9. Can we learn from overseas?
Most certainly and we must, including examples from elsewhere in Africa. Zambia, for example, has NWASCO: a small but effective water and sanitation regulator that monitors and publishes results. This happens like clockwork in April every year and without political interference.
10. What is the international best practice on regulatory independence?
Celine Kauffmann of the OECD( Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) researched 32 water regulators, and in her aim to establish the degree of independence, she based her questions on decisions, staff, and budget, or fixed in law. She found( Kauffmann, 2014) that 81 % of respondents said they are independent because decisions are taken without being subject to government assessment, while 78 % said that independence is further enforced as technical staff are chosen on technical grounds and not political criteria.
Sophie Tremolet( Tremolet, 2010), in her study to guide on best regulatory models, used the term‘ sound regulation’ to describe the essential principles of an able and capable regulator, such as clarity in the distribution of roles, with( in particular) a clear separation between the functions to determine policy, regulation and service provision, as well as other key organisational values, such as autonomy, accountability, participation, transparency, and predictability.
11. Will the DWS pass the test as an independent water regulator?
Applying the criteria suggested by Tremolet, Kauffmann, and other researchers to the DWS, it is evident that:
• There is no clear separation of functions in the organisation, as the DWS is policymaker, operator, as well as regulator.
• The responsible manager for water services regulation in the DWS must seek approval of the DWS minister before the publication of results. This is clearly a form of political scrutiny.
• As reports, such as the Blue Drop and Green Drop reports, have not been published( 2013 and 2015) or put on the DWS website very late, a perceived lack of transparency and limited opportunities for the public to engage exist.
Therefore, it is clear from the way that the DWS operates that the South African water services sector operates without an autonomous water regulator. Regulation is, thus, highly ineffective and the public is unprotected and left in the dark.
In conclusion
An independent water services regulator— an entity staffed by core competent and objective people( and not political appointees)— would provide an autonomous oversight body. This watchdog can ensure that our water is safe to drink, would call municipalities to task, provide an avenue for complaints, and ensure the efficient and sustainable water services that are so essential for our social and economic wellbeing.
Helgard Muller
Water, Sewage and Effluent( WSE) welcomes Helgard Muller as a regular contributor to this publication. Helgard recently retired from the Department of Water Affairs, where he served as deputy director-general: Policy and Regulations. His vast knowledge in policy and regulations at the Department of Water and Sanitation will add huge value to WSE.
References
1. Kauffmann, Celine.( 2014). Presentation made at Water Regulator Forum, Lisbon.
2. Republic of South Africa( RSA, 1997). Water Services Act, 1997( Act No. 108 of 1997). Pretoria: Department of Water Affairs and Forestry.
3. Republic of South Africa( RSA, 2003). Strategic framework for water services. Pretoria: Department of Water Affairs and Forestry.
4. Republic of South Africa( RSA, 2014). The 2014 Blue Drop Report on website of the Department of Water and Sanitation. Available at www. dwa. gov. za / bluedrop
5. Tremolet, Sophie.( 2010). The Regulation of Water and Sanitation Services in DCs( Developing Countries). Agence Francaise de Development, Paris. u
An effective and autonomous water service regulator can be a major driver to get us in a better position. contributor tech news industry environment infrastructure municipalities networking
Water Sewage & Effluent March / April 2017 39