Real story behind Masi ‘propaganda’

Lutz van Dijk

The City’s mayoral committee member for human settlements, Benedicta van Minnen, had good news for the public and all residents of Masiphumelele for the new year. In a statement (published on January 12), she declared that “all of the validated fire-affected residents” from the latest fire in Masi (which made more than 4 500 people homeless on November 29) could “be accommodated with space within the newly designed sections E and D” of the informal settlement area.

Sounds like great news, indeed. But why are hundreds still homeless? Because only “validated fire victims” are cared for – those who owned a registered shack. But what about the many fire victims who only had rented a room or a shack from somebody else?

They are “illegal”, explained ward councillor Felicity Purchase on another occasion. And what to do with “illegal” human beings, except ignore them? In fact, there are still 259 children, women and men sleeping in the Masi community hall for several weeks now under unacceptable conditions: One toilet, no shower, no kitchen facilities, matresses on the ground, no privacy. In a written statement, the public was informed by mid-December that before Christmas they would “all be housed adequately”.

When early this year concerned parents asked how their children could start school under these conditions, they were told that soon a piece of land would be made available for about 90 families. Maybe by the end of January. And what about the others outside the hall, estimated at 350 to 400 more homeless people desperately roaming around, either squeezing themselves in with someone else or trying to erect their starter kits (as received by the City earlier) on any land close to Masi?

Among them are those who had to make way for much-needed firebreak space or those who had been pushed away because some rebuilt their shacks bigger than was permitted.

More than 170 violent evictions by law enforcement happened since then and could happen any moment again, also to those who had received City starter kits earlier. So, surely, they could not all be “illegal”?

But where must they go? All human beings, “illegal” or not, are breathing, must eat, sleep and need water and toilets. Altogether, probably more than 600 former fire victims are still homeless since the end of November.

Not to mention a few individuals who are not fire victims, but just poor and trying their chances by posing as fire victims. This is what extreme poverty produces. It can be avoided, at least reduced, if there would be honest communication from the City towards the community leadership and all NGOs working in Masi.

It is not. Instead, the City officials retreat to “positive propaganda” towards the public and communicate only with selected NGOs and those Masi residents most dependent on them by declaring them as “leaders”.

Those who are community leaders for years are widely ignored and their plea for co-operation and practical action (see also their “Masi Memorandum” published in the Cape Times on December 22,) ridiculed. All of us will regret this strategy sooner rather than later, once new protests might erupt, not only around housing, but also about ongoing drug abuse and the big businesses of local drug lords.

Not one of the drug lords has been arrested, instead more than 30 Masi protesters will stand trial on February 2 in the Simon’s Town Magistrate’s Court. Let us not forget: It was mostly the Masi community leaders (all of them unpaid volunteers) who successfully negotiated an end to the violent protests since mid-September.

And here comes the real good news: There is public land available where no neighbours complain; instead, would even appreciate development. Why does nobody know about it? Because the City prefers secrecy.

This is what Masi community leaders had to learn when they – in their efforts to assist the most desperate in their community – only a week ago approached the senior management of SANParks to ask their advice, as Masi borders hugely with them.

To everybody’s surprise they were told that already in 2006 a piece of land was sold to the City which SANParks was not interested in, as it does not have any value for their nature conservation work.

In all previous communication the City had told the community leaders the opposite: That this portion of land (roughly 3-4ha, no more details given here to avoid invasion by others) could never be developed as SANParks would be opposed to it. When we heard the opposite last week and immediately informed ward councillor Purchase, she appeared to be positive and committed herself to inform the City officials urgently, as the size and location of this land could be a solution for much more than only disaster relief.

This glimpse of hope was crashed only days later: At a second meeting with SANParks, especially arranged for the City officials to hear the good news, none of them arrived.

But the SANParks management was indignantly asked in a letter not to give any further information to the Masi leadership and certainly not to make any promises (which they never did). Meanwhile, we learnt another interesting detail: In connection with a public petition for Masi called “No more charity – but true sharing of land and housing” (2014), signed by more than 900 people from Masi and the whole Fish Hoek valley, an expert’s plan had been presented to develop the whole area of the informal settlement. Wetlands for more than 10 000 residents, sustainable with basic services and four access roads.

We were told then that this is impossible as 90 percent of the informal settlement is pristine wetland. SANParks a week ago: No, all the land in question is not wetland, but a reed bed which – again – has no value for them.

Just imagine such a dishonesty to any other civic organisation from Kommetjie to Fish Hoek and from Noordhoek to Scarborough.

Everybody would be up in arms. But here it’s “only” Masi. Fortunately, more and more neighbours who care for the Masi community, where most of the local workforce is coming from (40 percent of the valley’s residents are living in Masi), have finally, especially since the latest protests and fire, begun to ask questions.

For example: If it is true that it would cost around R20 million to develop the informal settlement, where more than 10 000 Masi residents live, every year prone to fire and flooding, why are they not doing it?

The few past weeks of disaster relief alone were costing the City close to R30m. Just multiply this for the coming decade by 10: R300m in public money wasted.

With honest communication by the authorities and a shared vision with most residents and neighbours, Masiphumelele could develop within the next 10 years into a prosperous and ordinary town with its own council authority of elected, paid and accountable leaders.

l Dr van Dijk is since 2002 founding co-director of the HOKISA Children’s Home in Masiphumelele