2013 division of revenue billpmg-assets.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/docs/...2013 division of...

2013 Division of Revenue Bill

Joint meeting by the Standing and Select Committees on Appropriations

x

.

Presenters: Kenneth Brown, Wendy Fanoe and Steven Kenyon, Intergovernmental Relations

Branch, National Treasury – 6 March 2013

Outline

• Legal basis of the Division of Revenue Bill (DoRB)

• Responses to the recommendations by the

Standing and Select Committees on Appropriations

• Layout of the 2013 DoRB and Act

• 2013 Division of Revenue Bill

– Changes to 2012 Division of Revenue Act

• Fiscal framework

• Provincial and local government allocations

• FFC proposals related to division of revenue for

2013 MTEF and government’s response

2

Background

• Division of Revenue Bill – S214(1) of Constitution requires an Act of Parliament that sets out the

equitable division of nationally raised revenue among the 3 spheres, and

any other allocations to provinces and municipalities. The annual DoR Bill

gives effect to this section of the Constitution

• Section 76(4) of Constitution requires that DoR Bill must be tabled in NA, and go to NCOP thereafter

• Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act (MBAPRMA) impact on DOR Bill

– When budget is tabled, a report must be tabled that explains how recommendations by Parliamentary Committees on Appropriations regarding proposed division of revenue and conditional grant allocations to provinces and local government as contained in MTBPS are given effect to (or reasons why not)

• IGFR Act requires that – FFC submits 10 months before start of financial year recommendations to

Minister on division of revenue for coming budget. Government to present

Government’s response at tabling of Budget

3

.

Responses to Recommendations by

Standing and Select Committees on

Appropriations

as they relate to Division of Revenue

(provinces and local government):


and

2012 MTBPS

4

Recommendations by Standing Committee on

Appropriations on 2012 DoRB and 2012 MTBPS

Committee Recommendation Response

• 2012 Division of Revenue Bill (DoRB)

- Technical corrections be effected

to Municipal Infrastructure Grant

(MIG) of four municipalities (OR

Tambo DM; Alfred Nzo DM;

Matatiele LM and Umzimvubu LM)

• These technical errors were corrected in

the Gazette published in terms of

section 15(2) of 2012 Division of

Revenue Act

- National Department of Basic

Education (NDBE) to submit to

Parliament a progress report on

49 schools constructed under the

Accelerated Schools

Infrastructure Development

Initiative (ASIDI)

• Minister of Finance referred matter to

Minister of Basic Education

• NDBE submitted a progress report

signed by Minister of Basic Education to

Standing Committee on Appropriations

(SCOA) in July 2012 and made

presentation to SCOA on 1 Aug 2012.

Thereafter a number of further

engagements between department and

SCOA on implementation of this grant

(12 Sept; 19 Oct; 20 Feb 2013) 5

(1 of 3)

Recommendations by Standing Committee on

Appropriations on 2012 DoRB and 2012 MTBPS

Committee Recommendation

Response

- National

Department

of Health

(NDOH) to

submit to

Parliament

proposals to

address

challenges

in

misalignment

of national

and

provincial

priorities in

Health

Minister of Finance referred matter to Minister of Health

Stronger collaboration by national and provinces - • Infrastructure Unit Systems Support (IUSS) programme

(NDOH/CSIR and DBSA technical support)

• National Health Facility Audit in all 9 provinces - audit

results informs support by Facility Improvement Teams to

individual provinces

• Coordination mechanisms by NDOH to protect non-

negotiables

• NDOH increasing working with Provincial Treasuries to

ensure provincial budgets are directed towards national

health priorities

• Creation of an indirect grant (National Health Grant)

• Provincial Finance and Budget Support Unit to better

monitor and support provinces

• Implementation of NHI, including the roll-out of NHI pilots 6

(2 of 3)

Recommendations by Select Committee on

Appropriations on 2012 DoRB and 2012 MTBPS (3 of 3)

Committee

Recommendation

Response

• 2012 MTBPS - National Treasury (NT)

reports to Parliament on

the minimisation of costs

associated with employ-

ment of implementing

agents for delivery of

infrastructural programmes

• Proper management of implementing agents key

to ensuring that project are kept on-track, on-

budget and to specification. NT assists in building

capacity in these areas through infrastructure

development management system and

infrastructure development improvement

programme (national and provincial departments

of health, education, public works and treasuries)

– NT puts in place

measures to ensure that

transferring entities are

held accountable for the

administration and

performance of

conditional grants

• Roles and responsibilities of transferring national

officers (TNOs) defined in DoRA and conditional

grant frameworks. TNOs report to NT on financial

and non-financial grant performance. NT meets

with TNOs on quarterly basis to determine what

measures TNOs have put in place to improve

performance on underperforming grants

• Financial and non-financial reports shared with

Parliament on a quarterly basis 7




• 2012 DoRB - National Treasury (NT) and SALGA

should meet before 30 June 2012 to

deal with uncertainty and concerns

raised by SALGA, incl. calculation of

Local Government Equitable Share

(LGES) Formula and SALGA’s

improved participation in budget

process. A report on meeting,

detailing way forward, should be

provided to Committee

- SALGA should continue to interact

with Parliament, National Treasury,

and the Financial and Fiscal

Commission on their concerns

• Meeting was held on 22 June

2012. A joint report was submitted

to Select Committee

• NT and SALGA committed to

forging working relations on future

budgets, incl.

- technical preparation sessions

with SALGA prior to 2012

Budget Forum

- SALGA included in various

technical working groups

(LGES Formula review and LG

conditional grant frame-works

for 2013/14 financial year)

8




• 2012 DoRB - Correction to Appendix W5:

“Cape Agulhas LM” must be

deleted where it appears next to

“Swellendam Waste Water

Treatment Works”, and the words

“Swellendam LM Municipality”

should be inserted

• The amendment was made through

the Gazette required in terms of

section 15(2) of the 2012 Division

of Revenue Act, which was

published on 31 May 2012

– Possible admin and legal issues

that could arise due to DoRB

being enacted after 1 April 2012

noted, but deadlines in DoRB be

adhered to given that contents in

Bill is known. Minister of Finance

may use his regulatory powers in

DoRB to resolve any such matter

• NT, in consultation with conditional

grant departments, made

appropriate amendments to 2013

DoRB (clauses and grant frame-

works) to deal with implementation/

legal challenges identified during

2012 due to enactment of 2012

DoRB after 1 April 2012 9




• SALGA to assist municipalities with:

- Using existing infrastructure

grants to address challenges in

rollout of infrastructure

- Clarifying grant purposes and

grant responsibilities

- Efficient and effective spending

and complying with grant

conditions

• Minister of Finance welcomed

recommendation and referred

this matter, in writing, to SALGA

for their attention

• SALGA participated in DCoG

provincial workshops on 2012

DoRA where awareness was

raised on legislative provisions

and how to comply

• 2012 DoRA Brochure produced:

- Informed municipalities of the

purpose and conditions of grants

- Finalisation delayed due to

serious capacity constraints

- Brochure will be updated with the

2013 DoRA including provincial

allocations to municipalities 10



Committee Recommendation

Response

• All provincial

treasuries to

implement

effective

systems to

monitor

conditional

grant spending

by provincial

departments

• Minister of Finance welcomed recommendation and

referred matter, in writing, to Finance MECs for attention

• DORA requires that business plans by a national

transferring officer be approved by provincial treasuries.

This forms basis for monitoring performance. Both the

financial and non-financial reports prepared by

provinces are submitted to National Treasury via

provincial treasuries, who verifies the information.

Provincial treasuries are thereby able to monitor both

financial and non-financial performance on a monthly

and quarterly basis. Also, provincial treasury analysts

have access to the Basic Accounting System (BAS)

where they can monitor expenditure on conditional

grants on a daily basis

11



Committee

Recommendation

Response

• Relevant provincial

treasuries need to clarify

and address the issues

raised by provinces in

their negotiating

mandates

• Minister of Finance welcomed recommendation

and referred matter, in writing, to MECs for

Finance for their attention

• A number of provincial legislatures raised

concerns on the funding of poorer resourced

municipalities – a new LG equitable share

formula will be introduced from 2013/14

• All national and provincial

departments should work

with municipalities to

resolve issues of dispute

around properties and

incorrect billing which

contribute to non-

payment of property rates

• Minister of Finance welcomed recommendation

and referred matter, in writing, to Minister of

Public Works to be attended to together with

MECs

• Devolution of Property Rate Funds Grant was

instrumental in resolving these issues (Phase

Out Report was submitted to Standing and

Select Committees on Appropriations in Feb

2013) 12

.


13

Layout of the 2013 DORB

• Division of Revenue Bill – 39 sections

• 7 Schedules: 1. Equitable division of revenue among 3 spheres of government

2. Determination of each province’s equitable share (direct charge

against National Revenue Fund)

3. Determination of each municipality’s equitable share

4. Supplementary conditional grants to provinces and

municipalities

5. Specific purpose allocations to provinces and municipalities

6. Grant-in-kind (or indirect) grants to provinces and municipalities

7. Provision to specifically cater for immediate release of funds to

provinces and municipalities for disaster response

14

This forms

part of Act

once

enacted

• Conditional grant frameworks

• Annexures with allocations per municipality

• Appendixes

Legislated

through Gazette

i.t.o. s15(1)

• Explanatory memorandum Falls away (but remains

on NT website)

Significant changes to the 2012 Bill (1 of 3)

• A large part of Bill remains the same annually – revisions are mainly to take

into account specific policy adjustments. Main amendments to 2012 Act:

– Provisions on infrastructure conditional grants further strengthened

• Provincial infrastructure grant reforms – Submission of monthly provincial report on provincial expenditure of

supplementary provincial infrastructure grants in format prescribed by

National Treasury (section 9(1)(d))

– Additional requirements in clause 26 require provinces to submit funding

proposals in line with prescribed standards during 2013/14 for health

and education infrastructure projects to be implemented from 2015/16

(s13 strengthened and s26(4) added)

• Health infrastructure – The 3 health infrastructure grants merged into 1 grant with 3 grant

components. Any shift between a grant component (limited to the same

province) needs to be gazetted (new s7(3))

– National Health Grant (indirect grant) can be converted to a direct grant

should a province have proven capacity (new s20(1)(iv))

15

.


• Human Settlements – Additional clauses added to s16 to more comprehensively deal with

shift of a function (and concomitant grant funding) in cases where a

function (human settlements and public transport) is assigned to

specific metropolitan municipalities

» provisions for transfer, ceding of contracts from provinces to those

municipalities

– Municipalities receiving Urban Settlements Development Grant to

report against measures defined in their Service Delivery and Budget

Implementation Plan (s11 strengthened)

• Infrastructure rehabilitation and reconstruction costs following a

disaster – To assist provinces and municipalities with the recovery and

rehabilitation of infrastructure damaged by disasters, a clause is added

(s19(4)) to allow National Treasury to instruct that a portion of an

existing infrastructure grant be used for this purpose

16

.


– Continued operation of Act after commencement of the new

national and provincial financial years up to enactment of the new

Division of Revenue Act • In line with recommendation by Select Committee of Appropriations,

provision has been made to enable National Transferring Officers to still

enforce conditions in previous Act and conditional grant frameworks until

new Act becomes in force (around May each year) (27(1) is for 2013/14 and

27(3) is for 2014/15 onwards)

– Framework for providing exemptions on any condition in Act

and/or conditional grant framework • Exemptions subject to: cannot be implemented in practice, impede

achievement of any object of this Act, or undermines financial viability of

affected national or provincial department or municipality

– Improving linkages between sections (technical refinements)

• Suspending payment schedule when a transfer is withheld (s17(2))

• NT to determine approach for payment schedules with respect to indirect

grants (s22(3)(d))

• Improved alignment between Govt Gazettes i.t.o sections 15 and 25

17

.

2013 DORB - Schedules

• Re-organisation of Schedules – A technical (drafting) amendment to re-organise numbering of conditional

grant schedules so that schedules dealing with the same kind of grant for

provinces and municipalities are now contained in one schedule

18

Purpose of schedule 2012 DORA

numbering

2013 DORB

numbering

Supplementary grants to provinces 4 4A

Supplementary grants to municipalities 4 4B

Specific purpose grants to provinces 5 5A

Specific purpose grants to municipalities 6 5B

Allocations-in-kind to provinces 7 6A

Allocations-in-kind to municipalities 7 6B

Provision for immediate disaster relief (provincial) 8 7A

Provision for immediate disaster relief (municipal) 8 7B

.

.

Context of the 2013 Budget

19

South Africa’s Fiscal Framework

20

• Countercyclical response to

financial crisis turned a budget

surplus to a deficit

• Weaker-than-expected revenue

growth widens deficit to 5.2% in

2012/13

• Deficit narrows to 3.1% of GDP by

2015/16 in line with expected

improvement in the economy and

slower expenditure growth

• Government has:

– Trimmed growth in national

department expenditure

– Reduced the contingency

reserve by R23.5bn

– Reprioritised R52.1 billion in

support of key priorities

• Core spending is reduced by

R10.4bn over the medium term

• Expenditure reviews will increase

efficiency and eliminate waste

Consolidated expenditure and revenue as a

percentage of GDP, 2002/03 – 2015/16

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

Pe

r c

en

t o

f G

DP

Revenue

Expenditure

2013/14 Consolidated expenditure: R1.15bn

2013/14 Consolidated revenue: R985bn

2011 Census revealed the scale of challenges

facing South Africa

21

Population growth (per province, 2001 – 2011) Changes in household numbers have been

even more dramatic in some municipalities: National

population

growth:

16%

Backlogs remain a major challenge (number of households without access)

But many more households have access to services (number of households with access at RDP standard)

Name Province Type2001-2011

% Growth

Gamagara Northern Cape Small town 104%

Bitou Western Cape Small town 90%

Steve Tshwete Mpumalanga Secondary city 79%

Rustenburg North West Secondary city 76%

Musina Limpopo Small town 73%

Umzumbe KwaZulu-Natal Rural municipality -8%

Great Kei Eastern Cape Small town -9%

Maphumulo KwaZulu-Natal Rural municipality -10%

Kopanong Free State Small town -11%

Nala Free State Small town -16%

How the Division of Revenue responds to

these challenges

• South Africa has pressing needs for the delivery of infrastructure and

services, but limited fiscal space. Government must learn to do more with

existing resources

• Some of the key ways the 2013 DoRB responds to this challenge :

– A new local government equitable share formula that increases

transparency and will promote accountability for the use of resources

– Reconfiguring health infrastructure grants to promote flexibility in

delivery

– Introducing a new system for allocating provincial infrastructure

grants that will link funding to planning (impact form 2015)

– A new Municipal Water Infrastructure Grant administered by DWA

(with assistance from water boards) to accelerate backlog eradication

22

Additions to Baselines

23

National (47.6%) Provincial (43.5%) Local Govt (8.9%)

•Job creation and labour

•Economic competitiveness

and support package:

Green Fund

• Improved infrastructure

(Universities in Mp and

NC, De Hoop Dam,

Passenger Rail and

national roads, science

and technology

infrastructure)

• Equitable Share: ICS, absorption of

social work graduates; NGOs;

number of teachers in grade R and

no-fee schools; improved TB

diagnostic systems

• Conditional Grants: HIV and Aids

treatment & prevention, ICS in

health and FET colleges,

infrastructure (education and

roads) and housing (accelerated

upgrading of informal settlements)

•Equitable share: Increased

institutional support for small

and poor municipalities and

funding for increased bulk

costs for basic services

•Conditional Grants: Support

to integrated city

development; infrastructure

(water; public transport;

energy)

Changes over baseline, 2013/14 – 2015/16

R million 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

National departments 6 310 10 628 24 752

Provinces 3 060 4 723 17 283

Local government 793 873 6 608

Allocated expenditure 10 164 16 223 48 643

Division of Revenue

.

24

Table W1.3 Division of nationally raised revenue, 2009/10 – 2015/16

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

R million

Outcome Revised

estimat

Medium-term estimates

Debt-service costs 57 129 66 227 76 460 88 325 99 741 108 718 118 163

Non-interest expenditure 690 068 738 914 812 063 878 642 955 333 1 029 262 1 107 564

Percentage increase 18.7% 7.1% 9.9% 8.2% 8.7% 7.7% 7.6%

Total expenditure 747 197 805 141 888 523 966 967 1 055 075 1 137 981 1 225 727

Percentage increase 17.5% 7.8% 10.4% 8.8% 9.1% 7.9% 7.7%

Contingency reserve – – – – 4 000 6 500 10 000

Division of available funds

National departments 345 366 355 188 381 324 413 098 452 530 489 456 521 706

Provinces 293 164 322 822 362 488 388 516 414 152 441 727 474 389

Equitable share 236 891 265 139 291 736 313 016 337 572 359 924 383 697

Conditional grants 56 273 57 682 70 753 75 500 76 580 81 803 90 692

Local government 51 537 60 904 68 251 77 028 84 651 91 579 101 469

Equitable share1 23 845 30 541 33 173 37 373 40 582 44 490 50 208

General fuel levy sharing w ith

metropolitan municipalities

6 800 7 542 8 573 9 040 9 613 10 190 10 659


Total 690 068 738 914 812 063 878 642 951 333 1 022 762 1 097 564

Percentage shares

National departments 50.0% 48.1% 47.0% 47.0% 47.6% 47.9% 47.5%

Provinces 42.5% 43.7% 44.6% 44.2% 43.5% 43.2% 43.2%

Local government 7.5% 8.2% 8.4% 8.8% 8.9% 9.0% 9.2%

SECRET

.

Provincial Budget Framework for

2013 MTEF

25

Provincial fiscal framework

• R44.3b added to provincial fiscal framework over 2013 MTEF

• Equitable share increased by R36.1 billion – The 2012 wage agreements

– Cushioning the impact of the phasing in of the 2011 Census data in the

provincial equitable share formula

– Increased numbers of teachers for poor schools and Grade R

– Improved diagnostics for tuberculosis

– Increased assistance to non-governmental organisations providing social

development services

– Absorption of social work graduates

• Conditional grants are increased by R8.2 billion – Continued expansion of HIV and Aids prevention and treatment programmes

– Investment in provincial roads

– Informal settlement upgrading in mining towns

– Improvements in community library services

– School infrastructure

26

Total transfers to provinces for 2012/13

27

.

R million

Equitable

share

Conditional

grants

Total

transfers

Eastern Cape 50 165 9 466 59 631

Free State 20 000 6 021 26 021

Gauteng 61 375 15 510 76 885

KwaZulu-Natal 73 510 14 575 88 085

Limpopo 41 362 7 179 48 541

Mpumalanga 27 211 5 788 32 999

Northern Cape 9 022 3 274 12 296

North West 22 754 4 990 27 744

Western Cape 32 175 9 589 41 764

Unallocated - 188 188

Total 337 572 76 580 414 152

Total transfers to provinces, 2013/14

Revisions to the Provincial Equitable Share

•PES revised upwards by R36.1b over 2013 MTEF. The devolution of property rate funds grant

phased into PES over 2013 MTEF using current conditional grant shares as add-ons

Table 1.1 Revisions to the Provincial Equitable Share for the 2013 MTEF

R thousand2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 Total

Technical revisions

Original PES baseline 2013 MTEF 328 920 693 349 350 999 365 421 145 1 043 692 837

Reduction of 1%, 2% and 3% -785 746 -1 665 854 -2 604 449 -5 056 049

Revised PES baseline 328 134 947 347 685 145 362 816 696 1 038 636 788

PES additions 7 385 472 10 071 311 18 613 004 36 069 787

Improvements conditions of service 6 493 808 8 032 968 11 526 321 26 053 097

Education – – 1 811 492 1 811 492

Increased number of teachers (Quintile 1 schools) – – 1 011 492 1 011 492

Grade R teachers – – 800 000 800 000

Health 30 000 80 000 228 200 338 200

TB – GeneXpert 30 000 80 000 228 200 338 200

Social Development 220 000 505 100 812 991 1 538 091

Absorption of social w ork graduates 120 000 305 100 512 991 938 091

Support to the NGO sector 100 000 200 000 300 000 600 000

Other adjustments 641 664 1 453 243 4 234 000 6 328 907

Provision for 2011 Census impact to provinces w ith declining shares 641 664 1 453 243 2 117 000 4 211 907

Provision for 2011 Census impact – – 2 117 000 2 117 000

Revised baseline for 2013 MTEF (excl. Devolution of Property Rate Fund Grant) 335 520 419 357 756 456 381 429 700 1 074 706 575

Other adjustments 2 051 993 2 167 743 2 267 459 6 487 195

Property rate funds (to be phased into PES) 2 051 993 2 167 743 2 267 459 6 487 195

Revised baseline for 2013 MTEF (incl. Devolution of Property Rate Fund Grant) 337 572 412 359 924 199 383 697 159 1 081 193 770 28

.

• Education component (48 per cent)

– 2012 School enrolment numbers (2012 SNAP survey, DBE)

– 2011 School age cohort (5 – 17 years from 2011 Census)

• Health component (27 per cent)

– Population data (2011 Census, Stats SA)

– Insured population (General Household Survey 2011, Stats SA)

– PHC and Hospital output data (District Health Information System)

• Poverty component (3 per cent)

– 2010/11 Income and Expenditure Survey (Stats SA)

– Population data (2011 Census, Stats SA)

• Basic component (16 per cent)

– Population data (2011 Census)

• Economic activity component (1 per cent)

– GDP- Region (2010)

• Institutional component (5 per cent) - no data used

29

.

Data used to update components of formula

Population shifts from census 2001, Mid Year

Estimates 2011 and Census 2011

30

–

2,000,000

4,000,000

6,000,000

8,000,000

10,000,000

12,000,000

14,000,000

2001 Census

2011 Mid-year Estimates

2011 Census

.

Table W1.7 2011 mid-year estimates vs 2011 Census

2011 mid-

year

estimates

2011

Census

Population

shifts

Percentage

shares

(mid-year

2011)

Percentage

shares

(2011

Census)

Population

shifts

Eastern Cape 6 829 958 6 562 053 -267 905 13.5% 12.7% -0.83%

Free State 2 759 644 2 745 590 -14 054 5.5% 5.3% -0.15%

Gauteng 11 328 203 12 272 263 944 060 22.4% 23.7% 1.31%

Kw aZulu-Natal 10 819 130 10 267 300 -551 830 21.4% 19.8% -1.55%

Limpopo 5 554 657 5 404 868 -149 789 11.0% 10.4% -0.54%

Mpumalanga 3 657 181 4 039 939 382 758 7.2% 7.8% 0.57%

Northern Cape 1 096 731 1 145 861 49 130 2.2% 2.2% 0.05%

North West 3 253 390 3 509 953 256 563 6.4% 6.8% 0.35%

Western Cape 5 287 863 5 822 734 534 871 10.5% 11.2% 0.79%

Total 50 586 757 51 770 561 1 183 804 100.0% 100.0% –

Impact on equitable share for 2013 MTEF for

provinces with declining shares

31

.

Table W1.8 Provincial equitable share: 2011 Census impact

on provinces with declining shares, 2013 MTEF 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

R thousand Medium-term estimates

Eastern Cape 185 962 421 166 685 628

Free State 34 594 78 350 171 261

Gauteng – – –

Kw aZulu-Natal 289 915 656 600 773 075

Limpopo 131 193 297 127 487 036

Mpumalanga – – –

Northern Cape – – –

North West – – –

Western Cape – – –

Total 641 664 1 453 243 2 117 000

Shares per component per province

32

.

Table W1.10 Distributing the equitable shares by province, 2013 MTEF

Education Health Basic

share

Poverty Economic

activity

Institu-

tional

Weighted

average

48% 27% 16% 3% 1% 5% 100%

Eastern Cape 15.3% 13.5% 12.7% 16.3% 7.7% 11.1% 14.2%

Free State 5.3% 5.4% 5.3% 5.4% 5.5% 11.1% 5.6%

Gauteng 17.3% 21.9% 23.7% 16.9% 33.7% 11.1% 19.4%

Kw aZulu-Natal 22.7% 21.7% 19.8% 22.2% 15.8% 11.1% 21.3%

Limpopo 13.1% 10.3% 10.4% 13.6% 7.2% 11.1% 11.8%

Mpumalanga 8.5% 7.2% 7.8% 9.1% 7.0% 11.1% 8.2%

Northern Cape 2.3% 2.2% 2.2% 2.2% 2.3% 11.1% 2.7%

North West 6.5% 6.7% 6.8% 8.0% 6.7% 11.1% 6.9%

Western Cape 8.9% 11.1% 11.2% 6.1% 14.1% 11.1% 10.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Full impact of data updates on PES

.

33

Table W1.11 Full impact on data updates on the equitable

share2012 MTEF

weighted

2013 MTEF

weighted

Difference

Eastern Cape 14.9% 14.2% -0.79%

Free State 5.8% 5.6% -0.20%

Gauteng 18.0% 19.4% 1.44%

Kw aZulu-Natal 22.2% 21.3% -0.89%

Limpopo 12.4% 11.8% -0.56%

Mpumalanga 7.9% 8.2% 0.24%

Northern Cape 2.6% 2.7% 0.05%

North West 6.6% 6.9% 0.21%

Western Cape 9.4% 10.0% 0.51%

Total 100.0% 100.0% –

Phasing in the impact

34

.

Table :Implementation of the equitable share weights, 2013/14 – 2015/16

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Percentage Weighted shares

Eastern Cape 15.2% 14.9% 14.5% 14.2%

Free State 6.0% 5.9% 5.8% 5.6%

Gauteng 17.6% 18.2% 18.8% 19.4%

Kw aZulu-Natal 21.9% 21.7% 21.5% 21.3%

Limpopo 12.6% 12.3% 12.0% 11.8%

Mpumalanga 8.1% 8.1% 8.1% 8.2%

Northern Cape 2.7% 2.7% 2.7% 2.7%

North West 6.7% 6.7% 6.8% 6.9%

Western Cape 9.3% 9.5% 9.7% 10.0%

Total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

2013 MTEF weighted shares 3-year phasing

PES allocations after data updates, additional

funds phase-in and top up are included

35

Note: 2012/13 excludes in-year additions and 2013 MTEF allocations do not include the phasing of

the Devolution of Property Rate Funds Grant into the PES

Table :Allocations per province, 2013 MTEF

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16


Eastern Cape 46 940 272 49 952 983 52 114 079 54 377 525

Free State 18 531 165 19 717 421 20 606 599 21 584 657

Gauteng 54 545 389 61 078 937 67 118 490 73 722 523

Kw aZulu-Natal 67 802 913 73 039 732 77 316 101 81 590 459

Limpopo 38 721 016 41 324 604 43 224 713 45 227 388

Mpumalanga 24 874 453 27 098 657 28 961 401 30 969 089

Northern Cape 8 255 155 8 974 831 9 571 246 10 213 017

North West 20 614 831 22 550 753 24 204 415 25 992 069

Western Cape 28 772 188 31 782 501 34 639 411 37 752 974

Total 309 057 382 335 520 419 357 756 456 381 429 700

Table 1.12 PES annual growth rates, 2013 MTEF

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16


Eastern Cape – 6.4% 4.3% 4.3%

Free State – 6.4% 4.5% 4.7%

Gauteng – 12.0% 9.9% 9.8%

Kw aZulu-Natal – 7.7% 5.9% 5.5%

Limpopo – 6.7% 4.6% 4.6%

Mpumalanga – 8.9% 6.9% 6.9%

Northern Cape – 8.7% 6.6% 6.7%

North West – 9.4% 7.3% 7.4%

Western Cape – 10.5% 9.0% 9.0%

Total – 8.6% 6.7% 6.6%

.

Major changes to provincial conditional

transfers

• Devolution of Property Rate Funds Grant phased into equitable share

– Allocations will be as an “odd on” based on provincial conditional grant

expenditure shares for three years

• Reforms to health grants to provide greater flexibility

– Merging of health infrastructure grants (s7(3))

– Creation of an indirect grant (health infrastructure and NHI components)

with possibility to shift to a direct grant (new s20(1)(b)(iv))

• New Provincial Roads Maintenance Grant formula

– New formula based on provincial road networks, road traffic and

weather conditions

• Human Settlements Development Grant

– Potential devolution to cities (s16(5)–also applicable to public transport)

– Plan to revise formula over the MTEF

• 2014 African Nations Championship health and medical services grant

• Provincial infrastructure grants (see next slides)

36

.

A new approach to institutionalise planning –

provincial infrastructure grants

• Failure to complete infrastructure projects on time and in budget usually

begins with poor planning

• The 2012 Medium Term Budget Policy Statement said:

– “Over the next three years government aims to achieve better value

for money from investment in provincial infrastructure. A new

approach to infrastructure conditional grants is intended to

institutionalise proper planning. Provinces will be required to bid

for these allocations two years in advance and financial incentives

will be built into the grant for provinces that implement best

practices in delivering infrastructure”

• A new approach is being introduced for health and education

infrastructure grants that will require provinces to begin submitting plans

in 2013/14 for funds to be received in 2015/16

• If plans (and subsequent project packaging) do not meet the

requirements prescribed, provinces will not receive grant funding

37

How the planning and approval process

will work

38

Treasury and related

national sector

department evaluate,

review and recommend

Unallocated

funds

Approval

Unsuccessful

YEAR 1:

Infrastructure

and

Procurement

Planning

Stages 1& 2

Submission of Works

Packages

Unsuccessful Approval

Evaluation of

Strategic Briefs

Confirmation

allocation letter

Treasury and related

national sector

department

evaluate, review and

recommend

YEAR 2:

Package

Preparation

and package

definition

Stages 3 and 4

Unallocated

funds

Approval

Evaluation of U-AMP

(Infrastructure Plan)

Approval

Evaluation of IPMP and

Construction Procurement

Strategy

Submission of bid

for grant allocation

Approval

Evaluation of

Concept Reports

Funds

available

to re-

allocate

Implementing the new approach

The proposed approach seeks to: • enforce proper infrastructure and procurement planning for infrastructure

projects/packages

• ensure that project implementation results in better value for money

• reward provinces that follow best practices for planning and procurement by

establishing a performance based funding mechanism with incentives

• support the development of appropriate capacity and systems

The approach is supported by changes in the 2013 DoRB: • Section 26(3)&(4) require for provinces to submit plans in line with the bidding

process for the grants

And complimented by: • Draft Treasury Regulations on the Standard for the Infrastructure Delivery

Management System (IDMS) and the Standard for Construction Procurement

Strategy (CPS) – these will promote better planning and procurement

• The 2013 DoRB also promotes improved capacity by requiring compliance with

DPSA capacity requirements for infrastructure units, and reporting on positions in

these units

39

Revisions to Provincial Conditional Grant

Baselines

40

.

Revisions to conditional grant baseline allocations, 2013/14 – 2015/16

R million 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2013 MTEF

Additions to baseline 260 2 083 7 558 9 901

Arts and Culture – 385 680 1 064

Community library services – 385 680 1 064

Basic Education – 1 191 4 101 5 292

Education infrastructure – 1 191 4 101 5 292

Health – 100 1 184 1 284

Comprehensive HIV and Aids – 100 1 184 1 284

Higher Education and Training 91 110 130 331

Further education and training colleges 91 110 130 331

Human Settlements – 110 1 040 1 150

Human settlements development – 110 1 040 1 150

Transport 169 187 424 780

Provincial roads maintenance 169 187 424 780

Total additions to baseline 260 2 083 7 558 9 901

Less: Savings effected on conditional grants -268 -538 -916 -1 722

Net additions to baselines -9 1 545 6 642 8 178

Provincial Conditional Grant Allocations (1 of 2)

41 .

Table W1.22 Conditional grants to provinces, 2012/13 – 2015/16

R million 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 MTEF total

Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries 1 925 2 147 2 194 2 294 6 635

Comprehensive agricultural support programme 1 393 1 600 1 665 1 742 5 007

Ilima/Letsema projects 416 438 461 482 1 381

Land care programme: poverty relief

and infrastructure development

116 109 68 71 248

Arts and Culture 565 598 1 016 1 341 2 955

Community library services 565 598 1 016 1 341 2 955

Basic Education 10 990 12 343 13 188 16 350 41 882

Dinaledi schools 100 105 111 116 333

Education infrastructure 5 587 6 631 7 161 10 059 23 851

HIV and Aids (life skills education) 203 214 221 226 661

National school nutrition programme 4 906 5 173 5 462 5 704 16 339

Technical secondary schools recapitalisation 194 221 233 244 699

Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs 180 188 197 204 590

Provincial disaster 180 188 197 204 590

Health 26 073 27 517 29 610 32 083 89 210

Africa Cup of Nations 2013: medical services 15 – – – –

Comprehensive HIV and Aids 8 763 10 534 12 311 13 957 36 802

Health facility revitalisation 6 191 5 124 4 739 4 988 14 850

Health professions training and development 2 076 2 190 2 322 2 429 6 941

National tertiary services 8 878 9 620 10 168 10 636 30 425

National health insurance 150 49 70 74 192

Provincial Conditional Grant Allocations (2 of 2)

42 .

Table W1.22 Conditional grants to provinces, 2012/13 – 2015/16

R million 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 MTEF total

Higher Education and Training 4 845 2 443 2 600 2 759 7 802

Further education and training colleges 4 845 2 443 2 600 2 759 7 802

Human Settlements 15 726 16 984 17 918 19 667 54 569

Human settlements development 15 726 16 984 17 918 19 667 54 569

Public Works 2 429 613 644 667 1 925

Devolution of property rate funds 1 919 – – – –

Expanded public w orks programme

integrated grant for provinces

293 356 371 382 1 108

Social sector expanded public w orks

programme incentive for provinces

217 258 273 286 816

Sport and Recreation South Africa 470 498 526 550 1 573

Mass participation and sport development 470 498 526 550 1 573

Transport 12 299 13 249 13 909 14 777 41 934

Provincial roads maintenance 7 982 8 696 9 126 9 774 27 596

Public transport operations 4 317 4 553 4 783 5 003 14 338

Total 75 500 76 580 81 803 90 692 249 075

Indirect transfers 1 277 3 060 5 269 5 032 13 361

Basic Education 1 277 1 956 3 170 2 912 8 038

School infrastructure backlogs 1 277 1 956 3 170 2 912 8 038

Health – 1 104 2 100 2 120 5 324

2014 African Nations Championship health and

medical services

– 6 – – 6

National health – 1 098 2 100 2 120 5 318

.

Local Government Budget Framework

for 2013 MTEF

43

Local government (LG) budget framework

• R5.4 billion added to LG equitable share over 2013 MTEF

• Net change (increase) to LG conditional transfers of R12.1b over MTEF

– Of this, R8.2b added to direct transfers and R3.9b added to indirect transfers

44

Table W1.25 Net changes to direct and indirect transfers to local government,

2013/14 – 2015/16

R million

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2013 MTEF

total

revisions

Total of revisions to baselines 1 196 2 721 9 896 13 813

Direct transfers 830 1 165 7 003 8 998

Indirect transfers 366 1 556 2 892 4 815

Less

Total savings to fund government priorities -525 -513 -643 -1 681

Direct transfers -36 -292 -414 -742

Indirect transfers -489 -221 -229 -939

Net additions to baselines 671 2 208 9 253 12 131

Direct transfers 793 873 6 590 8 256

Indirect transfers -123 1 335 2 663 3 875

Additional funds for local government

• Local Government Equitable Share

– For rising costs of Free Basic Services and to support poor municipalities

• Integrated National Electrification Programme

– Once off allocation for “Approach to Distribution Asset Management” strategy

in 2013/14

– Additions (direct and indirect grants) to accelerate access over MTEF

• Water infrastructure

– Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant and Municipal Water Infrastructure Grant

• Rural Roads Asset Management Grant

– Expand to reach all district municipalities by the end of 2013 MTEF

• Infrastructure Skills Development Grant

– Fund more interns with science and engineering skills

• Hosting the 2014 African Nations Championship

• Promoting more integrated and efficient cities

45

Local government budget framework

46

Local government budget framework, 2009/10 – 2015/16

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

R million

Revised

estimate

Direct transfers 51 537 60 904 68 251 77 028 84 651 91 579 101 469

Equitable share and related 23 845 30 541 33 173 37 373 40 582 44 490 50 208

Equitable share formula1 20 281 26 761 29 289 32 981 35 886 39 409 44 900

RSC levy replacement 3 306 3 492 3 544 3 733 3 930 4 146 4 337

Support for councillor

remuneration and w ard

committees

258 288 340 659 766 935 971

General fuel levy sharing

with metros

6 800 7 542 8 573 9 040 9 613 10 190 10 659


Infrastructure 18 699 20 871 24 643 28 029 31 092 33 548 36 971

Capacity building and other 2 194 1 951 1 862 2 586 3 364 3 351 3 632

Indirect transfers 3 081 2 939 2 770 4 956 5 538 7 171 8 768

Infrastructure 2 763 2 682 2 553 4 823 5 399 7 029 8 617

Capacity building and other 318 257 217 133 139 142 151

Total 54 618 63 843 71 021 81 984 90 190 98 751 110 237

1. Outcome figures for the equitable share reflect amounts transferred after funds have been withheld to offset

underspending by municipalities on conditional grants

Outcome Medium-term estimates

The new local government equitable share formula

structure

47

Basic Services

Institutional and Community Services

+

Allocation for every poor household in the country to enable municipalities to fund the cost of free basic services (including maintenance costs)

Made up of three parts:

Institutional funding

Funding for Community

Services

Revenue Adjustment factorEnsures more funds go to the municipalities with

less own revenue capacity(Factor of between 0% and 100% applied)

Form

ula

Ho

w it

wo

rks +

Correct-ion &

Stability

Ensures guarantees are met and smoothes changes in allocations

±

LGES Allocation

1 2 3

LGES = BS + (I + CS) x RA ± C

Where:

• LGES is the local

government equitable share

• BS is the basic services

component

• I is the institutional

component

• CS is the community

services component

• RA is the revenue

adjustment factor

• C is the correction and

stabilisation factor

Schematic of how the formula works The new Local Government equitable share (LGES) formula :

• Old formula produced allocations per poor household that were lowest for municipalities with

the least ability to raise their own revenue

• New formula corrects this with a much more redistributive structure

More realistic level of institutional funding for those municipalities

that need transfers to sustain their administration

Includes funding for community services

• Simpler formula structure is more transparent

• Higher affordability threshold (includes 59% of households)

• More realistic cost estimates for basic services

• Capability to update data (basic service costs and population)

Advantages of the new LG equitable share formula

48

Metros Secondary cities Large towns Small towns Ruralmunicipalities

Old formula - Allocation per poor household

Metros Secondary cities Large towns Small towns Rural

New formula - Allocation per poor household

Challenge is to

ensure that once

funds reach

municipalities they

are used to deliver

services that benefit

poor households

Phasing-in the new allocations

• Large changes in allocations for some

individual municipalities (due to new

formula & updated 2011 Census data)

• Proposed five-year phase-in to cushion

impact

– ‘losing’ municipalities see allocations reduced

by 20% of the difference between old and new

formulas each year

– Funded by ‘gaining’ municipalities, giving them

time to adjust to higher allocations

49

Allocations with old formula

Allocations with new formula

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5

Phase-in path20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Example of phasing in the shift from the old formula to the new formula over a 5 year phase-in period for a municipality with a lower allocation in the new formula

Changes to the structure of local

government conditional grants

• New grants:

– Municipal Water Infrastructure Grant

• Accelerate provision of water to households without access

• Partly funded through shift of funds from MIG

– Public Transport Network Operations Grant

• Separates operating funds from Public Transport Infrastructure

Grant and provide greater planning certainty for cities

– Integrated City Development Grant

• Linked to City Support Programme

– 2014 African Nations Championships Host Cities Operating Grant

• January 2014 tournament is follow-up to AFCON

• Rural Households Infrastructure Grant will become a direct grant

• MIG formula updated with Census 2011 data (phased in over MTEF)

• Structure of local government infrastructure grants will be reviewed in 2013

50

LG conditional grants – Additions

,

51

Additions to direct and indirect transfers to local government, 2013/14 - 2015/16

R million

2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2013 MTEF

Total

revisions

Additions to baselines 1 278 3 010 9 859 14 147

Direct transfers 805 1 454 6 966 9 225

Equitable share – 851 4 561 5 413

Municipal w ater infrastructure grant 312 113 1 399 1 824

Municipal infrastructure grant – 179 231 410

Integrated national electrif ication programme 320 77 500 897

Infrastructure skills development grant – 50 70 120

Integrated cities development grant 40 150 150 340

2014 African Nations Championship host city

operating grant

120 – – 120

Rural roads asset management systems grant 13 34 54 101


Neighbourhood development partnership grant – – 4 4

Integrated national electrif ication programme 191 425 1 522 2 139

Regional bulk infrastructure grant 282 1 131 1 366 2 779

Neighbourhood Development Partnership

Grant allocations

• The Neighbourhood Development Partnership Grant has undergone a

review and a new strategy, aligned with the National Development Plan,

is being implemented.

– The grant will focus on being a catalyst for the development of densified and

interconnected hubs that transform the fragmented economic and spatial patterns of

development in our cities.

– Projects not aligned to this strategy are being completed and closed out. The

Department of Rural Development will take over small town projects.

• The allocations included in the annexures to the DoR Bill were based on

draft allocations before municipal assessments had been completed and

allocations had been aligned with the new strategy.

• The revised allocations were not included in the final Bill as the result of

a technical oversight. National Treasury apologises for this error.

• The Committee is requested to note this error and recommend that when

National Treasury gazettes the allocations in terms of Section 15, the

correct allocations are used.

52

Integrated National electrification

Programme (municipal) allocations

• R320 million is added to the INEP (municipal) grant for a pilot of the

Approach to Distribution Asset Management that will refurbish key

municipal electricity distribution infrastructure.

• These amounts will be allocated and transferred through the INEP grant

• Unfortunately the allocations per municipality captured in the Bill do not

capture these allocations for the ADAM projects. The Department of

Energy revised these allocations, but due to a technical oversight these

were not captured in the Bill. National Treasury apologises for this error

• The Committee is requested to note this error and recommend that when

National Treasury gazettes the allocations in terms of Section 15, the

correct allocations are used.

• National Treasury will implement additional checks in the 2014 Budget

Process to avoid a recurrence of these errors.

53

LG conditional grants - Infrastructure

,

54

Infrastructure transfers to local government, 2009/10 – 2015/16

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

R million

Revised

estimate

Direct transfers 18 699 20 871 24 643 28 029 31 092 33 548 36 971

Municipal infrastructure grant 8 728 9 704 11 443 13 882 14 352 14 684 15 448

Municipal w ater infrastructure

grant

– – – – 603 1 059 2 672

Urban settlements development

grant

4 418 4 968 6 267 7 392 9 077 10 335 10 700

Integrated national electrif ication

programme

900 1 033 1 097 1 151 1 635 1 565 2 056

Public transport infrastructure

grant

2 421 3 700 4 612 4 988 4 669 5 126 5 279

Neighbourhood development

partnership grant

508 832 738 578 598 591 600

2010 FIFA World Cup stadiums

development grant

1 661 302 – – – – –

Rural roads asset management

systems grant

10 10 35 37 52 75 98

Rural households infrastructure

grant

– – – – 107 113 118

Municipal drought relief grant 54 320 450 – – – –

Indirect transfers 2 763 2 682 2 553 4 823 5 399 7 029 8 617

Integrated national electrif ication

programme

1 616 1 720 1 165 1 879 2 141 2 488 3 680

Neighbourhood development

partnership grant

70 50 50 80 55 58 65

Regional bulk infrastructure grant 577 851 1 260 2 523 3 203 4 483 4 872

Backlogs in w ater and sanitation

at clinics and schools

350 – – – – – –

Backlogs in the electrif ication of

clinics and schools

149 – – – – – –

Rural households infrastructure

grant

– 62 78 341 – – –

Total 21 462 23 553 27 196 32 852 36 492 40 577 45 588

Medium-term estimatesOutcome

LG conditional grants – Capacity and Other

,

55

Capacity building and other current transfers to local government

2009/10 2010/11 2011/12 2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

R million

Revised

estimat

eDirect transfers 2 194 1 951 1 862 2 586 3 364 3 351 3 632

Municipal systems improvement

grant

200 212 220 230 240 252 261

Local government f inancial

management grant

300 365 385 403 425 449 470

Public transport netw ork

operations grant

– – – – 881 745 862

Integrated city development grant – – – – 40 150 150

2010 FIFA World Cup host city

operating grant

508 210 – – – – –

2013 African Cup of Nations host

city operating grant

– – – 123 – – –

2014 African Nations Championship

host city operating grant

– – – – 120 – –

Water services operating

subsidy grant

849 664 542 562 421 450 470

Expanded public w orks programme

integrated grant for municipalities

101 280 364 662 611 632 661

Infrastructure skills development

grant

– – 39 75 99 154 179

Energy eff iciency and demand-side

management grant

175 220 280 200 181 155 202

Municipal disaster grant 61 – 32 330 347 364 376


Energy eff iciency and demand-side

management grant

75 109 119 – – – –

Water services operating subsidy

grant

243 148 98 133 139 142 151

Total 2 512 2 208 2 079 2 719 3 503 3 493 3 783

.

Government’s Response to

Recommendations of Financial and

Fiscal Commission on 2013/14 Division

of Revenue

56

FFC Recommendations (3 main themes divided into 10 chapters)

• Intergovernmental Fiscal Relations Act requires that FFC submits recommendations on (a) an equitable division of revenue raised nationally among the 3 spheres; (b) determination of each province’s equitable share; and (c) any other allocations to provinces, local government or municipalities

• Government response limited to those that deal with 2013/14 Division of Revenue (non-related recommendations dealt with through other processes)

• FFC submitted recommendations for 2013/14 in 3 main themes and 10 chapters

57

Supporting inclusive growth

1 Perspectives and prospects for job creation and the intergovernmental fiscal relations system

2 Financing e-education and achieving policy goals in public ordinary schools

3 Budget review of public universities in South Africa (SA)

Climate change and environmental sustainability

4 The Impact of Climate Change on South Africa’s Rural Areas

5 Alternative financing mechanisms for disaster management in SA

6 Financing of waste management in SA

Institutional development and inclusive growth and innovation

7 Impact of aggregate revenue and expenditure assignments on economic growth: the case of

provinces and municipalities in SA intergovernmental relations

8 Alternative service delivery arrangements: A case for municipal agencies

9 Understanding the dynamics of the capacity challenge at local government level

10 Assess gender-responsive budgeting in local government

Recommendations directly linked to

Division of Revenue (1 of 2)

• Ch 1: Government spending and its impact on

unemployment – Government already has a number of job creation initiatives

• Ch 2: Financing e-education – Agreed. Provinces should amend performance indicators to include

e-education

• Ch 4:Impact of climate change on South Africa’s rural areas – Government is reviewing the local government functional and fiscal

framework. Ensuring sustainability will be part of this review

• Ch 5: Alternative financing for disaster management – Government has developed a planning toolkit to assist municipalities

incorporate plans in their IDPs. Fiscal capacity is taken into account

in allocating disaster funds to municipalities

58

Recommendations directly linked to


• Ch 6: Financing waste management – Government is committed to investing in the green economy. Intend

to review infrastructure grants in 2013

• Ch 7: Impact of aggregate revenue and expenditure

assignments to provinces and municipalities – Government agrees that ability to raise own revenues should be

considered in any review of local government funding

• Ch 9: Understanding the dynamics of the capacity challenge

at local government – Government agrees that funding should be based on powers and

functions

– Government has already taken steps to streamline capacity grants

59

Recommendations indirectly linked to


• Ch 2: Financing e-education – Government agrees that successful e-education consists of an

ecosystem that includes both content and technology

• Ch 6: Financing waste management – full cost accounting – Government agrees that full cost accounting should be phased-in

and has several training and support initiatives to support this goal

• Ch 7: Impact of aggregate revenue and expenditure

assignments to provinces and municipalities – Government agrees that provinces and municipalities should

continue to invest in physical and human capital in line with the New

Growth Path and National Development Plan

– Government acknowledges that the performance of municipalities in

collecting revenue varies widely. Government is working to support

municipalities to build their administrative capacity

60

Recommendations indirectly linked to


• Ch 9: Understanding the dynamics of the capacity challenge

in local government – Government agrees that we need to enforce the minimum

competencies in the MFMA and has strategies in place to support

this

– Government supports the FFC’s view that sectors should set

minimum standards

• Ch 10: Assessing gender responsive budgeting in local

government – Government supports the proposals as a way of ensuring that the

collection and allocation of public resources is effective and targets

vulnerable groups

61

.

THANK YOU

62

2013 division of revenue billpmg-assets.s3-website-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/docs/...2013 division of...

Documents