service delivery have gained trust in many quarters and are widely acknowledged as a viable solution to a number of service delivery challenges. In implementation, however, partnerships are complex and often associated with vicissitudes characterised by varying victories and challenges. How do these victories and challenges look like, and what can we learn from them? The purpose of this blog is to assess the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro partnership with SA SDI Alliance as an approach to improving service delivery, highlighting different victories, challenges and what can be learned from them.

Some of the SA SDI Alliance team members that were involved in partnership negotiations with the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro

Some of the SA SDI Alliance team members that were involved in partnership negotiations with the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro

Background to the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro partnership with the SA SDI Alliance

Since the formation of the Informal Settlement Network (ISN) in 2008, forging partnerships with local governments for incremental upgrading of informal settlement has been a priority for SA SDI Alliance. Nelson Mandela Bay Metro was one of the first municipalities that were considered, especially, because of the strength of FEDUP in housing developments (e.g. Joe Slovo ePHP project), and the extent of deprivation in the province. Former CORC Director, Bunita Kohler, reflects: 

At first, it was difficult to find a break through and establish a structured way of working together. As a result, the Alliance decided to focus on building its relationship with the municipality through learning exchanges. Senior officials of the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro were invited to join the Alliance on various learning exchanges to places such as Thailand, Stellenbosch and Cape Town. 

One of the first engagements was with the Department of Human Settlements’ Ministerial Sanitation Task Team (MSTT) in 2011. Communities such as Missionvale, Seaview, Midrand, Kleinskool, and Zweledinga, that had already enumerated their settlements, presented their settlements’ data to the MSTT. They highlighted sanitation and water services as one of the pressing priorities for many settlements. Following these engagements, the SA SDI Alliance demonstrated community led development by constructing a water and sanitation facility in Midrand informal settlement. 

In 2016 FEDUP and ISN profiled settlements in Port Elizabeth, as part of an engagement with Nelson Mandela Bay Metro Municipality, enabling the municipality to receive comprehensive data about the status of informal settlements in Port Elizabeth. As informal settlement residents conducted the profiling activity, they came across informal settlements that the municipality was unaware of. This demonstrated that data collected by informal settlement residents has the capacity to be more comprehensive and accurate than outsourced approaches to data collection on informal settlements. Consequently, some of the communities profiled used their data to engage government. 

 Together with previous exchanges and engagements, data collection and projects all culminated into a signed Memorandum of Agreement in 2016.

Midrand WaSH Facility in Midrad informal settlement, one of the projects that the were constructed by the community.

Midrand WaSH Facility in Midrad informal settlement, one of the projects that the were constructed by the community.

The Memorandum of Agreement

In 2016, a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) was signed between the SA SDI Alliance and Nelson Mandela Bay Metro. This agreement offered an opportunity for the municipality and Port Elizabeth’s profiled informal settlements (supported by the SA SDI Alliance), to achieve service delivery objectives. Experience and expertise in data collection, exchanges and community led projects made the Alliance a strategic partner to promote shared values of improving access to services, transparency, community participation, and trust between the municipality and informal settlement communities.

As part of the MoA, a number of deliverables in a period of three years were identified. This includes profiling of all informal settlements in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, enumeration of 14 informal settlements (at least two in each municipal cluster), plan and/or implement small-scale projects in at least 14 informal settlements. To achieve this work, the SA SDI Alliance committed to contribute three million Rand over a period of three years (one million per annum). Nelson Mandela Bay Metro committed to contribute six million Rand over the same period of three years (two million per annum).

Whereas the financial commitments have been clearly determined in the MoA, specificities of how this ought to happen, in terms of delivering services were not clarified. This lack of bindingness leads to uncertainty on how the municipality will use the agreed six million Rand and hampers access to the resources. Accordingly, communities have been struggling to access the funds committed by the metro for incremental upgrading projects. One of the strategies to overcome this challenge has been to present community collected data to municipal officials. This approach aimed to highlight the communities’ priorities and thus, present possible upgrading projects requiring financial commitment from the metro.

The presentations are, however, limited to the Department of Human Settlements because of difficulties to access other departments. This has made it hard for informal settlement residents to get other departments to contribute to the fulfilment of the signed Memorandum of Agreement. It is only the Department of Human Settlements that has taken up the task of ensuring that the agreed objectives are achieved, but informal settlements issues identified require collaboration with other departments as well. This climate of fragmentation has unfortunately successfully frustrated the efforts of service provision and it is a clearly missed opportunity to improve living conditions of poor people.

Service Delivery, and Minimum Norms and Standards in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro

 Service delivery in the informal settlements of Nelson Mandela Bay Metro is in a miserable state. Since 2009/10 when the SA SDI Alliance conducted informal settlement profiling in the Metro, 40 settlements were profiled. These communities have identified water and drainage, and sanitation and sewage as one of the major issues and consequently, priorities were set around these issues.

Profiling of informal settlements taking place in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro

Profiling of informal settlements taking place in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro

In a number of informal settlements, residents do not have any access to water, forcing them to purchase water from groups of people that collect water elsewhere. In a case where households do not have money to purchase water, it becomes very difficult. A further issue is the functionality of existing water taps. Although in some communities, there exists at least one water tap within a 200-meter radius, some of those water taps are not working. In cases where water taps are working, there are interruptions that occur on a regular basis. As a result, people end up not accessing 25 liters of water per day, within a 200-meter radius as prescribed in the Strategic Framework for Water Services 2003.

The Strategic Framework for Water Services of 2003, a comprehensive approach in the provision of water services in South Africa, sets out compulsory minimum technical norms and standards for the provision of water. These include that, in the case of communal water points, 25 litres of potable water per person per day must be supplied within 200 metres radius of a household and with a minimum flow of 10 litres per minute. These specific standards are reflected and considered as compulsory minimum norms standards for water by the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro’s Integrated Development Plan (2016/17 – 2020/21).

Priorities set by informal settlements residents clearly demonstrate a missed opportunity within the municipality. Due to their specific challenges, informal settlement residents propose a number of solutions to the many challenges of water and service delivery in their communities. These include additional water taps closer to their structures. This means that at least one water tap should be provided for a maximum of five households. Currently people wait in long queues to access water taps because of high population densities in their settlements and in some settlements people do not even have access to water. Informal settlement residents believe that their proposed minimum technical norms and standards will fit well to their context.

Across South Africa, municipalities are developing and implementing their water services plans as mandated by the constitution of the Republic of South Africa. Drafters of the constitution had envisaged that from time to time local government, as water services authorities, will have to set minimum technical norms and standards that are locally relevant. In the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, challenges and priorities identified by informal settlement dwellers clearly demonstrate the need to collectively develop a water services development plan that is well known and accepted by everyone.  

In the case of sanitation/sewage, in almost all 40 informal settlements there are no toilets. Instead, people use bucket systems and pit latrines as toilets, which cause health hazards to children and pose risks to women as they are not well maintained and are located too far away from certain structures. During the night, it is especially dangerous for women to use the toilets because of risks of being raped. Residents have contributed by building their own pit latrines. These, however, are not connected to the sewer system of the municipality. This creates stagnant grey water around toilets that also poses a health hazard. People are also using open fields and bushes to relieve themselves.

Pit latrine toilet used by some residents from Midrand informal settlement

Pit latrine toilet used by some residents from Midrand informal settlement

The impact of data collection

The profiling of informal settlements in Nelson Mandela Bay Metro has helped communities to understand and articulate their needs. Communities now understand the importance of organising themselves, they understand that the more organised they are, the stronger their voice, the more isolated they are, the weaker their voices. 

The idea of using profiling as a mobilizing tool in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro has allowed FEDUP and ISN to engage deeply with more communities about their priority issues. Previously the Alliance was working mostly with settlements around Missionvale, Seaview, Midrand, Kleinskool, and Zweledinga. Because of profiling activity in the municipality, the Alliance now has a footprint in all informal settlements. These include areas such as Uitenhage, Walmer, Colchester, Greenbushes, Joe Slovo, Kleinskool, Kwa Zakhele, Veeplaas, Swartkops, Riversdale, New Brighton, and Motherwell.

“If I could call them today, I know they will ask me when am I coming back, when are we going to have our own forum, when are we going to have our own dialogue around issues that affects us. Communities, now want to start talking about the next step, they want to take action on the issues that affect them. The profiling exercise has mobilized communities to a level where they feel they have a relevant movement/platform of the poor that they can use to address their problems. Communities are ready.”  (Mzwanele Zulu, ISN)

Informal settlement residents coming together to discuss community issues based on profiling that they conducted.

Informal settlement residents coming together to discuss community issues based on profiling that they conducted.

Looking ahead

We currently have a good partnership with the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro that can potentially develop into something great. Communities have been mobilised, and they have presented their challenges and priorities to different  officials of the municipality. However – there are some serious gaps, negatively affecting provision of services, which need to be dealt with as a matter of urgency. (Bunita Kohler, CORC)

In Nelson Mandela Bay Metro, the partnership between the municipality and SA SDI Alliance remain an important approach to improving service delivery. In implementation, the experience of informal settlements dwellers with the municipality demonstrates that partnerships are complex and often associated with varying vicissitudes. One of the main challenges in this partnership is accessing financial resources from the municipality to be used for service delivery in line with priorities identified by communities from their profiling exercise.

Going forward, the Nelson Mandela Bay Municipality has committed to rollover finances, which was supposed to be used in the first year of the MoA. On the side of communities, there is a need to find innovative ways of accessing municipal resources and support for incremental upgrading. In this regard, the SA SDI Alliance is currently working with the International Budget Partnership, to learn about different methods that communities can use to access municipal budgets for incremental upgrading.

The success of the partnership also depends on other departments in the Nelson Mandela Bay Metro taking up the task of ensuring that agreed objectives are achieved. This will require a coherent approach from the city, which encourages city departments to act together. There is also an opportunity for the municipality to commence a process of collectively developing and implementing water services plans together with informal settlement residents, which will be well known and accepted by everyone. This would clarify and sort the disagreements around which standards to use.

Apr 20
Love0

FEDUP’s recipe in the Free State: agriculture, income and Nala Local Municipality

By Archive, FEDUP, Youth No Comments

Mariel Zimmermann (on behalf of CORC)

“Large mines in the Free State are falling on hard times. Subsequently, our Federation members are complaining that it is now difficult to find employment in the mining sector. Historically, some of our members have used mining as a significant source of income. This is difficult since some of these mines are now closing. This development particularly affects the younger population, as their options to earn a living are even more limited.” – Lebohang Moholo (Savings Facilitator of the Federation in Free State)

Against this background, the Federation of the Rural and Urban Poor (FEDUP) in the Free State is exploring new ground – generating income through cultivating farmland. Agriculture offers an opportunity to create employment and to “keep the youth busy”, as Lebohang puts it. This approach aims to both reduce crime and counteract the negative consequences of the economic downturn that often affects the most vulnerable people in society.

WhatsApp Image 2018-04-20 at 11.13.53

Saving Scheme in Free State

Income as a result of partnership: how FEDUP engaged Nala Municipality

FEDUP identified farmland in Wesselsbron (a farming town south of Bothaville), which is owned by the municipality and has been unused for years. FEDUP approached the officials with the proposal of an agricultural development project. Negotiations around an agreement with Nala Local Municipality (NLM) started in 2016. FEDUP wanted to provide the community with agricultural land to plough grain products, vegetables and dairy as well as technical knowledge and through agriculture create alternative sources of income.

In a first step, members of the Federations held a presentation about their activities and engagements to the municipality. This space was also used to introduce the Federation’s intention to launch agricultural development project. As the identified land has been cultivated by another community, which had left years ago, the municipality first needed to check with the leadership of that former community whether the land could be used or not. Having received this approval, FEDUP and different departments of the municipality met again for numerous times to discuss and to clarify the details of the arrangement.

On 26 May 2017, a Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) between FEDUP and Nala Local Municipality was signed. In this MoA the municipality would lease 20 hectares of unused farmland to the Federation free of charge from June 2017 to June 2020. NLM would also assist FEDUP by providing expert knowledge, as officials with agricultural expertise would help to train community members.

Lebohang describes the process of partnering with the municipality “as a long journey, which needed a high level of perseverance. It took about a year to make that agreement. We [FEDUP] went to projects officials, councillors and agricultural officials. Finally, we received the land.”

Even though the agricultural partnership took a long time, Lebohang describes it as a smooth process without any considerable challenges.

“The reason for that lies in the good relationship we have established with them [the government] over the time. We first built a relationship with them via land – we had meetings with them, we invited the councillors to our meetings and we also attend their meetings.”

Lebohang refers to a PHP project (People’s Housing Process) in Bothaville where FEDUP and Nala Local Municipality were jointly engaged in the construction of 50 houses. By building on the existing relationship, FEDUP managed to engage NLM around agriculture.

What does it take to make the MoA work on the ground?

Even though the agreement was signed nearly a year ago, the actual cultivation of the land has not started yet. The delay is due to extremely hard soil conditions because the land lay fallow for several years, which meant that the Federation members were not able to plant their vegetables. The delay is also due to a delay in technical skills training, without which the Federation does not want to start cultivating the land. Mama Emily (Regional Coordinator of the Federation in Free State) reflects,

“We want to do it correctly and this from the beginning. Our relationship with the municipality is mixed – sometimes it is good, sometimes it is bad. When it comes to meeting, the officials were always available. However, when it comes to decision-making it is very hard. They tell us that they will make a plan and that they will get back to us. But they do not. As soon as they have to provide something, it does often not happen or takes a long time.”

In order to see movement on the ground, the Federation is including youth in their negotiations with officials.

“We want to involve them in the development of the project, we want to have their opinion and actually we want to give them the ball. We hope this approach helps to speed up skills training and project implementation, as the municipality has identified youth engagement as a clear priority.”

In addition, the Federation currently negotiates with an external professional that works in the agricultural field for assistance in terms of technical knowledge and equipment, so that Federation members do not need to wait for government for skills training.

18033926_1418990278138933_5808232904604104650_n

Saving scheme meeting in Free State

When reflecting on the past year of negotiating and exploring this new ground, one aspect becomes particularly evident for the Federation: when existing and established relationships are taken care of, they can offer a good foundation to build on over time:

“It is vital that each of us [FEDUP and the municipality] understands how the other works. This helps with negotiating and prevents misunderstandings. We also need to do our research – in particular on planned projects”.

Because of the agreement with Nala Local Municipality, 32 people heard about the work of FEDUP and joined a savings scheme called Kopano Ke Matla – Unity Is Strength. How true this is, especially when poor residents engage their municipalities.

Mar 06
Love0

Building an organised community through the Shamrock wash trough project in KZN

By Archive, FEDUP, ISN, News, Publications No Comments

Kwanda Lande (on behalf of CORC)

Shamrock informal settlement at a Glance

Shamrock informal settlement is located along a portion of Amrisar Road and Gladiola Road in Belfort Estate suburb, northeast of Pietermaritzburg in Kwa-Zulu Natal. This informal settlement is located on municipal owned land and it contains single storey, stand-alone mud and timber shacks. The area is located along the flood line as a result this makes the settlement prone to flooding. The slope analysis for the settlement shows that the settlement is predominantly characterised by moderate to very steep slopes.

Shamrock informal settlement residents have lived in this settlement for more than 20 years without any adequate basic services. The community of 140 people was using one water tap and the nearby river as sources of water. The settlement location on steep slopes makes it difficult for residents to collect water. The settlement also lacks basic services like paved roads and walkways, which makes it even more difficult to collect water because roads that become muddy especially when it is raining. The distance to collect water that residents are expected to travel is also too long and difficult for old people.

Differrent methods that were used before the wash trough, to wash clothes and collecting water.

Different methods that were used before the wash trough, for wash clothes and collecting water.

The area’s close proximity to various primary and secondary schools and a college is one of the reasons people were attracted to Shamrock. In addition, a special needs school is located within a 30 minute walking radius. The residents of Shamrock were also attracted to the area because of job opportunities. This community is made of 52 structures, and a population of 140 people that migrated from rural areas of Kwa-Zulu Natal.

The Shamrock wash trough Project

In 2013, FEDUP and ISN went to Shamrock and mobilised the community through starting a saving scheme. Prior the implementation of the Shamrock wash trough project in 2016, the community was mobilised through profiling and enumeration. This exercise was important, amongst other things to mobilise community member that were not part of the local saving scheme, and for the community to collective identify issues and solutions. The community identified an ablution and drainage system as one of their priorities and made a decision that they want a wash trough facility after some assistance from CORC technical team on different options to address their priorities and challenges.

The project implementation process of the wash trough commenced in 2016, and the project was completed in January 2018. However, the actual implementation of the wash trough took four days to be completed, in a period of two weekends (13-14 and 20-21 January 2018). One of the challenges that were experienced include that some community members did not participate in the implementation of the project. The reason is that these people felt that the project was only for people who are part of the local saving scheme. The community also had to change initial location of the wash trough, which was at the centre of the settlement. It was changed so that an elderly woman in a wheel chair would be able to access it too. The project was then moved closer to her shack, which is approximately 50m from the initial point.

The total cost of the project was R6426.00. The community contributed 20% to the overall cost of this project from their savings scheme. As a result, not all the community members contributed to the project because not all members of the community were involved in savings. Msunduzi Local Municipality’s water and sanitation, and area based management departments contributed with the additional 80% of the overall cost and with some technical expertise, this include environmental studies.

The wash trough is helping the community, it is now very easy for people to wash their clothes. The community has six water taps in the wash trough, which they can use. People are now interested in the project, even those who did not indicate any interest when we started this project. Everyone is now using the facility and people are demonstrating some excitement now that they do not have to wait long lines or go to the river for water. Those who were rejecting the project, now that they see the benefits that it has brought, they are apologising, they are promising to be part of future projects and they also want to be part of the local saving scheme. Ndodeni Dengo (ISN regional coordinator)

The success of mobilising the community of Shamrock informal settlement through the wash trough project also extends to neighbouring informal settlements. As part of the project, the community members and leaders from neighbouring informal settlements such as Crest place and Mayfair sent two community members to assist and observe. As a result, Crest Place has requested a similar project for their settlement. This community has also started contributing towards their project, which is planned to start soon.

Different construction phases of the Shamrock wash trough

Different construction phases of the Shamrock wash trough. 

Going forward

The SA SDI Alliance has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) with the Msunduzi Local Municipality. However, there are challenges in terms of making this MoU work for both parties involved. As a result, FEDUP and ISN, want to use this project to showcase the ability of organised communities to the Municipality and other informal settlements.

The community of Shamrock has made their desire to improve this project known. They want to use the MoU signed with Msunduzi Local Municipality to add shelter, refuse removal, a table for children and other services. This will allow the community to use the wash trough facility even when it is raining, and that they could have a place for their children to do their schoolwork while their mothers are using the wash trough. The community also wish to do community gardening and install a grey water collection facility. Currently the municipality is being engaged by the community to request electricity.

Through this informal settlement-upgrading project, therefore, residents sharpened their ability to organise (through daily savings). This in turn contributed to building the community’s ability to engage other actors to continue incrementally upgrading their settlement. In this way poor communities want to demonstrate that they can use their projects to shift government policies and practices to the benefit of their communities.

Feb 26
Love0

Social and Physical Impact of Re-blocking: California Informal Settlement, Mfuleni (Cape Town)

By Archive, CORC, ISN, News, Press, Publications, Resources No Comments

by Kwanda Lande and Mariel Zimmermann (on behalf of CORC)

We decided to do re-blocking because we were living in a very congested settlement, we wanted our settlement to be rearranged, we wanted services –  we wanted to have roads, toilets, electricity and water. We also wanted this project because it is going to mitigate fire in the settlement, and we have been careful with the building material we have used to build our structures. (Lindiwe Noqholota, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

In the upgrading of California there is an advocacy purpose, resources were used for the community to demonstrate good practice around upgrading of informal settlements. The project was done so that the community can build itself as a community that is able to come together around issues because re-blocking is just the start, it’s not the end, it’s the starting point to say what’s next? (Oscar Sam, ISN Mfuleni subregional coordinator) 

The story of California informal settlement in Mfuleni, Cape Town is a story of many challenges, but also of many victories and hope. It is through this story where we begin to grasp nuances and multi-layers that capture the impact of re-blocking to the community.This story is told by community members, who have been engaged in a struggle for basic services, land and and housing since 2008.

Look over California informal settlement before and during implementation

Look over California informal settlement before and during implementation

 

California is an informal settlement located in the midst of formal houses in the Township of Mfuleni, Cape Town. The settlement occupies a space of 2,239 m2 between the streets of Umzumbe on the North, Mgwanda on the West, Dutywa on the South, and M Baba on the East. The community of California has been subjected to some threats since 2008, when the settlement started. This includes the fact that the community existed until 2012 without any services. It became worse in 2012 when there was fire that destroyed almost all their houses threatening their existence.

I remember in 2012 after almost all our shacks were burned down we had to build our shacks again because we had nowhere to go. People from this church in our area did not want  us to build our shacks in this area again. After the municipality had intervene the church then told us that each household should at least pay R50. But we refused because the municipality had told us that the church does not have rights to do this. This is how we fought to stay in this settlement, after which everything became easy and we were also given house/shack numbers. (Nokuthula Mazomba, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

Some of the first signs of collective action and self-reliance

Since 2008 the community of California did not have any legal water source and toilets, people were forced to use water taps provided to people in formal houses. This lack of water and sanitation services led to anxiety and the feeling of insecurity, when using the ‘toilet’ at night. Consequently, there was an attitude that led to restricting access to water from people living in formal houses. The community had to do something as a result they decided to make contributions of R10 each household and installed one water tap for the whole community.  

The installation of water tap is one of the first signs of collective action and self-reliance by the community. After which the community organised itself and went to the ward councillor demanding further access to water, in which they were successful. However, the settlement was still lacking services such as toilets and electricity, and the community needed a partner to intensify their struggle to access better services and improve their lives. Against this backdrop, the community of California meet with the Informal Settlement Network (ISN) in 2015 to enforce their voices.

Community members of California, and SA SDI Alliance leaders working together in implementing the project.

Community members of California, and SA SDI Alliance leaders working together in implementing the project.

 

Community using Data Collection and Community Exchanges

The Informal Settlement Network, partner in the SA SDI Alliance, brought a number of tools to assists the community in their struggles. This includes the data collection tool, which helped the community to engage municipality with facts and community-determined priorities. As a result, seven toilets were installed for the community, through the assistance of ISN, which helped to do data collection that helped the community to negotiate and to demand all these services.

Community of California doing enumeration of their own settlement

Community of California doing enumeration of their own settlement

 

Based on the data collected (profiling and enumeration) in 2015, the population of California is made of 47 households with 108 residents. Furthermore, this profiling and enumeration exercise done by the residents of California assessed community prioritise, which include electricity, water and sanitation. As a result, the community also went to the City of Cape Town to request electricity. Their first request was, however, met with disappointment. The municipality explained that it could not install electricity because of congestion and limited space for installing electricity.

 Through ISN, in 2016 we went on an exchange to another settlement that was re-blocked by the SA SDI Alliance called Flamingo Crescent. We went to that settlement and saw how that settlement was built and how the settlement was redesigned and reconfigured to create space that would ensure the provision of services. After a year without interacting with ISN we also learnt that the City of Cape Town had made some budget for re-blocking in California and this was through the work of ISN that negotiated for budget to be made available for upgrading California. (Lindiwe Noqholota, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

However, when the community leaders who visited Flamingo Crescent were reporting to the community some members were not convinced about this project and rejected it as they felt that they were not sufficiently informed. After several meetings and explanations of how the project will look like and what the benefits for the residents will be, the community voted for the implementation. The community also knew that if they will not make use of the budget from the city, these resources would be taken elsewhere.

How has the project impact the Settlement?

The implementation of re-blocking in California begun in May 2017 and 47 structures were upgraded and specific building material that reduces the risks of fire was used. Paved access roads were implemented throughout the settlement. Furthermore, a stormwater drainage system has been implemented and electricity is in the process of being implemented. In the case of funding for the project, there was an agreement with the municipality that they will provide services, including water, electricity, and toilets.

Work in progress that involves structures before implementation and the last phase of the project

Work in progress that involves structures before implementation and the last phase of the project. 

 

The community contributed 20%, and supported by Community Organisation and Resource Centre (CORC) with 80% towards building their structures. Yet, the community is still waiting for the implementation of toilets and water taps per household from the municipality. The community also managed to negotiate for extra piece of land. This municipal land is located adjacent to the settlement but the community was not allowed to use it before. This extra piece of land has helped the community to have more space for access walkways and space for people to dry their clothes after washing them.

The re-blocking project of California allowed people in the community to ‘break walls’, and start learning and talking to one another. It allowed people to take ownership of the process and start personalising their environment where they have change their community and houses to suit their personal taste. Through this re-blocking process, it became evident that compromises are at the centre of re-blocking, and although some might not like an idea and approach, it is important that people compromise on their differences for the sake of development.

I learned that as residents of California, we do not really know each other, as I though before this project. This project has created a chance for us to learn about each other and to tolerate one another because we differ in a lot of things. As a result, it is helpful that we have community leaders that can speak for everyone and that people can raise their issues through and not to one another or direct to government one by one.(Buhle Mthimkhulu, community member and member of the project steering committee) 

What can the future for the community look like?

In regard to the future of the community, the kind of experience that the community has went through is essential because re-blocking is not the end but a starting point. It is a start for individuals to recognise themselves as part of a community. It is a start for the community to establish itself as part of a broader network of informal settlements. The project presents an opportunity for the community to start a saving scheme that will build social capital of the community and allow community members to support each other not only financial but also socially. This project is a start for the community to investigate and make sure that community prioritise are part of government budgets and use that to hold them accountable.

Oct 11
Love0

TB community hall – A foundation for community organising

By Archive, CORC, FEDUP, ISN, News, Resources No Comments

By Kwanda Lande (on behalf of CORC)

We would like a type of a hall that can accommodate a lot of activities, like church services, cultural activities and office space for the Informal Settlement Network (ISN). It will be a shared space with other communities, but this will depend on the kind of activities they plan to do. We want to encourage activities that are about community development, and activities that would impact people’s lives in a positive way.

Through these words, one community leader of TB Section in Khayelitsha’s Site B explains how the priority of the community was having a shared space for four different communities located in the area (TT, UT Litha park, UT and TB section). The community of TB section have, for some time relied on a community hall that was in a very bad condition, a community hall that was not able to take care of the many of the activities and needs of the community.

The building of a hall for us was very important because the one that we used to have, was in a very poor condition. It was difficult to have meetings when it is raining because of a hall that was leaking, and this prevented us from discussing community issues. We also have our youth that want to do a lot of things but they could not because we did not have a place for them to meet. We also wanted to use this hall as a place that people can be relocated to when it is raining – as a temporary shelter.

IMG-20170401-WA000

Community members, ISN leadership and contractor for the TB community hall

On 24th of June 2017 the community of TB section had an inauguration event to launch the new structure, however the idea around this hall started in 2015 and the actual construction begun in February 2017. Between 2015 and 2017 the community of TB section spent time on mobilising other residents through saving and data collection, and engaging with the City of Cape Town. Thus, after community profiling and enumeration, TB residents used their data to identify that they want a public space that contributes to their activities and, as a consequence, to community building and strengthening.

We wanted to build the TB hall in 2015, but we had to explain to the community how the Federation of the Urban and Rural Poor (FEDUP) and ISN work, for example, we had to explain to people that they support communities that are prepared and committed to organising and building themselves through saving and contributing to their development. This was necessary since people in this community did not know much about ISN and FEDUP.   

We also had to engage with the City of Cape Town about building a partnership – not only for this project, but for long term planning and development of the community of TB section. This include engagements that we had with the city’s officials – about asking for permission to build the hall, installing electricity and other services. We also had engagements with our ward councillor who endorsed the building of this structure. 

WhatsApp Image 2017-06-24 at 14.56.18

Community members with FEDUP and ISN leaders during inauguration event to launch the new structure

ISN has been working with the community of TB section since at least 2011, and the building of the hall came out of the process of mobilising through the tools of saving, collecting data, and partnership. The utmost achievement of this work by both ISN and FEDUP is that the community has begin to organise itself, identify priorities and established some sense of self-reliance. These are aspects which the community can hold onto and use long after the construction of the hall is complete.

The existence of this hall in an informal settlement like this also makes it easy for us to challenge the municipality and tell them that if we can do something like this with FEDUP and ISN what is stopping you from doing something of the same level like building houses for us?

People on the ground are really motivated and they now understand that you do not have to wait for government for your things to happen. We are now aware that community development only happen for people that work for themselves, if you are sitting at home you do not go out and demand things very limited chances that you will get those things.

FullSizeRender 19

Community members working together with contractor to build their own hall.

This community hall represents a building block for the ‘formalisation’ of the whole sub-region over time. It is a space for this community and surrounding communities to start building themselves as organised communities and start discussing the next step for their community. The community is in a better position, it has developed confidence to confront public issues that have direct and indirect impact on their lives.

The community of TB section, in the process of building the hall – has also demonstrated that it has capacity to collectively confront obstacles and can with time be in a position to do things for themselves with no external assistance. The community was able – during the implementation phase – to manage community dynamic on their own and there was almost no need for external intervention. The community was also able to collectively convince the ward councillor to support the project. As a result through this project a foundation for community organising has been formed and the community is build on it. 

Oct 15
Love0

Minister Sisulu speaks about Partnership with SA Alliance

By Archive, FEDUP, Resources, uTshani Fund No Comments
DSC03915

2006 Pledge Conference with Minister Lindiwe Sisulu

In anticipation of The National Human Settlements Indaba and Exhibition (16-17 October 2014) we share a speech made by Lindiwe Sisulu, Minister of Human Settlements in 2006 about the Department’s partnership with Shack/Slum Dwellers International (SDI) and the Federation of the Urban Poor (FEDUP).

During this event the minister recognised the inherent value of partnership with the Alliance and of promoting community-led development processes:  she signed an MoU binding Provincial MECs to pledging 1,000 subsidies per Province per annum to FEDUP.  Since 1994 the Alliance has partnered with national, provincial and local government, pioneering new methodologies of community organisation. This year’s Indaba will be held in Johannesburg and focuses on the theme of “Building partnerships for accelerated delivery of human settlements”.  Both SDI and the South African Alliance have been invited as partners who reflect and voice the interest of the urban poor.

KEYNOTE ADDRESS BY LN SISULU MINISTER OF HOUSING AT THE CONFERENCE OF SHACK/ SLUM DWELLERS INTERNATIONAL AND THE FEDERATION OF THE URBAN POOR 

19 May 2006 
International Convention Centre
 , Cape Town 

Chairperson;

President of the Slum Dwellers International,

President of the Federation of the Urban Poor,

Representatives of other different community based organisations present here
,

Comrades
,

Invited Guests,

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I accepted the honour to open this Conference with a great deal of humility. Humility because I, who represents those who are seen to have plenty, have to stand here in front of you who represent the poorest of the poor and pretend that I have some words of wisdom to impart to you. But I stand here with pride, and I am proud too, because you have chosen my government as a partner in a cause that goes right to the heart of what we are and what we fought for all those years. For me this can only mean an endorsement of your confidence in us, that with us, through us, your ideals can be achieved.

I welcome your confidence in us for we, in turn, will use it to spur ourselves on to ensure that our common goals are realised. It is an honour for us to be counted as one of the champions of the poorest of the poor.

The great revolutions of modern times have, apart from the influences of technological advances and progress, been the result often of the kind of progressive action that had found its source from the grassroots. Such has been the influence and the power of the grassroots in the present time that none who held political power could on their own define and occupy the political space that is critical to issues of sustainable development.

We are all one human force, inexorably drawn to the ideal that until all are free, free from the shackles of poverty, none of us is free. Because by some strange reason we are bound to this universe together. There is some logic in this contradiction. If we are to move forward – progress, our collective pace will be determined by the slowest, in this case the lowest. The great irony of our time! The future of our civilisation rests on how we determine our way forward. We shall not be identified as the civilisation of great poverty, that cannot defines us, we who are proud inventors of everything that has culminated into our launching into space to seek answers about what lies beyond. Perhaps, this is a justifiable deflection as we remain unable to solve problems that lie at our feet. Intellectually, one of the best periods of recorded history, but morally very wanting. The consciousness of the rich closed to the poverty that surrounds them.

In convening this Conference, the Slum Dwellers International and the Federation of the Urban Poor, give us reason to have greater confidence that the common struggle we share against homelessness will indeed achieve its greater results during our own lifetime. No moment in the history of human society has landed itself to this possibility other than ours.

Minister Lindiwe Sisulu, with Jockin Arputham (President of SDI) and Rose Molokoane, National Co-ordinator of FEDUP, 2006

Minister Lindiwe Sisulu, with Jockin Arputham (President of SDI) and Rose Molokoane, National Co-ordinator of FEDUP, 2006

I have just retuned from a trip to India – a most valuable learning experience it was. I did not get to see the Taj Mahal but what I experienced was more valuable than the Taj. I went out to see the pavement dwellers of Mumbai living in the most shocking conditions on the edge of society – having lived that way for all their lives. But a people with hope. An entrepreneurial people taught me the value of saving and the spirit that drives them to ensure that they do provide a house for their families. A people determined that they will do their bit to restore their dignity.

I yearn for that spirit here. A spirit that says this is our government – how can we help it in this huge challenge to provide housing? What can I – sitting in a shack house – do to help ensure that I too have a house? We need to infuse this in our people. We were once a proud people that moved heaven and earth and did do the impossible. The present challenge is within our power to resolve.

In India, I also had a tour of projects that had been undertaken by slum dwellers, projects that demonstrated resourcefulness, originality and innovation. They vindicated the belief I had always had that if government was to accelerate the delivery of housing then the complete involvement of the poor needed to receive full support.

I then began to reflect on the 2005 World Summit Outcome that committed governments to specific actions in relation to slum prevention and slum upgrading. Key among the resolutions was the commitment to increase resources for housing and the related infrastructure.

Ghandi believed that there was an innate goodness in human nature which at all times is able to perceive the truth as though by instinct.

We are a people with a very proud history, proud of what we can do for ourselves. My worry right now is that this proud heritage is dissipating now that we have our own government, the government of the poorest of the poor, the disadvantaged. And we have ourselves to believe that the government will provide.

I have been very attracted by the founding ethos of Shack Dwellers International: that no matter how disadvantaged, we can still do it ourselves, that in fact it is nobler if we do it ourselves. Help me plant this into the heart of every disadvantaged South African. Help me inspire them to stand up.

At the Special Ministerial Conference of the African Ministerial Conference on Housing and Urban Development (AMCHUD), that we held a month ago, in Nairobi, resolutions had been passed to effect these outcomes of the World Summit by focusing governments on the resourcefulness of the poor.

Having ourselves placed the issue of slum prevention and slum upgrading at the top of the international agenda we resolved not only to prevent new slum formations but to also look into the existing policies, legal, institutional and regulatory frameworks that hinder our abilities to deal with slum formation in ways that affirmed and strengthened our relationship with the poor.  We therefore resolved to review the frameworks that exist to enable an environment where the full capacities of community organisations and non-governmental organisations were utilised. In practice, amongst other things, this will mean the promotion of community-led development processes in slum prevention and slum upgrading and the identification of ways to assist initiatives relating to savings.  

I am gratified that the relation we have cultivated with yourselves has enabled us to implement some of these resolutions already. The Homeless People’s Federation, that we had interactions with in 2004, enabled us to make this start.

The Conference cements the relationship by now enabling us to act together at the international level. It is my hope that such collaboration will help encourage a fundamental rethinking of issues connected with sustainable development and the achievement, specifically, of the Millennium Development Goals. It is a great contradiction of our times, in my view, that whilst on the one hand we correctly extol the virtues of economic progress and political stability, on the other hand, we remain unable to expend and invest sufficient resources to achieve those outcomes.

I have had occasion to look back and assess the damage done to all of us in this country by the policies of inequality. It has cost us dearly. If eighty years ago we had all progressed along the same path, I leave you to imagine where this country would be today. We held back on the development of a segment of our society and we live with those consequences.

The steps that we have taken to support and assist initiatives from the Slum Dwellers International and Federation of the Urban Poor recognizes this singular truth. As government we recognize that apart from the market mechanism other initiatives and ways that have their origins in the people who make up our cities and towns, exist.

Minister Lindiwe Sisulu and President of SDI, Jockin Arputham

Minister Lindiwe Sisulu and President of SDI, Jockin Arputham

This is the experience that yet again I was exposed to when again I visited Thailand last year. I was exposed to a unique programs that forms partnerships between communities, government, and other stakeholders in identifying and developing suitable land for housing. This was a partnership to ensure that communities were located in the most opportune locations where their actual needs could be addressed in a sustainable manner.

We are thus committed to learn through practical experience and to enhance our programs to ensure that community needs are achieved. And I thus welcome the proposed structured cooperation arrangement that will be established during the Conference for the implementation of projects linked to policy and strategy enhancement.

The Conference is a unique opportunity for all of us to learn how partnerships with civil society are formed and should operate.

I would like to congratulate all of you for the achievements that both individually and collectively you have made in advancing the cause of slum dwellers.

Finally, Jockin, I do not know what to say to you. You remind me so much of my own father. You are beautiful in every single way!

I thank you most sincerely.

Oct 30
Love0

CUFF Project Report 2013

By Archive, CORC, FEDUP, ISN, News, Publications, uTshani Fund No Comments

By Thandeka Tshabalala (on behalf of CORC)

We live in the urban age where, for the first time the majority of the world population lives in cities.  Despite the overwhelming challenges encountered by the urban poor, the aspiration towards altering state-civil society relations, inclusive and integrated pro poor cities lies on the roles of networks organizations and agencies of the poor in bringing about social and political change. The national department of Human settlements aims to upgrade 400,000 well located households in-situ by 2014 and the National Development Plan “vision 2030” calls on government to stop building houses on poorly located land and shift more resources to upgrading informal settlements, provided that the areas are in great proximity to jobs.

 This publication articulates the spaces created by communities and local government to make decisions and work together towards the incremental improvement of informal settlements.  These new participatory spaces often create conditions for informal settlement upgrading to be more effective and sustainable.The Community Upgrading Finance Facility (CUFF) –Masikase- aims to enhance the agencies and practices of the organized poor by providing a platform and institutional support for communities to engage government more effectively around collaborative upgrading and livelihood projects.

https://sasdialliance.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/CUFF-Project-Report_Masikhase_Web-Version-2013.pdf