13-06-2025
Department blame game leaves SANDF personnel in crumbling facilities
South Africa's military infrastructure is on the verge of total collapse, an MP said in the wake of a joint meeting of two parliamentary oversight committees.
The high-stakes meeting of parliament's portfolio committee on defence and military veterans (PCDMV) and portfolio committee on public works and infrastructure (PCPWI) this week laid bare deep institutional dysfunction and mistrust between the department of defence (DoD) and department of public works and infrastructure (DPWI).
The session aimed to address the stalled devolution of infrastructure maintenance functions from the DPWI to the DoD and the growing crisis in defence facility management across the country.
The meeting was called in response to security concerns and service failures at military bases, many of which are more than a century old and suffering from chronic neglect.
Members heard that some bases house live ammunition depots and sensitive military equipment yet are surrounded by informal settlements due to land invasions that the DPWI, as the legal custodian of state property, has failed to respond to in a timely manner.
'We are sitting on a powder keg'
Chairperson of the PCDMV Dakota Legoete opened the hearing with a stark warning. He said some military bases house ammunition depots and are subject to land grabs by people residing next to these bases. It becomes very difficult to always consult the public works department to say there's a land grab as public works takes six months to respond and by the time they do, squatters need to be provided with alternative land because the law allows for this if they have stayed on the land for over 48 hours.
Defence readiness under fire as MPs grill Armscor over failing navy and air force contracts
MPs from across the political spectrum on Friday interrogated Armscor and the defence department about delays, underfunding and systemic risks ...
Politics
43 minutes ago
The DoD underscored that its lack of custodianship over its own bases prevents it from legally evicting trespassers or initiating critical repairs, making the situation untenable.
DPWI admits to backlogs and budget deficits
The DPWI, represented by deputy minister Sihle Zikalala and senior officials, conceded to a widespread breakdown of infrastructure delivery, pointing to years of underfunding and operational instability.
'In 2016 our budget was R17bn. Today it is R18bn. With inflation and increasing property rates, we are R9bn short of what we should have had,' said Siza Sibande, head of the Property Management Trading Entity (PMTE).
He reported a nationwide infrastructure maintenance backlog of R29bn, with R4bn directly related to defence properties. 'We are struggling with underspending, limited planning capacity and a model where the funds for projects sit with the client departments who then delay payment,' he said.
The department also revealed it was holding R4.171bn in unpaid accounts under a shared savings utility management programme, with the DoD being the largest debtor.
Frustration from defence
Vice-Adm David Maningi Mkhonto, chief of logistics in the DoD, detailed the department's efforts to reclaim control of its infrastructure portfolio, citing a 2018 directive from the standing committee on appropriations.
'The poor state of our facilities is due to DPWI's failure to deliver. Our own works capability is being rebuilt so we can take over key functions,' he said.
So far, emergency repairs and day-to-day maintenance have been devolved as of April 2024. However, rates and taxes, leases and capital projects remain under the DPWI. The DoD claims to have the professional and technical capacity to manage these, noting it has more than 1,000 trained artisans and professionals in infrastructure roles.
Deputy minister of defence Richard Mkhungo reinforced the need for departmental autonomy: 'We are a complex department with security sensitivities. Civilians managing critical infrastructure pose a risk. We do not seek superiority over DPWI, but we do seek independence where it matters.'
Committee members voice concern
Committee members delivered pointed criticism of both departments, with several voicing frustration at the repeated absence of key ministers. The failure of the minister of defence to attend or stay for the duration of crucial meetings was viewed as indicative of a broader lack of respect for parliamentary oversight.
Concerns were raised over the DPWI's track record in managing its responsibilities, with strong views that the department's repeated underperformance had put national security at risk.
The notion that the department of defence should continue relying on a landlord that struggles to maintain essential infrastructure was described as unacceptable, with the implications stretching far beyond administrative inefficiency.
Others highlighted what they saw as the real drivers behind the ongoing dispute — the competition for control over infrastructure budgets rather than a shared commitment to improving service delivery.
There was a call for departments to shift focus from internal power struggles to tangible outcomes. The handling of documentation was also criticised.
Committee members questioned why the DPWI submitted a modified version of its presentation without prior notice, suggesting this undermined transparency and accountability. Similar concerns were directed at the defence department, which introduced legal references during its briefing that were absent from the written materials, leaving members unable to scrutinise the claims properly.
Way forward: A technical working group and political oversight
Despite tensions, both departments agreed to establish a joint technical working group to review project statuses and agree on a path forward.
The DPWI proposed an 'accelerated execution model' using pre-approved contractor panels to improve turnaround times.
The DoD committed to finalising its internal infrastructure management structure by March 2026.
The committee recommended a reversal of the DoD's 2021 moratorium on new infrastructure projects, warning that failure to complete design-stage projects could lead to fruitless and wasteful expenditure.
Legoete concluded the hearing by stressing the urgency of progress. 'This is not a bureaucratic squabble. It is a national security risk. We need performance, not paper pushing — and we need it now.'
Further hearings are expected as the portfolio committees push for executive-level accountability and the resolution of a dispute that has effectively paralysed the maintenance of South Africa's military infrastructure.
DA defence and military veterans' spokesperson Chris Hattingh said in a statement after Wednesday's meeting that immediate political intervention was needed. This, because the DoD and its facilities maintenance arm — the works formation — and minister Dean Macpherson 's DPWI are in 'a destructive stand-off, paralysing infrastructure delivery'. He maintains the DoD/DPWI briefings 'laid bare this dysfunction — a complete breakdown in trust, co-ordination and accountability'.
Both sides are to blame, he says, adding years of DWPI underperformance has left defence facilities in disrepair with minister Angie Motshekga's DoD failing to settle its debts. One of these, according to Hattingh, is the more than R4bn owing for municipal services.
'In 2021 the DoD unilaterally froze all unfunded and planned infrastructure projects, citing excessive delays. The DPWI says this action wasted millions in design costs, now likely to be written off. What followed was a blame game: defence accusing public works of inefficiency and public works accusing defence of financial neglect and unilateralism,' his statement on the meeting notes.
Hattingh concluded that while departments point fingers, 'our soldiers are left to serve in dangerous, crumbling facilities. This is not just a governance failure it is a betrayal of the men and women in uniform.'
