Infrastructure development is a critical component of government’s drive to reignite the South African economy and place it on a more sustainable and inclusive broad-based growth path. Investment in public infrastructure is one of the non-negotiable foundations of transformation and growth if the country is to achieve greater productivity, increase its competitiveness, reduce spatial inequality and support job creation.

How can the National Infrastructure Plan 2050 (NIP 2050) achieve this goal successfully?

A recent Infrastructure South Africa discussion, in partnership with Business Day Dialogues and moderated by Clement Manyathela, included an in-depth conversation analysing the country’s plans for infrastructure delivery. A panel of experts including Dr Kgosientsho Ramokgopa, head of investment and infrastructure in the office of the President and head of Infrastructure SA; Miriam Altman, a leading economist, strategist and thought leader; Monale Ratsoma, director general of New Development Bank (NDB), African Regional Office; and Matthew Parks, the parliamentary co-ordinator at COSATU, discussed whether government is meeting the targets that have been set.

Ramokgopa pointed out that the recent catastrophic floods in KwaZulu-Natal proved that climate change had not been factored into infrastructure planning, that urbanisation had been allowed to proliferate in flood plains and that infrastructure had been poorly designed and maintained. “The state must occupy the centre,” he said, pointing to the excellence of SANRAL. Ramokgopo added that it was unnecessary to outsource capacity, especially with the collaboration of the private sector. However, of the 270 pipeline projects that the state has committed to, only 50 have been completed, indicating that upstream investment is required. He revealed that his mandate has been extended to include maintenance in a bid to address the challenge of crumbling infrastructure.

Asked about the government’s readiness for future disasters, Altman said resilience, tech-readiness and flexibility were essential to respond to such issues. The NIP advocates a move from the rigid monopoly system to a flexible model with multiple players and new ideas.

Ratsoma pointed out that fiscal involvement was a benefit of having private sector partners contributing finance and this should be embraced. Monopolies, he said, are not broadly bad but they need to be modernised and policy must drive change. Ratsoma said he would prefer to see a “bold decision” being taken to put money on one large entity with economic multipliers. The system of municipal governance needs to be transformed, for projects to appeal to financiers.

Parks applauded NIP 2050 but said he would like to see government moving faster on implementation, job creation, transparency and local procurement. Pension funds, he said, should be unlocked to make a meaningful contribution to the development of infrastructure, provided a “hawk’s eye” supervises the transactions to provide a balance between investment in social infrastructure and a reliable return for the members.

One such opportunity, added Ramokgopa, would be in basic school infrastructure, nationally.

The panel agreed that the two most important commitments in the NIP are capacity development and transparency in reporting. Without leaders in place with the technical capability to oversee projects, the plan will fail.

Ratsoma pointed out that the World Bank oversees the money it lends, and that this could help with monitoring projects, preventing ‘leakage’ of funds and installing a culture of professionalism among public servants.

Altman concluded by explaining that NIP 2050 is not a project but rather a system focused on continuously improving and constantly modernising, driving behaviour in government and supported by civil society “who need to participate in change and hold government to account”.

If you missed the discussion, please click here to view the recording.