unknown author•9 months ago Comments on City of Cape Town Councillor’s & City Officials’ Entertainment Policy on 30/11/2024 1. Background 1.1. In terms of the CCT document “Councillors Code of Conduct” reference is made to the Municipal Structures Act 117 of 1998, as amended by Schedule 7 of Act No. 3 of 2021, with effect from 01 November 2021, the Preamble to Schedule 7 in defining the Code of Conduct for Councillors States: Councillors are elected to represent local communities on municipal councils, to ensure that municipalities have structured mechanisms of accountability to local communities, and to meet the priority needs of communities by providing services equitable, effectively and sustainable within the means of the municipality. In fulfilling this role, councillors must be accountable to local communities and report back at least quarterly to constituencies on council matters, including the performance of the municipality in terms of established indicators. In order to ensure that councillors fulfil their obligations to their communities, and support the achievement by the municipality of its objectives set out in Section 19, the following Code of Conduct is established.” 1.2. From the foregoing “Code of Conduct”, reference to Councillor’s having to advance the City’s working relationship with significant external persons is not a requirement of their election manifesto. 1.3. Further the Section 12 of the Code of Conduct for Councillors restricts a councillor to non-interference in management of administration of the Council. Therefore, Councillors have minimal authority or standing in regard to City Matters. Other departments or Committee’s such as Supply Chain Management and the “Ease of Doing Business Portfolio Committee” are considered to have appropriate authority and direct relationships with significant external persons, than that of Councillors. 2. General Comment 2.1. This proposed policy is not supported. 2.2. Councillors are required to be accountable to local communities in regard the communities’ needs and the performance of the municipalities in regard to service delivery. 2.3. The proposal that the Councillors are tasked with the duty of entertaining significant external persons in order to advance the City’s working relationship is an additional duty to the duties of their election manifesto. 2.4. The City already has a number of bodies which advance the City’s relationships with significant external persons. Therefore, it is considered to be unnecessary for Councillor’s to perform a duty which is already performed by others. 2.5. Councillors should rather use the time dispensed in entertainment to improve their performance in attending to caring for their constituents and the conditions in their respective Wards. 2.6. It is viewed that should this proposal be instituted in the City of Cape Town it will then be proposed by other Municipalities within the Western Cape. 2.7. The return or advantage to the City on the expenditure for the entertainment is unknown. It may possibly be nil or a minimal amount. Therefore, it will not be cost effective. 2.8. It is not a good idea. It is a temptation for abuse. It is well known that irregularities occur within the majority of municipal councils. 2.9. In addition, Councillors will be working over-time for which they will request to be compensated; 2.10. Councillors will view this as an extra task in their job description and possibly request extra remuneration. 2.11. How will the proposal achieve the maintaining & increasing support for City Partnerships and enhancing efficient and effective operations or improved service delivery; Is this not the job of the Heads of the various departments? Would rather set up objective of improving the efficiency in the various departments, who appear to include some officials lacking understanding of their functions and are simply unmotivated. These officials are deemed as “dead wood”, who should be dispensed. 2.12. This Proposal has been poorly advertised. Newspaper advertisement did not say where proposed policy could be sourced. Advert did not advise of closure date for submitting comments 2.13. Nor did the Advertisement refer to the CCT Webpage item “Have your Say”. 3. The Text of the Policy 3.1. The policy name should be modified to read, “Councillor’s and City Official’s Entertainment Policy”. 3.2. Sub-Section 5.1 - The interpretation of “significant external persons” needs to be specific and clearly defined. 3.3. Sub-Section 6.1.1 (c) Community Engagement and partnership programme should not be interpretated as entertainment but rather as public meetings or community forums. 3.4. Sub- Section 9- Regulatory context 3.4.1.Add: Events By-Law; 3.4.2.Add: Cost Containment Policy (Policy No. 60027) – Section 6,7 ,15, 18 and 19; 3.4.3.Add: Remuneration of Public Office Bearers Act,1998 (act 20 of 1998); 3.4.4.Add: Consequence Management Policy (Policy Number 59392); 3.4.5.Add: Municipal Code of Conduct for Municipal Staff Members; 3.4.6.Guest Accommodation Policy; and 3.4.7.Add: CCT System of Delegations- page 136 to page 138. 3.5. Sub-Section 10.4 to Sub-Section 10. 11- Change numbering to 10.3.1 and 10.3.9 3.6. Sub.10.12.2-Change 10 years to 20 years. 10 years is a short period. A 10- year period will increase the total cost to be borne by Council. This is wasteful expenditure. 3.7. Sub-Section 10.12.3- Delete this Sub-section entirely. The official is paid a salary, so to include the cost of the official is a duplication of payment by the Council 3.8. Add New Sub-Section 10.3. 9- In addition to the requirements of 10.6.2 (change to 10.3.3.2), the use of budgeted funds is to be limited to: Executive Mayor R240 000 Deputy Manager R200 000 Speaker R150 000 Mayco Member R150 000 Chief Whip R150 000 Councillor R80 000 4. CONCLUSION 4.1. This proposed policy is not supported as explained it is unnecessary and will also be abused. Submission of Comments by: David Byers Email: davidbyers225@gmail.com. Cellphone: 082 304 0238 Date of Submission: 30/11/2024
