The alignment of social and labour plan (SLP) commitments with municipal integrated development plans (IDPs)

Abstract

According to s 23, 24 & 25 of the MPRDA, mining companies must submit a Social and Labour Plan (SLP) when applying for mining rights, and the local economic development (LED) of the SLP must be aligned with the local and district municipality Integrated Development Plan (IDP). The alignment between the SLP and IDP local economic development initiatives provides a platform for investment opportunity, economic growth, poverty reduction and infrastructure development (ICMM, 2006). The main objective of this research was to determine the extent to which the mining SLPs are aligned with municipal IDPs. The research was conducted using a qualitative method for three case studies, a literature review, a documents review (of the SLPs and IDPs), questionnaires and interviews. The mining industry charter gives mining companies targets for the development of local communities through their SLPs. The King reports on corporate governance also give the industry ways to report on corporate social responsibility and sustainability. The local government Municipal Systems Act governs the development of local communities through the development of IDPs as per s 29.There are also debates on the increase of local beneficiation by mining companies, thereby creating jobs and accessing incentives in the form of royalty payments and tax relief. In addition there is a growing demand for a portion of such royalties and taxes to be paid directly into the municipalities to improve the LED and infrastructure challenges. The main challenge with alignment is how mining companies deal with related community grievances and risks, capacity constraints at local government and the DMR, poor stakeholder engagement and the backlog of service delivery. Overall, in the three case studies the KPIs were generally aligned (criteria B) with the municipal IDPs, which indicates that there is a general compliance with the DMR regulations and guidelines. The SLPs, socio-economic background and key economic activities were aligned (criteria A) with the IDPs, while projects and programmes were also generally aligned (criteria B). The negative social impacts were just aligned (criteria C) with the IDPs while no KPI was found to be not aligned (criteria D) with IDP. Some of the initiatives to improve the positive social impacts were the continuous Social Impact Assessment (SIA) throughout the life of mine. Most importantly the research identified that there is a need to improve capacity in local government for dealing with local economic development as this will also aid/improve the alignment of IDPs and SLPs.