NCOP SELECT COMMITTEE ON FINANCE

9 NOVEMBER 2009

SALGA’S INPUTS INTO THE GREEN PAPER ON NATIONAL

STRATEGIC PLANNING

BACKGROUND

Green Paper

discussed

at SALGA

NEC

Lekgotla in

September

2009

Presidency

introduced a

Green Paper

released in

September

2009

SALGA

provincial

structures

requested to

engage with

the Green

Paper at

Provincial

level

Preliminary

comments

from PEC

Lekgotlas

and

stakeholders

Presentation outline & comments

Section 3

Section 4

Section 5

Section 6

Section 7

Section 8

Section 9

The planning horizon

The objectives and intent of the Green Paper

The plan and the planning system

The institutional arrangements

The cross-sphere or intergovernmental planning

The need for understanding change management

The importance of development and spatial planning

Planning Horizon

• Broad principles of Green Paper welcome

• Vision for 2025 is chosen as a timing horizon

• More clearer definition of a long term planning framework

– ‘long term vision' should be based on a 'long term strategic perspective' (ie an analysis of

likely long term trajectories and trends) which in term defines the actual 'plan' for achieving

things en-route to that vision

– As a result, can have two separate dates for the vision and plan

– The 'plan' (what we say we are going to do) should be more important than the vision (what we

say we want to become)

• Currently vision statements exist in silos (Joburg 2030, Gauteng 2055; Durban

a 100 year perspective) - The national planning process needs to ensure

alignment

Objectives and intent of Green

Paper

• Examine the varied experiences of setting ambitious targets

(eg. achieving a million houses after 5 years on one hand but almost a decade

after the commitment to halve poverty by 2014 we still haven't got a clear

definition and baseline on what we meant by poverty

Role of planning commission:

– assist government to present to society a set of ambitious, but nonetheless clear

and credible, objectives and targets

– establish clear commitments into output sets by different parts of government

(SOE, Municipalities, etc)

– monitor performance (Ministry for Performance Monitoring)

• Scenario planning ( of where the world will be in 15-30 years) to be

included

Plan vs planning system

• Planning Commission needs to advise government on resource allocation

adequacy and alignment with stated objectives (NB experience of IDP)

• Lack of a reference in the national planning process on what currently

exists and what the challenges (and successes) so far have been - ie.

certain aspects of our current system are good and are working well, how

will they be incorporated or recognized (eg. Asgisa challenges)

• Is this a top-down or bottom-up approach? How can integrative planning

be reached – ie alignment to bottom up emphasis of IDP processes

• The principle of differentiation especially for local government and by

geographical context – mitigate the risk is that “one-size” fits all policy

Institutional arrangements

• Composition of Planning Commission – should it only just be intellectuals

and experts?

• While the overall thrust of the Green Paper is about ensuring policy coherence

and coordination, it is not clear where and how organised local government

will be represented in the planning commission?

• Related to this is also how intergovernmental coordination can be achieved

with provinces, SOE and national departments with local government

• National Strategic Planning will be affected by current planning processes

and legislation - Should we just assimilate IDP’s, PGDS, etc ?

• Institutional arrangements in provinces are being set up without a clear

national framework (result in different application of provincial planning with

Municipalities nationally)

Cross-sphere planning

• Need to ensure substantive cross sphere planning and not just

alignment of processes

• Vertical and horizontal alignment challenge for the National Planning

Commission

• Challenges in developing IDP’s:

– Municipality plans, budgets and identifies projects in the IDP, but there is no

backward integration to provinces and national interventions

– How does one ensure alignment, if IDP’s are chopped and changed

annually rather then reviewed

– Alignment to MTSF and PGDS does not have a clear methodology and

their timeframes are misaligned

• An example is to have a Part A and Part B IDP

Examples of misalignment of

national programmes

• Setting of EPWP targets and implementation of EPWP at a municipal level?

• Role of Municipalities in national response framework on Global Economic

Crisis

• Role of local government in addressing land use management issues

• Development of conditional grants that many municipalities cannot access

• Role of municipalities in setting housing targets?

• Role of municipalities in setting FBS targets in areas of water, electricity,

refuse removal

• Role of municipalities in development of support programmes – to link need

with resources

• Coordination of local government support programmes between national

departments, SOEs, provincial departments

Need for change management

• Systems and processes can be put in place, buts it’s the impact of people

that is most difficult to manage

• It is therefore proposed that change management process be considered

as part of setting up and ensuring coherence in planning by all key

stakeholders

– We need to move away from a negative approach of turfs and cilos and individual

competencies to a positive interpretation of cooperative governance (is about national,

provincial and local working together in a local space)

• This will requires a change in attitude of spheres of governments working

together

Importance of development and spatial planning

• There are national plans and strategies that have a spatial footprint on

economic and social development in a local space

– (NSDP, Urban Development Framework, Dinokeng Scenarios, Bulk Water Development

Plans, Housing Atlas, Rural Nodes, long range plans for energy, freight and passenger

transport, Sanral Plans etc)

• The commission should therefore take these perspectives and plans, look at

them collectively, identify areas of conflict and contradictions to ensure

a single national framework which will inform provincial and local planning

• Also, the commission should also ensure alignment of provincial and local

spatial development frameworks to a national consolidated perspective

Conclusion

• The development of a White Paper on National Planning will ensure

further engagement towards achieving consensus

• Substantively, any reforms proposed to achieve this vision must support

the Constitution and respect the integrity and autonomy of the three-

sphere principles, as opposed to, for example, the 17th Constitutional

Amendment Bill

• A defined role for the Planning Commission in relation to provincial and

local governments.

• Ensure linkages with the Policy Review process of CoGTA (sweeping

reforms to the governance model, powers and functions between spheres)

• Ensure policy and planning coherence in the IGR arena (move from

process to content)

KEY ISSUES

Institutions in the planning process…Institutions in the planning process…

Planning Commission Planning Commission