Questions and Answers to the Gauteng Provincial Department of Human Settlements

12 March 2015

Questions and Answers to the Gauteng Provincial Department of Human Settlements

1. What is your understanding/interpretation/definition of security of tenure?

The history of colonialism and apartheid is a history of the dispossession of black people from land – rural and urban. It is a history of the containment of African people in the Bantustans and the exclusion of all black people from a full and equal place in the cities. We never thought that after apartheid impoverished black people would continue to face eviction, often violent, from private land owners and the state.

Before colonialism we never used papers and money for access to land. There is a long history of urban land occupations as a way for black people to access urban land and city life. This has continued after apartheid. We do not believe that we need papers and money to justify access to land. If unused land or buildings are occupied for social purposes, and not for private profit, then this must be recognised as land reform or urban reform from below. For us an important part of security of tenure would be the political recognition of the importance of land occupations, and the occupation of unused buildings, from the ruling party and the state.

However because we live in a world of money and papers political support for land occupations needs to be translated into legal support. Individual tenure is better than the risk of eviction but it always leads to the middle class using their access to money and credit to take over land occupied by poor people. Therefore we prefer collective tenure and the democratic self-management of land.

2. There is general perception/concerns of corruption in subsidy administration that is processing application for housing subsidy and housing allocations.

Our experience is that corruption is live not only during the processing or allocation stage but from the data base creation stage. Serious problems emerge when officials use the ‘’one shack one house’’ criteria to register beneficiaries instead of ‘’one family one house’’ formula. Our experience is that there is often more than one family in one shack – and one shack often has more than one door showing that different families live in that particular structure. This is often the first step that leads to so many beneficiaries being excluded. When there are fewer houses than families all kinds of possibilities for corruption emerge. Sometimes officials are aware of this situation and do take note of it so that extra houses are allocated. However these may then be sold by corrupt officials and politicians.

Another common experience is that shack owners are registered on databases while but tenants are often excluded. When houses are built it is not even said that perhaps tenants will be considered in the next phase. No, they are deliberately left out and are just left homeless when their shacks are demolished.

These problems are mostly created by the involvement of both Ward Committees, which are often disfunctional, and Branch Executive Committees (BEC) or other structures of the political parties. A political party dominated allocation process leads to the exclusion of non-political party members. Shacks are sold; shack numbers are lost and given to the wrong people etc.

The role of local councillors has been noted in other communities having housing projects. This becomes very clear when a councillor is involve in deciding which contractor is given the job, in hiring the Community Liaison Officer (CLO) and nominating his or her own Project Steering Committee which is often only people of his or her own political party to manage housing allocation. This has been very clear in one of our housing project where the councillor allocated one house to two beneficiaries both of them issued with a document confirming they have been allocated to house x. This was because the allocation took place at night and on the bonnet of her car.

Abahlali’s efforts to hold these councillors and BEC’s accountable and expose them have caused our members lives to be lost. More leaders have been assassinated and as we speak two local councillors have been charged with murder in Ward 12 and will appear in Pinetown magistrate court on the 18 March 2015.

3. The social and economic impact of security of tenure. How does tenure access contribute to improved livelihoods of beneficiaries?

Once beneficiaries are granted secure tenure, they begin to invest in their structures be they formal or informal, they begin to do savings through stockvels and others form of savings etc. They will even consider taking loans where possible to improve their homes etc. They begin to identify other community spaces such as community hall, sports grounds, crèches or even parks. In the same way as looking at sustainable income, settlements are mostly situated in well located sites that are close to the working conditions. Even the purchase deal with third parties is much easier if one has a permanent address.

4. Can tenure access be fast-tracked in any way to ensure better living space/conditions of the people?

Yes. The most important thing is political will, firstly from those that are landless or homeless and secondly from the state. The state can give immediate guarantees that they will not evict. Where the state is hostile to impoverished black people litigation can also fast-track tenure access.