Background: Set up for hope - the spread of the coronavirus (Covid-19) health pandemic has, unsurprisingly, received saturation news coverage and been portrayed as the worst global crisis since World War 2. South Africa was initially applauded for responding quickly and comprehensively to the spread of the pandemic, including stopping international travel, declaring a National State of Disaster being, and announcing a lock down of the economy except for essential services. Frustrations have grown about the social and economic impacts of the prolonged lock down, along with concerns regarding the government’s lack of transparency around its response.
by Nick Hamer Researcher
This article focuses on the experiences of communities where the development of infrastructure and service delivery of water and sanitation has been neglected for years. The realities of trying to catch up on decades of neglect have become more apparent as the government clumsily rolls out emergency services. Water and sanitation activists have appreciated seeing glimmers of hope in their longstanding struggles for basic rights, with water and sanitation being prioritised as part of governments’ Covid-19 response.
A global wake-up call from the North bodes ill for the South - The shortcomings in many European countries, and later the USA, showed the destructive potential of Covid-19. This led to a growing realisation that if Covid-19 takes root in our densely populated and poorly serviced informal areas, South Africa could face a massive health crisis, that could overwhelm our under-resourced public health system and potentially leave tens of thousands dead. The possible impact of such a scenario was graphically illustrated in horrific scenes from South America of bodies piling up in the streets of Manaus in Brazil and Guayaquil in Ecuador. Here death rates shot up to 5 times the usual rates, with clinics, hospitals, morgues, and cemeteries quickly overrun.
A particularly worrying reality in South Africa was the staggeringly obvious realisation that the campaign to wash hands and keep surfaces clean to minimise the spread of the virus would mean that people would actually need access to water and soap. The absence of such basic fundamentals for masses of the population is a reminder of how far South Africa remains behind in addressing the gross inequalities in society. Only 65% of households have reliable access to water and in some municipalities, the figure is as low as 10%.
How is the government response to Covid-19 different? - Poor and working-class communities have faced public health crises before, indeed many live in a continuous public health crisis. Research carried out by Western Cape Water Caucus (WCWC) members found that people living near the polluted Kuils River faced a high risk of contracting life-threatening diseases, such as dysentery and E-Coli, and now Covid-19 which not only causes painful symptoms, it also means long term harm to health.
CoRect Project
THE AIM OF THE COMMUNITY RESILIENCE IN CAPE TOWN (CORECT) PROJECT WAS TO CONDUCT A STUDY THAT WOULD INFORM WCWC’S WORK TO IMPROVE LIVING CONDITIONS IN COMMUNITIES, AND FOR ITS MEMBERS TO LEARN HOW TO DO CITIZEN SCIENCE.
Economically, residents have to pay for healthcare and cleaning/buying of water, as well as the loss of jobs and income due to sickness. Within this context, it is important to understand why this crisis has warranted some swift attempts by the government to actually deal with water and sanitation issues, and start delivering.
The simplest explanation is that when the President and government ministers received the initial projections that hundreds of thousands could die from the pandemic, there was a realisation that drastic action would be necessary. Perhaps this crisis was especially defining because, at least initially, there was a realisation that the virus does not respect the invisible boundaries and physical walls we have erected between rich and poor areas like Alexandra and Sandton in Gauteng province. In other words, there was a sense that ALL South Africans would be ‘in this together,’ which is markedly different to the other ongoing public health crises that working-class communities face.
Regardless of the reasons, there was a strange sense that politicians had suddenly noticed the multiple crises that people live in every day and felt an urgent need to respond to many of these issues. The response to the pandemic initially led to a rush of central government proclamations to ‘de-densify’ informal settlements, re-locate the homeless, supply water services. After years of lackluster performance and failures around water and sanitation, there was suddenly some hope that this could become a defining moment to ensure that the right of universal access to basic water and sanitation becomes a reality.
Did government urgency translate to delivery? - Over 3 months later into lockdown, there is an opportunity to reflect on how meaningful the interventions around water and sanitation have been. Next up we briefly look at the impact of the government’s responses around water and sanitation.
Covid-19 water and sanitation responses – the results so far
Water tank distribution - the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) announced prior to lockdown stating that thousands of water tanks would be distributed across the country to communities that had been identified as facing water shortages. Below is a timeline of announcements from DWS that detailed their response.
On 16 March it was announced that the DWS would: “…ensure that rural areas and informal settlements are provided with water tanks and standpipes, to increase access to water for residents. The Department of Water and Sanitation will also provide water tanks and sanitizers in public spaces including taxi ranks, train and bus stations, and other areas where people congregate.”
On 24 March it was announced that just over 2000 communities had been identified: “The high-risk areas which require our immediate interventions are: - public areas with limited or no access to water and sanitation services, - overcrowded settlements (inclusive of hostels and inner-city areas), - informal settlements, - rural settlements and water-scarce towns”.
The impression was originally given that the communities had already been identified and that water would be available in these affected communities by the start of lockdown. However, there was no comprehensive information regarding which communities had been identified, how they were identified, nor when the tanks etc would be delivered. It gradually became clearer that the rollout of the proposed water infrastructure was much slower than originally indicated and that there were problems being encountered.
A challenge around the delivery was noted on 30 March by Deputy Minister Mahlobo at a meeting with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs - COGTA: “The water tankering in our communities is a temporary relief and is by no way for sale. There is also a growing concern for the vandalism of water infrastructure by certain individuals with the understanding that the government will use water tanker trucks as a substitution” remarked Mahlobo saying this phenomenon is being used by some for financial gains.”
Communication in April provided the following numbers regarding the delivery of tanks and tankers in various provinces. On 26 April it was announced that: “To date, a total of 4775 water tanks have been delivered to various communities and 3074 of those have been installed.” It is worth highlighting that this was an enormous undertaking by the DWS, but in the following weeks, it became increasingly difficult to understand the impact of the programme on the ground.
Communication, challenges, and change - After May there was far less detailed information about where water tanks and other infrastructure was actually being delivered, as well as statements that added to the confusion, rather than making things clearer. On 5 May DWS Minister Sisulu released a statement titled ‘Stop Cutting Water Supply at night’: “I appeal to municipalities who are guilty of this practice to switch on the water supply immediately. This is not the time to be punishing people for failing to pay their water bills. We must all rally around the government’s call to wash our hands frequently in order for us to defeat the scourge of COVID-19.”
This statement was unclear as to the actual problem being referred to. On the one hand, it speaks to individual users and the issue of unpaid bills being the reason for the cuts, in which case a municipal official would go to that individual property to cut the water supply. However, the cutting of supplies at night implies whole areas having water supply cut making the connection to billing is unclear. Often municipalities cut water at night to ensure reservoirs are full to supply areas in the morning. After previously sending a lot of press releases regarding the supply of water tanks, the emphasis had suddenly shifted to other matters, which gives the impression that the focus of the tank roll out programme was dropped. Challenges in delivering tanks and tankers were discussed in some detail in a DWS Media Briefing on 20 May. It highlighted issues around insufficient tankers being available in the Eastern Cape or tanks not being installed. It noted that ‘procurement problems needed to be sorted out with the implementing entity, Amatola Water.
On the 20th of May, DWS reported that “17 962 tanks have been delivered across the country, with 11 978 of these installed and that a total of 1 299 tankers (trucks) have been delivered to ensure the tanks remain in use.” This indicates that the tankers were supplied to ensure that the tanks would be regularly topped up with water. On 23 May it was suddenly announced that the Amatola and Lepelle Northern Water Boards were being placed under administration amidst allegations of irregular procurement processes. Clearly it is not helpful to suddenly have to deal with such challenges in the middle of the Covid-19 response.
Reflections on the water tanks implementation - Initially there was some confusion about where and when tanks were going to be distributed and installed. Many communities wanted to know if they were going to be delivered to their areas or assumed that these provisions were going to be made at the beginning of lock down. It might be reasonable to say the expectation that this programme would be concluded within a few days was unrealistic. Nonetheless, this was the expectation that was given, which left people in informal settlements and rural areas especially anxious about the impact of Covid-19, as they were simultaneously being told that water was urgently needed, but that it was still not available.
Remarkably, on 29 April, the Daily Maverick reported that Minister Sisulu admitted that water tanks had been distributed to many areas without the provision for their installation or for there to be water to fill the tanks. The reason given for non-installation, was that hardware stores were closed during the lock down. It is extremely disturbing that government can roll out such a massive response, without having thought through key logistical arrangements and leaving the intended recipients vulnerable to the virus.
A particular challenge of the mass roll-out of water tanks and tankers is that it is extremely difficult to find out how much impact the programme has actually had. It is not clear which 2000 communities were serviced, how often tanks were filled, how many tanks were never properly installed etc. To try to get some idea the piece below reflects on the experiences of the South Africa Water Caucus (SAWC ) members of the programme, in relation to their community needs.
Experiences of Water Caucus members
The SAWC is a national network of community based organisations and institutions that focus on engaging with water related challenges at local, provincial and national levels.
Western Cape Water Caucus (WCWC) members reported that the mistrust of government played out during the crisis and contributed to the difficulty of ensuring effective communication in that context. Some communities in Cape Town chased away water tankers, as rumours had spread that the provincial government (City of Cape Town) might be using them to infect them with the virus. There was also confusion as to why water tankers were not being deployed in all areas, regardless of whether taps were available on streets, in houses or not. These are examples that show the dangers of having a democracy where people are used to their voices being routinely ignored.
Nonetheless the crisis has also provided numerous opportunities for civil society voices to be raised and responses made that demonstrate the ability of people to best know how to respond to challenges faced. For example, area based Community Action Networks (CANs) have been established across much of Cape Town and in many instances have helped fill the gap where the state has been unable to ensure access to food for hundreds of thousands of people, as well as in mobilising around water and sanitation issues by transporting and providing water and sanitiser products. Water caucus members joined local CANs as part of the response to the Covid-19 crisis, as well as self- organising to assist people struggling with access to food in their own communities. The C19 Peoples’ Coalition was another space where civil society groups came together to coordinate responses to the challenges posed by Covid-19. EMG signed the founding document and became a member of the Water working group. .
Eastern Cape Water Caucus (ECWC) members reported on their experiences in dealing with water provision in the rural context sharing that most villages in the Amathole District Municipality did not have running water before and during lockdown. On 16 April, Ntsika Mateta from the ECWC reported to New Frame that: “Nxopho, Bhele and Gobozane villages are without running water and no trucks have been sent out yet. Ward 4 of the Raymond Mhlaba [Local] Municipality has been without water in the past few months due to unavailability of diesel to pump water from the reservoirs. We did follow up, inquiring about the issue. They say they have no feasible plan to offer water trucks to communities and also no water relief for small-scale farmers.” Mateta also reported to EMG that there was frustration as communities only receive information from municipalities when villagers ask critical questions. Municipalities were not seen as taking responsibility to engage villages around why they don’t have water, or what will be done to address the problem.
In a letter to the Eastern Cape Premier Mabuyane the ECWC joined a coalition of civil society in demanding water justice in the face of the following situation. “The promised JoJo tanks have not been delivered … in the OR Tambo district barely 6% of homes have piped water, while less than one tenth of households have flush toilets. The district is home to almost one-and-a-half million people – two-thirds of whom are under the age of 25. Yet most young people are unemployed. Only 18% of residents have finished school. Close to 60% of households are headed by women, many of whom are pensioners.”
Farming during Covid-19
Small scale farmers in some parts of the Eastern Cape reported that they were adapting to how they manage their water needs. The outbreak of Covid-19 meant that many people in rural areas became scared, causing them to be extra-cautious about keeping water for domestic use, as they wanted to ensure sufficient water was available for hand washing. Livestock practices were adapted, with farmers travelling with their livestock to find small dams for drinking and cutting back on dipping.
Crop and livestock farmers reported feeling left to fend for themselves while needed to comply with lockdown regulations. One of the greatest concern was the lack of water relief for small scale farmers in most villages. People were unclear if agricultural production as an ‘essential service’ applied only to big companies and not to small scale village farmers. They were also fearful that they would be arrested if they went about their farming business as usual, such as having agricultural meetings. This meant that small farmers were unable to sell their crops during the first few weeks of the lockdown.
Reports from the Eastern Cape highlighted that the numbers of tanks supplied was far too few to meet the needs of the communities, with many areas not receiving tanks, despite their need for tanks. Even where tanks were supplied there was a sense that they were not enough and would remain empty for several days until they were re-filled.
In the Western Cape, water caucus responded to water shortages in different ways: they were pleased that engagements helped ensure that water tanks were supplied in informal settlements like Mfuleni. In other informal settlements, such as Green Park the City of Cape Town fixed or installed taps for people to access water. Joe Slovo area reported that they had few water related issues, however members in Du Noon reported that they didn’t see any changes in water service delivery. The collaboration and support of CAN groups working together was also seen as a positive development during the crisis.
In Beacon Valley, an areas in Mitchell’s Plain, caucus members were forced to fetch water from stand pipes when water was cut off on their properties, despite government promises of no water cutoffs during the Covid-19 lock down.
People also assisted one another by delivering water to sick and elderly neighbours that could not fetch water themselves for their basic needs, including taking essential chronic medication. Backyard dwellers (people who rent the backyard space from the household), were extremely concerned about dealing with water insecurity, and had expectations that government would ensure that restrictions would be lifted during the pandemic. People adapted to the situation by doing their best to share the 350 liters a day allowance with neighbours and by going to standpipes to get water for others.
Sanitation
Concerns around sanitation have been ongoing during the pandemic, with many communities being frustrated that sanitation infrastructure remained inadequate. This was the case in Joe Slovo, Du Noon and Mfuleni. In Mfuleni key issues are that pipes on toilets are often broken, which leads to raw sewage going onto the street. Leaking sewage pipes also mean that raw sewage has been going into people’s houses.
BROKEN TOILET PIPES - Mfuleni, Cape Town
SEWAGE IN THE STREET - Mfuleni, Cape Town
CONCLUSION - one step forward, two steps back?
EMG has been extremely concerned at the vulnerability of communities to Covid-19. Although the additional delivery of water has been welcomed, it is still far from clear that sufficient has been done to ensure that people can actually wash their hands as much as is needed. EMG also passionately beliefs that, given support, community activists can build the solutions that will actually work in their context.
Clearly South Africa faced a sudden and unexpected health emergency and the swift response was broadly appreciated. Likewise, the realisation that the delivery of water was especially urgent to poor rural and informal city areas was welcomed as being a vital component of the government response to the pandemic. It is however and indictment on government that it took a global pandemic to realise that the vast majority of the population were continuously exposed to unhealthy and unsanitary living conditions,
It does seem that that the response in providing better water supplies to informal areas. The circumstance of Disaster Management meant that the usual legal bureaucratic obstacles to delivering water to where it is urgently needed, could be sidestepped. Experiences from Cape Town indicate that water tankers have been regularly distributing water to informal areas. It is far less apparent that the scale of the intervention in rural areas has been of a sufficient scale in relation to the challenges faced, nor that the interventions have worked as effectively as anticipated.
An underlying failure is the inability or unwillingness of government departments to be consistent in providing information to show the successes and failures of their interventions. There appears to be an absence of basic M&E procedures for these processes, which makes it difficult to properly assess their impact and critically, to be able to learn what works well and what failed in order to improve future interventions. In this instance, Rand Water is the implementing agency for the programme, but there is no information from Rand Water that tracks the implementation of the programme. It appears that these processes are expected to take place behind closed doors and there is no perceived value in letting citizens engage with the programme.
These failures also play out in inconsistent and uncoordinated communication. Instead of information on the delivery of water tanks being centrally available, DWS has relied on issuing occasional press statements that include some of these figures. The information that is released appears to be reporting on whatever issues are on the mind of the Minister or Deputy Minister when visiting a particular area or dealing with a particular issue at hand. This means that it is extremely difficult to track what has been happening and to understand what the main priorities and challenges have been.
The water response to the pandemic, as in other areas such as education and healthcare, emphasises the devastating impact of massive inequality in South Africa, the impact of Neoliberal Economic policies and the scourge of corruption on service delivery. The absence of basic levels of water and sanitation for millions of South Africans has been highlighted because of the pandemic. The ongoing impacts of corruption and maladministration have been seen as major obstacles to ensure an effective response. These issues have been clear for SAWC members for many years and a paradigm shift is required in South Africa to meet these basic rights.
Time is running out for South Africa to ensure that such gross inequalities are addressed. The impacts of Climate Change are progressively exacerbating underlying water scarcity and inequality. Future disasters, such as drought, fires and further pandemics are also increasingly likely because of Climate Change. This means that it is imperative that South Africa is far better prepared to deal with these challenges.