The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Limpopo will submit questions for written response to the MEC for COGHSTA on the continuous increase in Unauthorised, Irregular and Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure (UIFWE) by our municipalities and the growing number municipalities with unfunded budgets.
It is clear that the mandatory municipal Section 71 reports by the accounting officer and the quarterly Section 52(d) reports by mayors to set out the state of financial affairs of the municipalities, and which further act as an early warning system, is not worth the paper it is written on; either because of a lack of transparency on municipal balance sheets, or the lack of scrutiny by the Department of COGHSTA, or both.
A recent report from the Limpopo Treasury paints a bleak picture of the lack of financial stability of our municipalities and the imminent danger of financial collapse.
11 of our 27 municipalities have unfunded budgets with Makhado and Fetakgomo- Tubatse municipalities budget found to be unfunded after the adjustment process which is indicative of the ANC politicians’ demagoguery.
The unfunded municipalities are Greater Letaba, Ba-Phalaborwa, Mopani District ,Musina,Makhado, Vhembe District,Thabazimbi, Mokgalakwena, Modimolle-Mookgopong,Waterberg District and Fetakgomo-Tubatse.
A jaw-dropping R9.72 billion of UIFW expenditure was incurred by 10 municipalities.
It is concerning that the embattled Mopani District Municipality accounts for 39.7% of the UIFWE in the province in the amount of R3.86 billion; despite several requests by the DA, the Limpopo ANC government is yet to place Mopani District under administration, despite the District’s increasing inability to provide water and sanitation infrastructure.
Thabazimbi municipality, still fraught by ANC factionalism, incurred UIFWE of R1.57 billion, followed by Modimolle-Mookgopong with R1.25 billion in UIFWE.
In response to the escalating UIFWE by municipalities the MEC Makamu bluntly stated that the department is putting interventions in place without any further elaboration; this is no longer good enough.
In our questions for written response the DA will request:
- Details of interventions by the department in the municipalities with unfunded budgets
- Details of interventions in the top 10 municipalities contributing to UIFWE
- Access to Section 71 and Section 52 reports and the department’s response thereto
- What specific interventions are in place to address the Auditor General’s repetitive negative audit findings
We will further recommend to the portfolio committee for COGHSTA to engage with the Portfolio committee for Treasury to affect a collaboration to revive sound financial governance in our municipalities.