Consolidated Municipal Infrastructure (CMIP) and Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG)
description
Transcript of Consolidated Municipal Infrastructure (CMIP) and Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG)
1
Consolidated Municipal Infrastructure (CMIP) and Municipal
Infrastructure Grant (MIG)
DPLG PRESENTATION TO THE PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON LOCAL
GOVERNMENTBudget review10 March 2003
2
Municipal Infrastructure Grant
(MIG)
3
PROBLEM STATEMENTΩ Supply vs demand driven approach not
responsive to community needs-unsustainableΩ Centralised disbursement from different depts-
admin burdenΩ Inequitable allocations to municpalitiesΩ No clear spending accountabilityΩ Programme not supportive municipal capacity
and development
4
OVERVIEW (C0NT)Infrastructure is key to social security and economic developmentDecentralization recognises municipalities as primary agency for infrastructure delivery
MIG approach seek to to enhance accountability in terms of policy outcomes and outputsNational and provincial departments provide support and capacity to municipalities
5
BROAD OVERVIEWLast 7 years focused on addressing the needs of the underserved communities estimated at 15,2 million in 1994Approximately over 5 million (61%) have access to water, and an estimated 3,4 (66,1)million has access to electricityLevels of under-servicing remains high and requires an integrated strategy to addressInfrastructure delivery remains governments key priority
6
PRINCIPLES
غ Equity in the allocation and use of fundsغ Decentralization of spending authorityغ Efficient use of fundsغ Promote integrated development
objectives of the three spheresغ Predictability and transparency
7
OBJECTIVES Fully subsidize the capital costs of
providing basic services to the poor Distribute funding for MI in an equitable,
transparent and efficient manner Assist developmental capacity of
municipalities through multi-year planning Coordinated pursuit of national policy and
priorities. Increased job creation through higher
investment in public infrastructure
8
INSTITUTIONAL ARRENGEMENTSMulti-departmental accountability fund-
DPLG take financial accountabilityPolicy making and regulatory functions
of each of the national depts. Remains intact
MIPTT- for policy decisionsTMITT-for operational coordination
9
MIG BUDGET
2003/04 R 47million
2004/05 R117million
2005/06 R97million
10
PROCESS Pilot phase 2003/04 financial year Infrastructure transfers will go directly to local
government in support of IDPs The Grant will be consolidate from CMIP,
LED,WSCG,CBPWP,UTG,BS&R and NEP (post restructuring)
Largely formula driven to ensure proper targeting and windows for innovations
11
Pilot sitesNodal areas were identified as key
Ethekwini (U) Nelson Mandela(U) Sekhukhuni (R) Bohlabela (R) Kgalagadi (R) Alfred Nzo (R) OR Tambo ( R) Maluti-A-phofung (R) Mangaung
12
CHALLENGESMIG only provides basic servicesNeed for concession for poor municipalities with no revenue baseNo guarantees for proper O&M implementation capacity ( sustainability)Lack of Technical support for mostly rural municipalities to deliver infrastructure
13
Consolidated Municipal Infrastructure Grant
(CMIP)
14
Progress
• Since inception approximately 2,5 million households benefited from CMIP
• 1760 projects completed value R 2345m
• Currently 936 projects under construction value R2335m
15
Consolidated Municipal Infrastructure Programme
Outputs Service Delivery Indicators
The quantity and quality of infrastructure developed
315 projects were completed with a CMIP value of R480m
150 - Water 460 - Water 60 - Sanitation 280 - Sanitation 50 - Roads 450 - Roads
450 000 households per annum Number of beneficiaries 530 000 households
50% - Urban projects 51% - Urban projects50% - Rural projects 49% - Rural projects30% - Men 35% - Men30% - Women 17% - Women30% - Youth 48% - Youth
(Women youth is reported under youth component)
30% - Men 38% - Men30% - Women 18% - Women30% - Youth 44% - Youth
(Women youth is reported under youth component)
300 SMME’s per annum utilised SMME involvement 440 SMME’s utilised
Original TargetsOutputs achieved
Categories of projects funded
Location of projects
Employment opportunities
Accredited training provided
16
URBAN RENEWAL PROJECTS
ALLOCATION R70 MILLION Number of projects implemented in UR nodes 56Number of projects in the construction phase 14Number of projects completed 0
INTERGRATED SUSTAINABLE RURAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS
ALLOCATION – R230 MILLION
Number of projects implemented in ISRDP nodes 204Number of projects in the construction phase 80Number of projects completed 19
CMIP : ACHIEVEMENTS - 2002/2003
170
300000
600000
900000
1200000
1500000
1800000
R'000
Amount Voted (R'000) Projected Expenditure (R'000) Savings (R'000)
Preliminary Expenditure Results by Sub Programme - CMIP
1,799,097 1,797,897 1,200
Amount Voted (R'000)
Projected Expenditure (R'000)
Savings (R'000)
18
CMIP BUDGET
2003/04 R2246million
2004/05 R2724million
2005/06 R3016million
19
CMIP : OUTPUT DELIVERABLES - 2003/2004
Funds to be spent on labour intensive projects 20% of total allocation
Number of households serviced per annum 650 000 households per annum
30% - Men
30% - Women
30% - Youth
30% - Men
30% - Women
30% - Youth
Number of SMME's utilised per annum400 SMME’s per annum to be utilised
Output deliverables
Priority given to project implementation in ISRDP and URP
Employment opportunities created
Service Delivery Indicators
20% of allocation
Accredited training provided
20
2004/2005 2005/2006
Funds to be spent on labour intensive projects
20% of total allocation 20% of total allocation
Number of households serviced per annum
800 000 households per annum 900 000 households per annum
30% - Men 30% - Men
30% - Women 30% - Women
30% - Youth 30% - Youth
30% - Men 30% - Men
30% - Women 30% - Women
30% - Youth 30% - Youth
Number of SMME's utilised per annum
600 SMME’s per annum to be utilised
700 SMME’s per annum to be utilised
Accredited training provided
Employment opportunities created
20% of total allocationPriority given to project implementation in ISRDP and URP
Service Delivery Indicators
20% of total allocation
Output deliverables
CMIP : PROJECTED OUTPUT DELIVERABLES - 2004/2005 & 2005/2006
21
CMIP CHALLENGES
• Lack of technical capacity at municipal sphere
• Lack of monitoring capacity by municipalities
• Too lengthy procurement procedures followed by municipalities
• Life cycle costing for O&M by municipalities
22
THANK YOU