Dojar Knowledgeable in property development, property asset management, property management, facilities management, property acquisitions and disposals and property finance. To access earlier articles, click Advanced Search and set an earlier date range. Change Sort Order Publication date latest first Publication date earliest first Headline alphabetical Author alphabetical. Maintain and update the provincial Immovable Assets register. To apply for the above position, please apply online at www. Subscriptions are available via the Creamer Media Store.
|Published (Last):||23 June 2007|
|PDF File Size:||11.49 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||18.16 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The provinces in which projects were situated were highlighted, and it was noted that specific departments, mainly the provincial departments of Health and Education, were taking over some public works functions from DPW and would henceforth be responsible for maintenance on some of their own buildings, once the necessary budget allocations had been made.
National Treasury and the DPW were interacting on the budget issues. There was an Implementation Technical Committee that was dealing with the relationships, and the Immovable Asset Life Cycle Management plans would incorporate inputs from the various departments, and implement in accordance with guidelines.
The Construction Industry Development Board, DPW and National Treasury would be conducting provincial roadshows in April , focusing on the common budget planning cycle, the allocation of budgets, and the submission of asset management plans that incorporated infrastructure plans. It was also proposed that this project should be extended to local government, although this was not included when GIAMA had been passed.
Immovable Asset Management guidelines were being implemented at provincial and national departments, where best practices on asset registers were also being promoted. The relationship with the Deeds Office in relation to surveys and vesting of State land had improved, and monthly meetings were now being held. Issues highlighted by the Committee during its oversight, relating to the Mpumalanga Provincial Department of Public Works, were also discussed.
The estimated human resources were tabled, the Amnesty Strategy had been approved and the call centre was functional.
Provinces had already vested thousands of land parcels. Members confirmed that the hotline was operating and noted that it might be extended to operate also at weekends. Members discussed the inclusion of local government, noting what had been included when public hearings were held on GIAMA before its adoption.
Members asked for a table of all properties to be given, enquired whether the DPW was completely sure about the numbers of properties, and enquired whether underground properties were included. A progress report on issues raised by the President was required. Members also enquired what had been allocated for maintenance, and what the DPW would be doing itself. He reminded Members that the issues he was reporting on had previously been raised and discussed by the Committee.
Mr Mosalo said that several matters were raised during a meeting in January. Some of these issues had a direct bearing on the Department of Public Works DPW or the Department and some related to smaller public works projects. The provinces where these projects were situated were summarised. The meeting in January had also highlighted which public works functions had been taken over by other specific departments, and whether the DPW had managed to resolve issues.
Mr Mosalo said that the two main departments who were taking over some public works functions were the Departments of Health and Education, in all of the provinces. They would in future do maintenance on buildings, where they had the budget to do so. He said that the Immovable Asset Life Cycle Management would incorporate inputs from the various departments.
It would also consider the various guidelines. Mr Mosalo said that the NT and the Construction Industry Development Board CIDB , together with DPW, would be holding a provincial road show from April , focusing on giving an outline of the common budget planning cycle, the allocation of budget, and the submission of asset management plans that would incorporate infrastructure plans.
Mr Mosalo noted that it was proposed that the project should be extended to local government. She highlighted some of the matters raised at the January meeting see attached presentation and noted that the Immovable Asset Management guidelines had been finalized, and that these were currently being implemented at provincial and national departments.
She said that the Asset Register Task Team would promote best practices in regard to asset register issues. Ms Subban also said that the DPW had improved its working relationship with the Deeds Office regarding the surveying of State land and vesting.
The two institutions now met on a monthly basis. Ms Subban also dealt with the matters that had been raised during the oversight visits by the Committee. She noted that the Mpumalanga Provincial Department of Public Works had made contact with municipalities and that they had also shared the best practice guidelines on immovable asset management. The amnesty strategy would also cover local municipalities.
Ms Subban noted that the DPW was intending to update the existing files with the latest information, and that identified buildings and structures would be linked to underlying land parcels. Ms Subban tabled the estimated human resources allocation to the Committee see attached presentation for full details and highlighted the compilation and function of the Task Team. She further noted that the Amnesty Strategy had been approved by the Minister, and that the call centre was fully functional as from 01 March The appointment of call centre operators and investigators was finalised on 28 February The Task Team would now investigate the cases that had been reported.
Ms Subban then briefly reported on the progress with the vesting plan, noting that provinces had already vested thousands of land parcels. She said that the implementation of GIAMA had reached a critical stage, and highlighted the importance of full commitment from senior management.
Discussion The Chairperson said that she had checked on the hot-line for amnesty and artisans, and confirmed that the hot-line was working between and during week days. She noted that discussions were to be held regarding the extension of the hot-line hours to include weekends. The Chairperson expressed her concern that municipalities were included when the Act was first tabled in bill form, but that these had been removed during the final stages.
Ms Lydia Bici, Acting Chief Operations Officer, Department of Public Works, said that at the policy stage there had been no public consultation, only a document that the Minister had presented to Cabinet.
She agreed that when the legislation was first tabled, it had incorporated all the spheres of government, but by the time the public hearings were held, it had been amended to include only national and provincial government. For this reason, the Portfolio Committee had not discussed local government at the time. The Department had not approached local government and had not consulted with municipalities at that time.
Mr W Doman DA sought clarity on whether the presentation was a study of each piece of legislation. Mr Mosalo said that the Bill that had been finalised by the State Law Advisors in February had related to the national and provincial levels of government.
Mr Mosalo suggested that perhaps a table could be added to the progress report to make it easier for the Committee Members to understand the position. The Chairperson wanted to know if the DPW was completely sure about the numbers of properties that had been presented in the progress report.
Ms Subban confirmed that the DPW was completely sure about these numbers. The Chairperson wanted to know if the underground properties had been included. The number of properties mentioned during the presentation were those that were to be enhanced with the programme. The Chairperson asked the DPW for a progress report on the issues that had been raised by the President.
The Chairperson also enquired when the DPW would be tabling its Strategic Plan, as well as what dates had been set for the debate. Ms Bici noted the dates for the Easter weekend, and also added that the DPW was waiting to be allocated a date for presentation of the Strategic Plan and budget. She said that the DPW would definitely provide the Committee with the requested information as soon as possible.
Mr Doman made reference to the bulleted section of the presentation, which referred to the interaction with stakeholders, and the allocation of the budget across the user department mandate. He sought further clarity on the user department mandate for maintenance. He asked what had been allocated for maintenance, what the DPW expected from the user department and what the DPW would attend to itself. Mr Mosalo said that during the preparation of a user asset management plan, one of the key areas in the plan focused on the core mandate.
At the relevant time, between July and August, the user department, the custodian department and the NT would all discuss and allocate the budget. The three parties would agree that when it came to management, particularly management of immovable assets, this would be the responsibility of the custodian department, and the budget for goods and services would go to the user department.
The meeting was adjourned.
Email this article
Government Immovable Asset Management Act 19 of 2007