Mercury: ‘Laws will improve horrible lives’ (Article on the slums Bill)

http://www.themercury.co.za/index.php?fArticleId=3895043

‘Laws will improve horrible lives’
Shack dwellers remain sceptical about ‘draconian’ legislation, write Greg Arde and Stephanie Saville

June 21, 2007 Edition 1

KWAZULU-NATAL Housing Minister Mike Mabuyakhulu says shack dwellers live horrible lives, which he hopes to improve through a law that puts the brakes on slum development.

The extent of the ANC minister’s empathy will be judged most keenly by the residents of the 609 squatter settlements in the province.

Mabuyakhulu has cham- pioned the Elimination and Prevention of Re-emergence of the Slums Bill, which will allow him to clamp down on “slumlords” who are capitali-sing on the poor.

Abahlali baseMjondolo, the shack dwellers’ movement, has described the legislation as draconian, saying it is at odds with the national government’s housing policy.

The law will demand that all 51 municipalities in KZN prepare an audit of slums within six months, noting the number of dwellings and the number of residences to ensure their numbers were capped.

In tandem with that, Mabuyakhulu said a new national agency would be created to take stock of all available land, public and private, that was suitable for housing.

The state hopes to ramp up the construction of new houses and flats, and it wants to formalise some shack settlements.

Since 1994 about 500 000 low-cost houses have been built in the province, of a total of about 2.4 million nationally, through state subsidies.

Mabuyakhulu said 544 of the 609 shack settlements in KZN were in Durban – which showed that planners had accurately described cities as magnets of hope for the rural poor.

But he said landlords rented out unsafe shacks with no ablutions or basic amenities, which threatened lives and property rights.

“The fact is that it is a horrible life . . . and it is important to do something to eradicate slums.”

He said the government’s social housing programmes were making headway in addressing homelessness and R400 million was being spent in KZN this year to convert single-sex hostels into family units and extend the state housing pool.

Mabuyakhulu said he wanted shack dwellers to become more involved in creating permanent homes of their own.

“This is a lifetime asset, but the reality is that there is scarcity of land in the city. Some people want a free-for-all.

“I want to see people playing a role in building their own homes. I have a great deal of empathy for people living in shacks and I believe the government must act to defend them,” he said.

Mabuyakhulu said he did not expect problems with two controversial aspects of the legislation: allowing the state to fine property owners who did not take steps to protect their land from invasion by squatters; and proposed transit camps for shack dwellers.

Richard Pithouse, of Abahlali baseMjondolo, said although Mabuyakhulu’s motives might be noble, the language of the Bill was aggres- sive and focused on stopping shack settlements, rather than improving the living conditions of people there.

Mabuyakhulu said it would be foolhardy to try to herd shack dwellers into transit camps unless alternative houses were available to them. “It will have to be done on a phased basis,” he said.

Pithouse said the headquarters of United Nations’ Habitat were in Nairobi where massive shack settlements were gover-ned by “slumlords” who ren- ted out shacks to poor people.

“Not all settlements in South Africa are like that, it’s as though this legislation tries to adopt global best practice.

“Whether it is intended or not, this legislation gives the government a big stick to whack shack dwellers with. At the moment you can’t just set up a shack on any available piece of land you see, but we also have progressive laws against evictions. If you evict people you must give them notice and you must have a court order (among other things).”

Pithouse said the eThekwini Municipality had illegally demolished at least 100 shacks in Durban in the past year.

“The government goes on about the conditions in shack settlements being unsanitary. If you withhold services then places become slums. The government stopped the electrification of shacks in 2002.

Taps

“The municipality said slums would be cleared by 2010. They are not going to meet that target, but they could dramatically improve people’s lives by providing a few more taps and toilets,” Pithouse said.

The Bill has also been criticised by Marie Huchzermeyer, of the School of Architecture and Planning at Wits University.

Writing in The Mercury recently, she said the national housing policy (Breaking New Ground, 2004) stated the “need to shift the official response to informal settlements from one of conflict and neglect to one of integration and co-operation”.

The policy, she added, had introduced a new funding mechanism for informal settlement upgrading that would “maintain fragile community networks, minimise disruption, and enhance participation in . . . the development”.

Huchzermeyer said the national policy anticipated in situ upgrading of slums and in its Informal Settlement Upgrading Programme was geared towards addressing poverty, vulnerability and exclusion. She said the government should support shack dwellers in their struggle against fire and floods and to secure basic services without disruption to schooling and livelihoods.

Talking about the application of the law, Tim Jeebodh, the chairman of the portfolio committee on housing in the KZN legislature said it was unlikely that the province would follow trends in Gauteng where slum land that had been cleared would immediately be used for other housing purposes to prevent reoccupation by shack dwellers.

“We cannot force land ow-ners to develop their land. Obviously that would be the ideal, but it is not practical to expect formal housing to immediately be built on all slum land straight away and would be cumbersome to impose.”

Jeebodh said the obligation lay with the state to improve housing with the provision for housing subsidies and the like.

“But municipalities will have to take responsibility for stamping out shack farming, which is taking place on a large scale in some parts.” He said the Bill did not want the state to have to take responsibility for this.

He said transitional tent cities provided for in the Bill would not be used on a large scale.

“These would come into effect if there was an emergency only, for example if a community was moved away from the side of a river during heavy rains during the threat of flooding.”

Jeebodh said if any municipalities lacked the capacity to police areas or to provide housing then neighbouring municipalities would be called on to help them.

KZN Housing Head of Department Zandile Nyandu said the government’s aim was to clear all slums by 2014. The passing of the Bill would not mean that informal settlements would be wiped out in one fell swoop, Jeebodh said.

Instead it was aimed at getting municipalities to start programmes to eradicate slums by making provision in their budgets and working on improving infrastructure in needy areas.

The ANC MP said hearings on the Bill had been marked by general apathy, except in one instance when, at a public meeting in Pietermaritzburg a participant had objected to the use of the word “slum”. However, the drafter of the Bill, Vusi Nkosi, said the wording was the most appropriate term available.