Local government policy in South Africa 1980-1989 (with specific reference to the Western Cape) : devolution, delegation, deconcentration or centralisation?

• Main Author: Cameron, Robert
• Other Authors: Welsh, David
• Format: Doctoral Thesis
• Language: English
• Published: University of Cape Town 2015
• Subjects: Political Studies; Local government; South Africa; Western Cape
• Online Access: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/15947

Bibliography: p. 512-557. === This thesis is an examination of the National Party's policy of decentralisation of powers to local authorities in the 1980s. The thesis concentrates primarily on urban local government and its objectives are: 1. To trace the evolution of the south African state's policy of devolution of powers to local authorities in the 1980s; 2. To examine critically the main features of new local government legislation in this period, with particular reference to the devolution of powers policy; 3. To apply a normative framework for analysis, which can help serve as a heuristic device, in determining the extent of decentralisation that has occurred, to selected local authorities in the western Cape. The primary sources of research material that were consulted were Hansard, Acts of parliament, government commissions and gazettes, year books, provincial debates, ordinances, gazettes, circulars and local authorities' minutes and publications. Approximately 50 qualitative interviews were also conducted. The framework of analysis utilised certain indices, namely personnel, access, functions, party politics, finance and hierarchical relations, to measure the extent of decentralisation that has occurred in three local authorities in the Western Cape. This framework helped determine that limited devolution of powers had occurred. There were four major reasons for the reluctance of the National Party to devolve extensive powers to local authorities. First and foremost, reform policy was made in an elitist, top-down manner by a small group of reformers in order to ensure that the government could share power without losing control. The corollary of this centralised policy-making was the tendency of centr.al and provincial authorities not to devolve extensive powers to local authorities. Secondly, there was the viewpoint of the central government that the local government development process had to be controlled from the top because of the lack of sufficient skills, experience and finance at local level. Thirdly, the need for macro-economic financial control was· also a brake on the devolution process. Fourthly, the government believed that, in a unitary state, central government should always have a relative degree of control over local authorities' activities.