The point of the IDPs

The Integrated Development Plan (IDP) is a legally binding document given effect by the Municipal Systems Act (MSA) of 2000 which requires municipalities to undertake developmentally orientated planning. IDPs are compiled in terms of the requirements of chapter 5 of the MSA (32 of 2000). The Integrated Development Planning is a process of consultation, participation and information sharing at municipal level for a five-year period.

The IDP outlines the time frames of scheduled development activities, and co-ordinate structures and resources involved in the processes. It addresses issues such as the municipal budget, land management, promotion of local economic development and institutional transformation.

The IDP is legally recognised and it is more important than other plans that guide development at Local Government level. The core components of the IDP are clearly stated in section 26 of the MSA of 2000. The IDP is not a static document, it is reviewed and refined annually with involvement by internal and external stakeholders. The internal stakeholders in- clude Council, ward councillors, the Mayor, Municipal Manager, mayoral committee, IDP Manager, IDP Committee, and the Sarah Baartman District Council. The external stakeholders include Ward Committees, IDP Representative Forum, Government Departments, State Parastatals, CSOs, and External Funders. All these stakeholders contribute in producing, reviewing and improving an IDP.

What role do citizens play in the IDP?

Citizens are represented by the ward committees whose role is to consult them, on an individual or communal basis to establish citizens’ socioeconomic problems and reach consensus on the IDP and other development projects.

The ward councillor’s roles include organising a public participation forum at ward level for citizens to verify whether the socio-economic problems they identified to the ward committees are correct and adequate or not. This is also a platform for citizens to raise emerging issues. Whether all issues citizens raised are considered by the Municipal Council (whose role is to make the final decision, and approve the developed and re- viewed IDP document) or not, that is a story for another day.

Citizen participation in developing an IDP is supposed to begin at the planning stage, allowing Makana residents, and all other stakeholders to plan in a collaborative manner. The Makana IDP developers argue that stakeholder participation in producing an IDP has not been meaningful; government departments have participated inconsistently, and communities are not centrally involved in local planning.

However, the IDP developers need to consider that communities are not homogeneous.

There are a lot social and economic factors affecting people’s participation in a central manner. For instance, they have different thinking capabilities, different levels of knowledge and skills, language barriers, time-frames that are in conflict with their availability and more.

The role of IDP at District and Provincial Level

Makana’s IDP along with those of other eight local municipalities (such as Camdeboo, Ikhwezi, Baviaans, Blue Crane Route, Ndlambe, Sundays River Valley, Kouga, & Kou-Kamma) feeds into the Sarah Baartman District Municipality’s IDP.

The Sarah Baartman District Municipality IDP (informed by the National and Provincial Government priorities) represents the strategic plan that guides and informs all planning and allocation of resources for a five-year period.

It primarily reflects the socio-economic conditions and challenges of residents within the District as well as the institutional arrangements, infrastructure and organisational challenges of the District Municipality.

The Sarah Baartman District Municipality IDP informs the Eastern Cape Provincial Plans and the Eastern Cape Annual Provincial Budget. It is through the IDPs of District Municipalities and Metropolitan Municipalities that the Eastern Cape Provincial Treasury understands the socio-economic problems and the public resources required by the provincial citizens. For instance, in the Makana Municipality’s IDP 2016-17, there are seven development priorities decided by citizens, municipality and other relevant stakeholders:

Basic service delivery and infrastructure development

Community Development and Social Cohesion

Local Economic Development

Institutional Transformation and Financial Development

Good Governance and Public Participation

Support to vulnerable groups Human Settlement These development priorities clearly show that an IDP incorporates the developmental problems that inform municipal planning, as well as what needs to be budgeted for and time frames of development projects.

The IDP is supposed to be interrelated to the budget to improve operational effectiveness. It is important for budget plans to link to the IDP to ensure that key objectives and priorities are budgeted for and achieved. However, there is existing anxiety between the IDP and budgeting, which often makes it difficult to achieve the desired level of integration.

For instance, In Makana, municipal expenditure is not in line with the IDP and budget. Expenditure far exceeds revenue collection, resulting in increasing numbers of unpaid creditors.

This suggests that the budget allocated is firstly used to address urgent problems, making it impossible to implement all planned development projects.

The challenge of integrating the IDP with a municipal budget is the result of poor planning by a municipality, because creative and innovative planners learn from their previous plans and then preempt the feasible plan to ensure that development problems of a municipality do not result in the diversion of the budget allocated to the pressing problems every year.

Lungile Penxa is a local government researcher at the Public Service Accountability Monitor (PSAM).

IDP consultation meetings for Makana were postponed and Grocott’s Mail has not yet received the new schedule.