Introduction:
The purpose of this discussion document is to critically assess the progress in respect of the realisation of economic and social rights in the context of South Africa’s commitment to meeting the Millennium Development Goals...
The N2 Gateway Housing project has illustrated the great need for proper consultation and communication with communities. When a project of such a sensitive nature is initiated, communities need to be assured that they are not being marginalised like they were in the past. This assurance should preferably be made by the Department of Housing directly and not via a managing or development agent.
When deadlines pass and promises are not delivered on, communities need to be reassured that projects are still on track but just delayed due to certain reasons. Finally, communities need to know that they will eventually have proper shelter in which to live and bring up their families and it is the responsibility of the Department of Housing to consult with communities, work out options based on their income and needs. The Department should then provide surety to the communities that delivery promises will be met.
As explained by Advocate Geoff Budlender in Jordon “too many people in local, provincial and national government think that shacks are a problem and the solution is to demolish them, but one has to see shacks in a different light. They are a symptom of other problems – they are not themselves the problem.” And again, rapid service delivery should not take precedence over quality service delivery as it is evident that this creates additional problems and distrust between communities, government departments and service providers.
Working Paper: ESR Unit: Research, Documentation & Policy Analysis Programme (December, 2008)
The purpose of this discussion document is to critically assess the progress in respect of the realisation of economic and social rights in the context of South Africa’s commitment to meeting the Millennium Development Goals...
The N2 Gateway Housing project has illustrated the great need for proper consultation and communication with communities. When a project of such a sensitive nature is initiated, communities need to be assured that they are not being marginalised like they were in the past. This assurance should preferably be made by the Department of Housing directly and not via a managing or development agent.
When deadlines pass and promises are not delivered on, communities need to be reassured that projects are still on track but just delayed due to certain reasons. Finally, communities need to know that they will eventually have proper shelter in which to live and bring up their families and it is the responsibility of the Department of Housing to consult with communities, work out options based on their income and needs. The Department should then provide surety to the communities that delivery promises will be met.
As explained by Advocate Geoff Budlender in Jordon “too many people in local, provincial and national government think that shacks are a problem and the solution is to demolish them, but one has to see shacks in a different light. They are a symptom of other problems – they are not themselves the problem.” And again, rapid service delivery should not take precedence over quality service delivery as it is evident that this creates additional problems and distrust between communities, government departments and service providers.
Working Paper: ESR Unit: Research, Documentation & Policy Analysis Programme (December, 2008)
No comments:
Post a Comment