The government spent R97,014 per toilet in a project which is 17 years late

Plans to eradicate bucket toilets across South Africa have proven to be an incredibly pricey task for the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS), with a reported R312.65 million in unauthorised and irregular expenditure amid numerous missed deadlines.

Since the BEP’s inception, with the slogan “Sanitation is Dignity”, over R3.85 billion has been spent on both bulk and internal reticulation services, removing 39,686 bucket toilets, averaging R97,014 per toilet replacement.

Water and Sanitation Minister Pemmy Majodina revealed this in a written response to questions posed to her on the programme by DA MP Stephen Moore.

South Africa’s Bucket Eradication Programme (BEP) is a government initiative aimed at eliminating the use of bucket toilets, which is a degrading and unsafe sanitation method still used in some informal settlements and rural areas.

Approximately 13 years ago, the Department of Human Settlements (then responsible for sanitation) launched the Bucket Eradication Programme to remove 50,484 bucket toilets from formal areas in the Free State, Eastern Cape, North West, and Northern Cape.

However, despite missed deadlines, 10,202 bucket toilets in the Free State and 596 in the Northern Cape still need to be replaced.

According to the Minister, the project has been completed in the North West and the Eastern Cape, with 6,261 buckets having been eradicated.

In the Eastern Cape, a total expenditure of R425,609,000 was reported to remove 5,710 bucket toilets, including the upgrading of waterborne sewage systems in the municipalities.

This translates to roughly R74,537 per bucket toilet replaced in the province.

In the North West, a total expenditure of R29,377,000 was reported to remove 641 bucket toilets, or around R45,829 per bucket toilet replacement.

Majodina said that 23,902 have been eradicated in the Free State, costing a reported R2,499,069,000. This translates to R104,554 per toilet replaced.

Additionally, 11,288 have been replaced in Northern Cape, costing the fiscus R896,059,000, or R79,381 per replacement.

This is a far cry from the project’s initial R1.2 billion allocation, which did not account for major infrastructure needs.

In a Parliamentary briefing during the country’s third administration, the then Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) and the provincial Departments from the Free State and North West admitted errors.

However, they assured Parliament that the bucket toilet system was expected to be eradicated by end-2007.

They added that R600 million was allocated in the current budget, and despite costs ranging from R4,000 to R18,000 per unit, the budget was deemed sufficient.

Background of the project

Majodina explained that “the BEP projects in the Free State and the Northern Cape were not planned properly at the inception of the project.”

She said the Department of Human Settlements failed to conduct detailed feasibility studies or plan necessary upgrades to municipal sanitation systems.

As a result, she said that the DWS had to step in and took over the implementation of the BEP in 2024, developing new plans and investing in infrastructure upgrades.

These include constructing sewer lines, sewage pump stations, and refurbishing wastewater treatment plants.

Majodina said these planning failures are the main reason BEP projects in the Free State and Northern Cape remain incomplete.

However, planning is not the sole reason. According to the minister, unauthorised expenditure totalling R292.269 million and irregular expenditure totalling R20.376 million have been reported in the BEP thus far.

When asked what action was taken regarding the unauthorised and irregular expenditure in the programme, Majodina said that the line manager was charged with misconduct in July 2017.

However, after a two-year disciplinary process, the Presiding Officer found them not guilty, citing “insufficient evidence of wrongdoing or financial negligence” in managing the BEP.

As such, “no funds were recouped as the outcome of the disciplinary case was that there was insufficient proof that the official deliberately, wilfully and/or negligently caused the Department financial loss,” said Majodina.