Infrastructure

1. (a) There was a commitment to relocate 75 beneficiaries from Kanana to the Forest Village Housing Project. My department fulfilled the commitment to relocate 74 out of 75 beneficiaries from Kanana, prioritising elderly applicants and applicants living with disabilities, who were on the approved list. Between 17 July 2020 and 24 February 2021, 48 elderly (60 years and older) and 26 disabled beneficiaries were relocated. On two days of relocations, one elderly person was not available, and it was alleged that she is in Eastern Cape. The Councillor and community leaders were reminded, in several meetings and via email, to request for a withdrawal and replacement of the approved beneficiary. The Councillor and PSC leaders were further requested to provide evidence that the approved beneficiary in the Eastern Cape is withdrawing her approval. The Department is still in search of the said beneficiary.

(b) There were more than 75 people profiled for a potential opportunity in Forest Village to allow the community to provide public comment on those who may not be deemed to be a priority. The commitment made was to allocate 75 housing opportunities to elderly residents and people living with disabilities in Kanana. My Department fulfilled the commitment to relocate the beneficiaries with the exception of the 1 beneficiary that cannot be traced. Refer to (a) for details.

2. (a) There are many beneficiaries approved for housing opportunities in Kanana but who will not be placed in Forest Village and will instead form part of the Airport Precinct Development. Kanana is 1 of 8 informal settlements that form part of the Airport Precinct Project and the only reason Kanana relocation is prioritised, is to clear the landfill sites that need to be rehabilitated to unlock the commencement of the Airport Precinct Project. The 800 housing opportunities in Forest Village allocated for Southern Corridor Projects have been achieved and there are no more housing opportunities available.

(b) The approved beneficiaries will be allocated housing opportunities as and when opportunities within the Airport Precinct Project becomes available. The commencement of the project is dependent on the availability of two identified land parcels which are currently being developed to accommodate the residents of Kanana who need to be relocated to allow the land rehabilitation process to commence. It is not practical at this stage, to provide timelines on those projects as they could experience construction delays.

3.  It is incorrect to state that the commitment has not been honoured. My department allocated 75 housing opportunities in its Forest Village housing project to relocate elderly residents and people living with disabilities in Kanana. My department fulfilled the commitment to prioritise the relocation of the 75 beneficiaries with the exception of the 1 beneficiary that cannot be traced refer (1)(a)) above.

(b) My department, through the Project Manager, communicated with the approved beneficiaries on three different occasions. My department re-iterated on several occasions that the approval of a housing subsidy does not necessarily mean that the beneficiary will immediately be allocated a housing opportunity. The beneficiary priority criteria are catergorised in the following order:

1. Elderly (60 years and older).
2. People living with disability.
3. Child-headed households.
4. Applicants longest on the Housing Demand Database; and
5. Younger applicants (18 – 59 years, from eldest to youngest)

All the Kanana approved beneficiaries who were profiled and not allocated a housing opportunity, were outside the 75 approved beneficiaries that are on the priority list of elderly and disabled residents. They also fall into the 5th category indicated above.