Performance of Municipalities in 2015

Transcription

1 Performance of Municipalities in 2015 ( SERVICE DELIVERY, INDIGENT AND EMPLOYMENT NUMBERS FROM MUNICIPALITIES) 9 June 2016 Dr Pali Lehohla 1

2 Context NDP: Address the triple challenge of Poverty Inequality and Unemployment

3 No income education 80% 70% 60% No schooling 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% Age Grade 11 Grade 12 Diploma Bachelors degree

4 Proportion completing a bachelor's degree after completing grade White The alarming evidence points to regressive proportions in Bachelor s completion rates amongst Blacks Indian/Asia n Black African Coloured Year

5 Black African Coloured Indian White Percentage of workers in each age group who are skilled (managers, professionals, technicians) The percentage of workers in skilled occupations increased in all age and all race groups, except for black Africans aged 25-34, which decreased There were much weaker gains in the black African group for all ages 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

6 Inequality in South Africa % RSA 0.45 Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White

7 Geography as a dimension: Human Settlements policy The 2011 settlement patterns illustrate that policy intentions and public action are at variance with densification on the margins Population Density - Census 2001 Census 2011 shows increasing urban sprawl on the periphery instead Spatio-Cultural and Temporal Dimensions of Measurement

8

9 Real GDP decreased by -1,2% in Q (quarter-on-quarter) Real GDP decreased by -0,2% in Q (year-on-year) Seasonally adjusted and annualised Unadjusted

10 Table of contents: NFCM Background 2. General Results i. Basic Services ii. Free Basic Services iii. Indigent Households iv. Employment 3. Concluding Remarks 2

11 What is asked NFCM questionnaire Household Questionnaires Employment in municipalities By division, type, gender Infrastructure Basic and free basic services: Water Electricity Sewerage & sanitation Solid waste management Compliance Indigents Service provided: Funded by municipality, and /or Agreements with service providers and/or Agreements with national and provincial departments (where the municipality does not have the funds or infrastructure to provide service) CONSUMER UNITS Services - various Income Areas Employment Various other demography Population census Community survey 2016 GHS Etc HOUSEHOLDS 3

12 4 Consumer Unit explained - illustration Households = 140 reporting units Consumer units = 5 minimum; 70? maximum reporting units ? Consumer unit Household 1 10?

13 Free Basic Service Policy: Introduced in kl of water free per household per month 50kwh of electricity free per household per month R50 average for Sewerage and Sanitation R50 average for Solid Waste Management 5

14 Indigent household These are poor households as determined by municipalities. The basis on which a municipality determines if a household is indigent (and the criteria used for such determination) can vary. Not necessarily consistent across municipalities, even in same province. 6

15 Mechanisms used for provision of Free Basic Services Broad-based approach: Each consumer unit in that municipality receives free basic services on the current billing system of the municipality. Geographical approach: The process whereby consumers living in a particular area are assumed to have the same socio-economic profile and therefore tariffs can be set on location. Self-targeting approach: It is essentially an income-based system which municipalities use as a basis to determine if the household receives the service at lower, discounted or on a free basis. Technical targeting approach: The process whereby technology is used to regulate the provision of free basic services (including water and electricity meters). Other targeting methods: Consumption-based Property value Plot size 7

16 NFCM 2015: KEY FINDINGS Water: consumer units 12,2 million (BS) 4,7 million (FBS) 12,5 million (BS) 4,6 million (FBS) Solid Waste Management: consumer units 8,6 million (BS) 2,4 million(fbs) 9,0 million (BS) 2,3 million (FBS) Indigent households registered with municipalities 3,5 million 3,6 million Electricity: consumer units Bucket toilets provided by municipalities 10,4 million (BS) 2,6 million (FBS) 10,9 million (BS) 2,7 million (FBS) Sewerage & Sanitation: consumer units 10,4 million (BS) 3,3 million (FBS) 10,9 million (BS) 3,3 million (FBS) BS: Basic Service FBS: Free Basic Service Based on all 278 municipalities (100% response rate) 2014*

17 WATER 9

18 Context NDP: Increase in the percentage of households with access to a functional water service from 85% in 2013 to 90% by 2019.

19 Consumer units Basic water and free basic water consumer units: Basic Water Free Basic Water Year *

20 Consumer units receiving basic water: 2015 Top 3 municipalities per province EC 1. Nelson Mandela MM ( ) 2. O.R. Tambo DM ( ) 3. Amathole DM ( ) FS 1. Mangaung MM ( ) 2. Maluti-A-Phofung ( ) 3. Matjhabeng LM ( ) GP 1. Johannesburg MM ( ) 2. Ekurhuleni MM ( ) 3. Tshwane MM ( ) KZN 1. Ethekwini MM ( ) 2. Msunduzi LM ( ) 3. Ugu DM (152152) LP 1. Mopani DM ( ) 2. Vhembe DM ( ) 3. Greater Sekhukhune ( ) MP 1. Mbombela LM ( ) 2. Bushbuckridge LM ( ) 3. Govan Mbeki LM ( ) NW 1. Matlosana LM ( ) 2. Madibeng LM ( ) 3. Rustenburg LM ( ) NC 1. Sol Plaatjie LM (63 224) 2. Ga-Segonyana LM (24 791) 3. Joe Morolong LM (24 250) WC 1. Cape Town MM ( ) 2. Drakenstein LM (43 711) 3. Stellenbosch LM (37 846) 12

21 Percentage of households with access to piped or tap water in their dwellings, off-site or on-site 2015: 89% 2002: 85%

22 Percentage of households with access to piped or tap water in their dwellings, off-site or on-site by province, There were very high proportions of households in Western Cape (99,2%), Gauteng (97,7%), Northern Cape (96,5%) with access to piped or tap water off and on site 100% 95% 90% 85% 80% 75% WC, 99.2 GP, 97.7 FS, 96.1 MP, 85.5 KZN, 84.2 LP, 78.8 EC, % 65% 60% 55% 50%

23 Percentage of households rating the quality of water services provided by the municipality as good, and those that reported water interruptions, by province, 2015 vs An inverse relationship between the perceived quality of services and the number of interruptions seems to exist. Quality Interruptions WC 86.4% 3.1% NW 76.8% 6.6% SA 62.0% 25.4% FS 57.5% 30.7% KZN EC GP 51.1% 49.4% 51.6% 36.1% 26.1% 37.8% NC MP LP 32.4% 40.2% 40.2% 50.8% 59.4% 60.9% LP MP NC GP EC KZNLP FSMP SA NCNWGP WCEC KZN FS SA NW WC

24 Percentage of households rating the quality of water services provided by the municipality as good, and those that reported water interruptions, by Metro, 2015 An inverse relationship between the perceived vs quality of services and the number of interruptions seems to exist. Quality Interruptions City of Cape Town ethekwini 84.4% 87.8% 3.6% 7.1% City of Johannesburg All Metros Ekurhuleni City of Tshwane Nelson Mandela Bay Buffalo City Mangaung 52.9% 55.6% 58.0% 79.6% 77.4% 75.9% 73.7% 6.0% 7.6% 6.3% 9.6% 5.9% 15.2% 31.1% Mangaung has a significantly higher percentage of interruptions than the average for all metros City of Cape Town ethekwini City of Johannesburg All Metros Ekurhuleni City of Tshwane Nelson Mandela Bay Buffalo City Mangaung

25 Electricity 17

26 Context NDP: The proportion of people with access to the electricity grid should rise to at least 90 percent by 2030

27 Consumer units Number of consumer units basic electricity and free basic electricity: Basic Electricity Free Basic Year *

28 Number of consumer units receiving basic electricity : 2015 Top 3 municipalities per province EC 1. Nelson Mandela MM ( ) 2. Buffalo City MM ( ) 3. King Sabata Dalindyebo (53 362) FS 1. Mangaung MM ( ) 2. Maluti-A-Phofung LM ( ) 3. Matjhabeng LM (91 185) GP 1. Johannesburg MM ( ) 2. Tshwane MM (704056) 3. Ekurhuleni MM ( ) KZN 1. Ethekwini MM ( ) 2. Msunduzi LM ( ) 3. Newcastle LM (81 412) LP 1. Polokwane LM ( ) 2. Makhado LM ( ) 3. Thulamela LM (96 467) MP 1. Bushbuckridge LM ( ) 2. Mbombela LM ( ) 3. Nkomazi LM (86 492) NW 1. City of Matlosana ( ) 2. Madibeng LM ( ) 3. Rustenburg LM (97 791) NC 1. Sol Plaatjie LM (64 297) 2. Joe Morolong LM (25 500) 3. //Khara Hais LM (21 874) WC 1. Cape Town MM ( ) 2. Drakenstein LM (56 809) 3. George LM (44 920) 20 28

29 The percentage of South African households that were connected to the mains electricity supply 2015: 86% 2002: 77%

30 The percentage of households connected to the mains electricity supply by province The percentage of South African households that were connected to the mains electricity supply increased from 77,1% in 2002 to 86% in % 90% 80% 93% 92% 90% 89% 88% 86% 84% 83% 82% 82% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% LP NC WC FS MP SA NW GP EC KZN

31 Percentage distribution of wood as a source of energy used for cooking by province, 2015 Less than one per cent of households usually used wood for cooking in Western Cape and Gauteng (0,7% and 0,5% respectively). 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% Wood still represent a significant source of energy for cooking in Limpopo, along with other provinces with significant rural communities 30% 20% 10% 0% LP MP KZN EC RSA NW NC FS WC GP

32 Rating of the quality of the electricity supply services, The percentage of households in the country that rated electricity supply as good increased to 66,5% in 2014 before dropping to 60,2% in % 80% EC quality of the electricity supply services has been consistently declining over the time period 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% % 0% WC EC NC FS KZN NW GP MP LP RSA

33 SEWERAGE AND SANITATION 25

34 Context NDP: Increase in the percentage of households with access to a functional sanitation service from 84% in 2013 to 90% by 2019,

35 Consumer units Number of consumer units receiving basic sewerage and sanitation and free basic sewerage and sanitation : Basic Sewerage and Sanitation Free Basic Sewerage and Sanitation Year *

36 Sewerage and sanitation consumer units: 2015 Top 3 municipalities per province EC 1. Nelson Mandela Bay ( ) 2. O.R. Tambo DM ( ) 3. Buffalo City MM ( ) FS 1. Mangaung MM ( ) 2. Maluti-A-Phofung ( ) 3. Matjhabeng LM (86 474) GP 1. Johannesburg MM ( ) 2. Ekurhuleni MM ( ) 3. Tshwane MM ( ) KZN 1. Ethekwini MM ( ) 2. Msunduzi LM ( ) 3. Uthukela DM ( ) LP 1. Polokwane LM ( ) 2. Greater Sekhukhune ( ) 3. Vhembe DM ( ) MP 1. Bushbuckridge LM ( ) 2. Mbombela LM ( ) 3. Govan Mbeki LM (94 717) NW 1. City of Matlosana ( ) 2. Rustenburg LM ( ) 3. Mahikeng LM (77 232) NC 1. Sol Plaatjie LM (63 233) 2. //Khara Hais LM (23 381) 3. Joe Morolong LM (19 095) WC 1. Cape Town MM ( ) 2. Drakenstein LM (51 227) 3. Mossel Bay LM (36 862) 27 36

37 Percentage of households that have access to RDP standard sanitation per province, vs Nationally, the percentage of households with access to RDP standard sanitation increased from 62,3% in 2002 to 80% in % 90% 80% WC, 93.3 GP, 91.0 NC FS, % 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% NW KZN, 77.3 MP, 65.8 LP, %

38 Percentage of households that have access to RDP standard sanitation per province, Nationally, the percentage of households with vs access to RDP standard sanitation increased from 62,3% in 2002 to 80% in % 90% 80% NC WC 93.3 GP 91.0 FS 81.1 RSA % 60% 50% 67.4 KZN has shown steady increases in improving access to RDP sanitation standard over the last 3 years KZN MP LP %

39 Percentage of households that have no toilet facility or were using a bucket toilet, vs Percentage without toilet facilities, or buckets, improved from 12,3% in 2002 to 4,9% in 2002, nationally. Largest decrease in EC (28,3 pct pts to 8,5%) 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%

40 Number of households Municipality provision of bucket toilets: Year *

41 Number of consumer units using bucket toilets provided by the municipalities in each province: 2014 and 2015 Gauteng Limpopo North West Mpumalanga Northern Cape Free State KwaZulu-Natal Eastern Cape Western Cape No bucket toilet system provided by municipality in

42 SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT 38

43 Number of consumer units receiving solid waste management: ,0 million consumer units nationally received basic solid waste management services Just over 1 in 4 of these units received free basic services 58% of indigent households benefitted from indigent support on solid waste management 39

44 Consumer units Number of consumer units receiving basic solid waste management and free basic solid waste management: Basic Solid Waste Management Free Basic Solid Waste Management Year *

45 Number of consumer units receiving basic solid waste management services: 2015 Top 3 municipalities per province EC 1. Nelson Mandela Bay ( ) 2. Buffalo City MM ( ) 3. King Sabata Dalindyebo (30 000) FS 1. Mangaung MM ( ) 2. Matjhabeng LM ( ) 3. Metsimaholo LM (42 500) GP 1. Johannesburg MM ( ) 2. Tshwane MM ( ) 3. Ekurhuleni MM ( ) KZN 1. Ethekwini MM ( ) 2. Msunduzi LM ( ) 3. umhlathuze LM (64 000) LP 1. Polokwane LM ( ) 2. Mogalakwena LM (52 342) 3. Thulamela LM (49 700) MP 1. Nkomazi LM (82 126) 2. Thembisile LM (74 822) 3. Govan Mbeki LM (68 215) NW 1. Rustenburg LM (90 000) 2. City of Matlosana (88 400) 3. Moses Kotane LM (63 000) NC 1. Sol Plaatjie LM (56 540) 2. //Khara Hais LM (23 245) 3. Gamagara LM (14 791) WC 1Cape Town MM ( ) 2. George LM (53 200) 3. Drakenstein LM (41 515) 41 45

46 Number of consumer units receiving basic solid waste management services: 2015 Magareng 2014*: : Change: Service extended to various communities, including Warrenvale and Ikhutseng areas 42

47 Percentage of households whose refuse is removed by the municipality Households refuse removal by geotype, 2015 Households in urban areas were much more likely to receive some rubbish removal service than those in rural areas, and rural households were therefore much more likely to rely on their own rubbish dumps LP 6% 100% 90% 80% 8.6% 70% 60% 50% 40% 84.1% 86.4% 30% 20% 10% 0% 6.6% Removed at least once a weak Removed less often than once a week Urban Communal refuse dump Own refuse dump Rural Dump or leave rubbish anywhere Other

48 The percentage of households who experience specific kinds of environmental problems, The proportion of households that felt that there were problems with littering and waste removal in their areas increased notably since 2003 when 28,8% of households regarded this as a problem. 45% 40% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% NDP urges the rapid expansion of recycling infrastructure, and encouraging the composting of organic domestic waste to bolster economic activity in poor urban communities Waste, 39% Land, 31% Air, 19% Water, 16% 0%

49 Number of consumer units receiving basic solid waste management services: 2015 Msinga 2014*: : Change: Municipality solid waste management services was provided for the first time in Keates Drift, Tugela Ferry and Pomeroy 43

50 Number of consumer units receiving basic solid waste management services: 2015 Nyandeni 2014*: : Change: Services extended to: a. Various wards in Ntlaza; b. The Ziphunzana area 44

51 Indigents 45

52 Number of indigent households registered with municipalities per province: 2014 & *: : ,7% (92 444) increase in indigent identified by the municipalities in 2015 Northern Cape Gauteng North West Free State Limpopo Mpumalanga KwaZulu-Natal Western Cape Eastern Cape

53 Benefitting Indigent households in each province and services they receive: 2015 WC EC NC FS KZN NW GP MP LP Identified ,6 million indigent households 47

54 EMPLOYMENT 48

55 Gender breakdown of executive mayors and mayors: 2014 & % 38% 278 posts 62% 62% 2014*

56 Gender breakdown of executive mayors and mayors (%)*: 2015 Limpopo Mpumalanga Eastern Cape North West Northern Cape Gauteng KwaZulu-Natal Free State Western Cape 33% 33% 29% 27% 60% 43% 42% 39% 38% 67% 67% 71% 73% 40% 57% 58% 61% 62% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% * Rounded off Female Male 50

57 Municipality positions* per province: 2014 & *: : Gauteng North West Limpopo Mpumalanga Northern Cape Free State KwaZulu-Natal Western Cape Eastern Cape *Including: full time + part-time + vacant + managerial positions 51

58 Province Employment by type* of municipality : 2014 & 2015 Type of municipality Metros Districts Locals Total 2014* * * * 2015 Western Cape Eastern Cape Northern Cape Free State KwaZulu-Natal North West Gauteng Mpumalanga Limpopo South Africa *Including: full time + part-time + vacant + managerial positions 52

59 Municipal staff vacancy rates by province: ,3% (41 303) of municipal posts throughout the country are vacant Northern Cape 15,9% Gauteng 10,8% North West 19,4% Free State 25.6% Limpopo 18,4% Mpumalanga 12,4% KwaZulu-Natal 9,2% Western Cape 10,3% Eastern Cape 17,6% 53

60 Vacancy rates in ALL MUNICIPALITIES per department: 2015 Environmental protection Health Finance & administration Sport & recreation 10% 11% 9% 23% 13% vacancy rate in all departments 20% Electricity 18% 16% Road transport Waste water management 11% Waste management 12% 11% 12% 14% Community & Social services Excludes managerial positions & other. Public safety Water 54

61 Vacancy rates in District municipalities per department: 2015 Excludes managerial positions & other. Community & Social services Water Waste management 11% 8% 1% 41% 13% vacancy rate in all departments Electricity 37% Environmental protection 24% 18% Sport & recreation Road transport Waste water management 13% Finance & administration 13% 16% Health 18% Public safety 55

62 Vacancy rates in Metropolitan municipalities per department: 2015 Waste water management Excludes managerial positions & other. Environmental protection 4% 28% 20% Electricity Sport & recreation Public safety 7% 5% 10% vacancy rate in all departments 11% 10% Water Road transport Finance & administration 7% Community & Social services 7% 8% Health 10% Waste management 56

63 Vacancy rates in Local municipalities per department: 2015 Excludes managerial positions & other. Waste management 13% 36% Health 28% Environmental protection Waste water management Sport & recreation 14% 13% 18% vacancy rate in all departments 24% 21% Road transport Public safety 16% Finance & administration Water 16% 21% Electricity 21% Community & Social services 57

64 Results Survey date is October to November 2015

65 Background There are five types of Municipalities in KZN Type A1 Type B1 Type B2 Type B3 Type B4

66 Municipal Infrastructure Investment Framework (MIIF) used to distinguish Municipalities TYPE A : 1 MUNICIPALITY 1 Metropolitan municipalities (metros) TYPE B1: 3 MUNICIPALITIES TYPE B2: 6 MUNICIPALITIES 6 3 Secondary cities, local municipalities with the largest budgets Local municipalities with a large town as core TYPE B3: 13 MUNICIPALITIES 13 Local municipalities with small towns, relatively small population, significant proportion of urban population but with no large town as core TYPE B4: 28 MUNICIPALITIES 28 Local municipalities which are mainly rural with communal tenure and with, at most, one or two small towns in their area

67 Background in terms of service delivery Kzn has shown progressive improvements over time which includes water, sanitation and electricity amongst others and this has resulted in the B4 Municipalities reducing head count poverty the greatest

68 Context: KZN Service Delivery Progress Access to piped water Electricity for lighting Sanitation 76% 87% 82% 76% 69% 51% Source GHS 2014

69 Context: Poverty headcount by municipality (South African multidimensional Poverty index (SAMPI)

70 Poverty headcount by municipality (SAMPI)

71 Reductions in intensity and Headcount Poverty headcount by municipality (SAMPI) SAMPI 2011 SAMPI 2001

72 Drivers of Poverty in KZN 2011 (SAMPI) Unemployment Years of Schooling Sanitation Water Heating Dwelling Cooking Lighting Assets School Attendance Child Mortality 3% 2% 8% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 5% 15% 35% Strong linkage between years of schooling and unemployment

73 Inequality has remained high especially amongst the Blacks with a gini that dropped marginally from 0.53 to 0.51 Inequality amongst Indians has declined overtime from a gini of 0.53 to 0.46 Amongst Whites the gini is low showing more equality with a gini that dropped from 0.39 to 0.37

74 Significant variations in inequality by population group Note that Colored population Numbers too small in KZN to make conclusive determination on inequality trends Gini-coefficient: KwaZulu- Natal KZN Coloured* Black African Indian/Asian White KwaZulu Natal Black African Coloured Indian/Asian White *Small sample size for Coloured persons in KZN province may influence figure provided

75 in real life circumstances have rapidly increased Yet despite this level of change the Level of satisfaction with overall performance of Kwazulu-Natal provincial government shows surprising results Now the Results follow

76 36% Dissatisfaction with overall performance of KwaZulu-Natal provincial government 31% Somewhat Satisfied with overall performance of KwaZulu-Natal provincial government 33% Outright Satisfaction with overall performance of KwaZulu-Natal provincial government

77 Satisfaction rates are similar across age and Sex However marked differences in the ratings by population group, education level, income level and district

78 Outright Satisfaction with overall performance of provincial government differs by Population Group but colored population numbers too few to be conclusive Coloured 48.0% Satisfaction of Performance of Provincial Government White 35.7% Black African 32.5% Indian/Asian 31.1%

79 Changes in ranking of population groups when viewed from dissatisfaction perspective Outright Dissatisfaction with overall performance of provincial government Dissatisfaction of Performance of Provincial Government Black African 37.6% White 32.4% Indian/Asian 20.1% Coloured 16.2%

80 Lower Educational attainment linked with lower rates of outright satisfaction Outright Satisfaction with performance of provincial government by educational level Certificate with Matric 36% Completed Matric 33% Some High School 34% Some Primary 30% No Education 28%

81 Outright satisfaction with performance of provincial government by Income 50% level 45% Those Households with the least income show the least outright satisfaction More than twice as likely to be satisfied than low income earners 40% 42% 40% 44% 42% 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 21% 26% 31% 34% 31% 33% 34% 33% 34% 10% 5% 0% R1 - R2400 R2401- R6000 R R12000 R R18000 R R30000 R R42000 R R54000 R R72000 R R96000 R R R R R R R Annual Household Income

82 Locality is also a key differentiator in rates of satisfaction Different municipalities have differing abilities to serve the citizens given based on financial, technical and management resources

83 Outright satisfaction with performance of provincial government by municipality Outright satisfaction % % % % % Areas with higher outright satisfaction with overall performance of provincial government more dispersed

84 Outright dissatisfaction with performance of provincial government by municipality Outright dissatisfaction % % % % % Evidence of clustering with regards to outright dissatisfaction with overall performance of provincial government

85 Outright dissatisfaction with performance of provincial government by Municipality Outright Dissatisfaction % % % % %! Many of the most Outright Dissatisfied areas are governed by coalition

86 Municipal Type Outright satisfaction with performance of provincial government by Municipal Status B1 Despite more resources Ethekwini (only type A municipality) does not rank as high 45% B2 37% A 34% B4 27% B3 23% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50% Outright Satisfaction

87

88 Outright Dissatisfaction is particularly apparent in umkhanyakude, Zululand and uthukela districts Where nearly 7 out of every 10 respondents reported that they are dissatisfied with the overall performance of their local municipality.

89 Perceived importance of municipal services and programmes

90 What are the top three priority areas?

91 KZN Citizens Priority Areas by population group! For All Population Groups Job Creation is the Main Priority Black African #1 #1 Job Creation #2 Provision Housing #3 Provision Housing Coloured #1 #1 Job Creation Education & skills #2 Poverty eradication Development #3 Indian/ Asian #1 #1 Job Creation #2 Crime prevention #3 Fighting corruption White #1 #1 Job Creation #2 Poverty eradication #3 Fighting corruption

92 Ratings of performance of KZN Provincial Government in selected areas

93 Performance Of KZN Provincial Government in selected areas Overall 62.6% of KZN citizens were satisfied* with the provincial government in providing basic education Providing healthcare and maintaining provincial roads also ranked relatively higher performance ratings at around 50% satisfaction rating * Satisfied rating is based on Good, Very Good or Excellent responses

94 Performance Of KZN Provincial Government in selected areas 49.1% Of KZN citizens ranked provincial government as poor in eliminating fraud and corruption Promoting accountable government and enhancing entrepreneurship and SMME were also ranked relatively poorly

95 Municipal services and programmes viewed as critically Important Water 52% Electricity Clinics Sanitation Housing 40% 39% 36% 34% More than 50% view Water as critically important Percentage Critically Important

96 What are the satisfaction rates, of services that are viewed as critically important by type of municipality?

97 Outright Satisfaction with services provided Affordable Housing ranks lowest amongst all MIIF categories High Satisfaction with Electricity services almost universal B3 and B4 Municipality have particular concerns with Quality of water provision Type A Type B1 Type B2 Type B3 Type B4-10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Percentage Outright Satisfied

98 Poverty headcount by municipality (SAMPI) Mapping the poverty headcount by Municipality Eastern Cape (SAMPI) 3

99 Poverty headcount by municipality (SAMPI) 4

100 Poverty headcount by municipality (SAMPI) 5

101 Economic activity Living standar d Unemployment Assets Dwelling Sanitation Water Cooking Heating Lighting School attendance Education Years of schooling Health Child mortality Poverty drivers in South Africa are multidimensi onal Men Total Women Unemployment rate Unemployment is now the major driver of poverty in the country

102 Unit data for all 278 municipalities for 2014 and 2015 is available on the Stats SA website (or on request) Technical queries: Mr Malibongwe Mhemhe (Cell: Office: ) Dr Patrick Naidoo (Cell: Office: ) Thank you 58