27-05-2025
Water insecurity means Gauteng has reached the limit of its sustainable development
Those of you who read my articles will know I often speak of the lucrative nature of applying inappropriate solutions to misdiagnosed problems in the South African water sector. It is therefore refreshing to be able to report on genuine progress being made to rectify this situation.
In June 2024, a structure known as the Platform for a Water Secure Gauteng (PWSG) was launched by the Director General of the Department of Water and Sanitation. Readers will know I am strongly supportive of this initiative because it represents a coherent strategy to avoid the ravages of a Day Zero scenario in Gauteng, so it represents an example of self-correction at work.
The initiative brings together all the key stakeholders from all three tiers of government – national, provincial and municipal – in support of a common objective.
I have been given a privileged position of insight into this process since its inception. More importantly, I have never been pressured or persuaded to write with a particular slant on the inner proceedings. I am grateful to the organisers for granting me this privilege, for it has enabled me to assess the decision-making processes and policy formulation with total independence. This is why I am now able to give an optimistic report back to the public.
What I see unfolding before my eyes is a genuine attempt to accurately diagnose the problem. This means that certain uncomfortable truths are being laid bare for the first time. What follows is a summary from a Draft Discussion Paper that has been circulated among all PWSG participants to focus on the policymaking going forward.
Stated differently, we are starting to see the green shoots of appropriate solutions being applied to accurately defined problems for the first time in decades.
This is laudable and so I endorse the process.
This Draft Discussion Paper frames the challenge as being chronic shortages of water in some places, and an increasingly widespread series of supply disruptions, unplanned outages and intermittent supply.
In addition to this, the Draft Discussion Paper identifies increasingly 'visible leaks and losses from the (municipal) supply network', a problem made worse by 'slow response times and repairs that often require repeat visits to resolve successfully'.
It is also noted that 'institutional weaknesses at municipal level have contributed significantly to this deterioration in services'.
All of this is music to my professional ears because, for the first time, we are seeing an attempt at doing a root cause analysis. I have beaten the root cause analysis drum long and hard, because if we don't know what's causing systems to fail, how can we really fix them? I am naturally impressed when I see change taking place in the right direction.
More importantly, we can now get to the nitty gritty of the contents of the Draft Discussion Paper. To accurately report on this, I will not paraphrase, deeming this significant enough to quote verbatim:
'These problems have been compounded by long delays in the nationally-led Lesotho Highlands Water Project Phase 2 (LHWP2) to increase bulk water supplies from the Integrated Vaal River System (IVRS) on which the region depends.
'At present, Rand Water, the bulk water provider to Gauteng, is taking more water than can safely and sustainably be supplied from the IVRS in the long term (1,600 million cubic metres per annum – MCM/yr), which is the long-term sustainable abstraction limit.
'Due to good rainfalls in recent years, DWS has given Rand Water a temporary licence to abstract 1,870 MCM/yr, which is renewed annually, depending on the status of the IVRS. If conditions in the IVRS deteriorate, DWS will have to revert to the long-term abstraction limit to avoid the risk of major water shortages should there be a multi-year drought.'
Now it gets to the crunch, because 'even when LHWP2 is completed in 2029, Rand Water will only be able to increase its abstraction by a limited amount, given that it is already over-abstracting in terms of the sustainable long-term abstraction limit'.
So, in essence, Gauteng has reached the limit of its sustainable development, and this is a very big deal indeed. Let us unpack some of these implications as part of the broader national dialogue.
Water — investment enabler
The first implication is that water insecurity is now constraining investment. It is refreshing to see reference being made to this specific issue, because when we created the SA Business Water Chamber to support the Public Private Growth Initiative (PPGI) launched in 2019, this was our concern.
In a Presidential brief titled ' Public-Private Growth Initiative Believe High-Growth South Africa is Within Reach ' dated 29 January 2019, it was stated that 'the PPGI believes growth of 5% and more is possible, provided certain enablers for the economy are realised, and key inhibitors are eliminated'.
At that time, water was simply not part of the thinking, so Benoit le Roy, Fred Platt and I engaged with the Presidency with one core message – water is an economic enabler – saying that if it is ignored by the PPGI, then the initiative will fail.
It was ignored and the PPGI failed.
So, we now see progress being made, because the Draft Discussion Paper acknowledges what we believed to be a self-evident truth, six lost years ago.
The second implication is that water insecurity is impacting negatively on employment opportunities and therefore, economic growth in general. This is a welcome admission in the Draft Discussion Paper because it is the direct outcome of ignoring the fact that water is an economic enabler in the first place.
We now have the first linkage at policy level between water security, employment and investor confidence. This is a significant breakthrough, in my professional opinion.
The third implication clearly stated in the Draft Discussion Paper is that the quality of life for the residents of Gauteng will continue to deteriorate unless appropriate intervention occurs.
In other words, what we have right now is as good as it's ever going to be, and if we collectively want to experience a better quality of life, then we must commit to a 10% reduction in water consumption per capita in Gauteng. Every proverbial cloud has a silver lining, and this is certainly true for this single policy objective, because the strategy recognises the central role that leakages and losses (known as unaccounted for water) play in the desired objective of sustainability.
Finally, the comforting bit is that Rand Water is firmly recognised as a key player in the PWSG. It has a robust balance sheet, despite the generally negative public perception around state-owned enterprises.
It also has the technical capacity to assist with institutional strengthening within municipalities where required. After all, it is municipalities alone that have the sole mandate to deliver water services to residents within their geographic footprint.
Good news is a rare commodity, which is why it is so refreshing to find hard evidence that sincere attempts are being made to perform a root-cause analysis with the sole objective of developing appropriate solutions to accurately diagnosed problems.
It is also comforting to the founders of the SA Business Water Chamber that water is indeed an economic enabler. Had the PPGI recognised this simple fact, then economic growth of 5% might have been achievable after all.
