INTENTION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH ACT, 2003 (ACT. 61 OF 2003).
INTENTION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH ACT, 2003 (ACT. 61 OF 2003).
The Issue
Mr. Francois Nel
National General Secretary - SAIEH / IFEH Councillor
E.mail: fnel70@icloud.com
Cell: 082 49 083 07
On behalf of:
SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
The President
South African Institute of Environmental Health
375 Mulanga Street
Makwarela Township
Sibasa
Limpopo
0950
Tel: 015 964 4543
Cell: 072 184 8012/078 647 8013
E-mail: saiehnational@gmail.com or nemakondend@gmail.com
Web page: www.saieh.co.za
NPO REG NO.: 114-254 NPO
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
____________
PETITION: INTENTION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH ACT, 2003 (ACT. 61 OF 2003).
Date: 14 January 2026
To: The Portfolio Committee on Health and on Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs.
1. Executive Summary
The South African Institute of Environmental Health (SAIEH) respectively petitions Parliament to reject the proposed amendment of the National Health Act, 2003 (Act No. 61 of 2003), that seeks to nationalize certain Municipal Health Services (MHS) functions. We submit that the functions of Water Quality Monitoring, Food Control and Chemical Safety should remain under the jurisdiction of Local Government as mandated by the Constitution and the National Health Act. This petition calls for strengthened National support to municipalities through resource allocation, human capacity and strong governance partnership, rather than centralisation. This is in keeping with the President of South Africa call for the implementation of the District Development model of service delivery.
We, the South African Institute of Environmental Health, the constituted, elected body representing the majority of Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs) in South Africa and fully recognized by the International Federation of Environmental Health, are appealing to the Portfolio Committee of National Health and the Portfolio Committee of COGTA to urgently intervene and address the intention of the National Department of Health to nationalize certain Municipal Health Services functions through an amendment to the National Health Act, 2003 (Act No. 61 of 2003).
At the World Environmental Health Day Conference, organized by the National Department of Health in collaboration with the Gauteng Department of Health and the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan.
The National Department of Health invited Environmental Health Practitioners to celebrate World Environmental Health Day through a commemoration held on 25-26 September 2025 at the Birchwood Hotel and OR Tambo Conference Centre in Boksburg, Gauteng Province. Approximately 500 delegates from the Environmental Health fraternity attended this event.
As part of the commemoration, the National Department of Health invited the South African Institute of Environmental Health to participate in a panel discussion to address Legislative Review aimed at centralizing Environmental Health Functions, specifically Water Quality Monitoring, Food Control, and Chemical Safety at the National Level. The objective of the discussions was to explore the feasibility, benefits, and risks associated with the centralization of these three municipal health services functions, as well as to identify the legislative changes necessary to facilitate this centralization.
The assembly was informed that in many instances, the Minister of Health faced challenges in obtaining reports from municipalities, particularly during outbreaks. The situation prompted the Minister to contemplate the centralisation of these specific municipal health services functions. The delegates overwhelmingly agreed that the Municipal Health Services functions should remain with Local Government level. The main challenge identified with delivery of municipal health services was general lack of human resources and financial resources in the municipalities country wide. The National Department of Health was advised to seek the most effective means of engaging with municipalities and supporting municipalities rather than pursuing the nationalization of these functions.
At present, Municipal Health Services (MHS) in South Africa are a mandated responsibility of local government, as outlined in The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 104 of 1996) and the National Health Act 61 of 2003 and the Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act No. 117 of 1998) aimed at promoting health and preventing disease through various environmental health and other factors. These essential services encompass water quality monitoring, chemical safety, food safety, waste management, health surveillance of premises, vector control, and environmental pollution control, along with the control of communicable diseases, excluding immunizations and the management of human remains. These services are provided at the district municipality level and metropolitan municipalities. This is clearly in keeping with the President of South Africa District Delivery Model for service delivery closest to the communities.
The Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act No. 117 of 1998), deals with the executive authority of various structures and in Section 84(1), assigns functions relating to environmental health to the district and metro Municipalities and Section 82(1) states Municipal Health Services as one of the mandated functions delegated to District and Metropolitan Municipalities.
2. Current challenges
2.1. Human resources
The World Health Organisation (WHO) standard for the staffing of Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs) is 1 EHP per 10,000 population; however, these staffing levels are also applicable to South Africa as outlined in the National Environmental Health norms and standards and the National Environmental Health Policy of 4 December 2013. Currently the country has 1712 (October 2024 stats), Environmental Health Practitioners servicing a population of 64.7 million (2025 estimated population), which translates to a shortage of 4758 Environmental Health Practitioners. This figure is significantly below the expected standard, indicating that South Africa has considerable progress to make, particularly in delivering municipal health services to rural regions that are more underserved and face higher rates of preventable diseases that could be addressed through EHP interventions.
The shortage of Environmental Health Practitioners within the country affects both urban and rural communities making them vulnerable to environmental health factors such as physical, biological and chemical agents.
This shortage of human resource needs is a major factor affecting the delivery of adequate environmental health services to both urban and rural communities, thus increasing the vulnerability of disease outbreaks, food outbreaks, water pollution and chemical poisoning. It must be pointed out that nationalizing and changing the designation of personnel for environmental health services will not improve these services without proper human resources and support from national government departments.
2.2. Funding
The primary issue regarding funding for municipal health services is its classification within the equitable share rather than as a conditional grant. If it were designated as a conditional grant, the funding would be specifically allocated for municipal health services; however, as part of the equitable share, it is vulnerable to being redirected for other municipal purposes. This situation is likely to pose challenges in district municipalities that lack environmental health personnel, resulting in limited awareness of health-related issues. It must be highlighted that during the commemoration, a national treasury panel member advised that the two spheres of government cannot request funding for the same function. It was therefore advised that National Department of Health should support Metros and Districts to render MHS services at local government level.
3. Reasons for the petition
3.1. The municipal health services functions earmarked for centralisation are essential for municipalities to generate revenue, thereby further debilitating them. It must be pointed out that National Department of Health must not make the same mistakes they made when the devolution of Municipal Health Services was done without additional funding, no resources and no support. Careful planning and thorough investigations and consultation must take place with its implications before this decision is made.
3.2. There is a significant likelihood that many municipalities may cease to view the remaining functions as services exclusively provided by Environmental Health Practitioners.
3.3. The centralisation of specific functions will lead to an increased encroachment into the domain of environmental health by other professions. This will create fragmentation of environmental health services. If this happens, it will take services far from communities and access will be very difficult.
3.4. We have observed instances where municipalities have struggled to provide services; in such cases, the concerned National Department intervenes by supporting these municipalities rather than withdrawing services.
3.5. There were district health offices across the country staffed by senior environmental health practitioners who collaborated closely with district municipalities; however, these positions have remained unfilled since the retirement of those officials.
3.6. Similarly, the vacancy rate of Environmental Health Practitioners increased significantly in Metropolitan municipalities due to financial challenges facing municipalities in the country.
3.7. Environmental Health Practitioners employed by municipalities are significantly more connected to local community structures compared to their counterparts in the national department.
3.8. Since the service was devolved to municipalities, not a single Minister from the Department of Health has visited any municipality to specifically address environmental health concerns. Municipalities are the sphere of government closest to communities and accountable to community services thus these critical municipal health services earmarked for nationalisation are pertinent to local communities and municipalities.
3.9. At present, environmental health practitioners are better equipped than when the services were with Department of Health.
3.10. Changing the designation of Environmental Health Practitioners will lead to more confusion, affecting Labour Relations issues and will affect our standing in the Global arena in Environmental Health. If this change is proposed, it will have implications for curriculum for universities offering this qualification and the status of Environmental Health Practitioners in the country and globally.
4. Petition request
The South African Institute of Environmental Health, therefore, respectfully requests that consider the following:
4.1. Cease the centralisation to the National level of government of Water Quality, Food Control and Chemical Safety, as these functions are closest to communities and municipalities are better suited to deliver these services to local communities and are also suitably accountable for the delivery of these services to local communities. These functions are primary source of income generation for municipalities.
4.2. Support to the municipalities, particularly those perceived as failing to deliver environmental health services as anticipated.
4.3. Ensure that the National Department of Health, along with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, to intervene and ensure that municipalities are filling the vacant environmental health positions to comply with the national ratio.
4.4. Establish National-Local support structures to assist with coordination, reporting, and capacity development in Municipal Health Services.
5. Conclusion
Environmental Health Services are best delivered by local government, closest to communities, accountable to citizens, and directly responsive to public health needs. Centralization and changing designation will not resolve resource constraints but may instead weaken governance and community engagement. The SAIEH calls for collaborative strengthening of local capacity as the sustainable way forward.
See Annexure A, for all the undersigned parties.
Submitted by:
David Nemakonde
The President
South African Institute of Environmental Health
Cell: 072 184 8012
Email: saiehnational@gmail.com or nemakondend@gmail.com
Website: www.saieh.co.za
1,340
The Issue
Mr. Francois Nel
National General Secretary - SAIEH / IFEH Councillor
E.mail: fnel70@icloud.com
Cell: 082 49 083 07
On behalf of:
SOUTH AFRICAN INSTITUTE OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
The President
South African Institute of Environmental Health
375 Mulanga Street
Makwarela Township
Sibasa
Limpopo
0950
Tel: 015 964 4543
Cell: 072 184 8012/078 647 8013
E-mail: saiehnational@gmail.com or nemakondend@gmail.com
Web page: www.saieh.co.za
NPO REG NO.: 114-254 NPO
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
____________
PETITION: INTENTION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE NATIONAL HEALTH ACT, 2003 (ACT. 61 OF 2003).
Date: 14 January 2026
To: The Portfolio Committee on Health and on Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs.
1. Executive Summary
The South African Institute of Environmental Health (SAIEH) respectively petitions Parliament to reject the proposed amendment of the National Health Act, 2003 (Act No. 61 of 2003), that seeks to nationalize certain Municipal Health Services (MHS) functions. We submit that the functions of Water Quality Monitoring, Food Control and Chemical Safety should remain under the jurisdiction of Local Government as mandated by the Constitution and the National Health Act. This petition calls for strengthened National support to municipalities through resource allocation, human capacity and strong governance partnership, rather than centralisation. This is in keeping with the President of South Africa call for the implementation of the District Development model of service delivery.
We, the South African Institute of Environmental Health, the constituted, elected body representing the majority of Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs) in South Africa and fully recognized by the International Federation of Environmental Health, are appealing to the Portfolio Committee of National Health and the Portfolio Committee of COGTA to urgently intervene and address the intention of the National Department of Health to nationalize certain Municipal Health Services functions through an amendment to the National Health Act, 2003 (Act No. 61 of 2003).
At the World Environmental Health Day Conference, organized by the National Department of Health in collaboration with the Gauteng Department of Health and the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan.
The National Department of Health invited Environmental Health Practitioners to celebrate World Environmental Health Day through a commemoration held on 25-26 September 2025 at the Birchwood Hotel and OR Tambo Conference Centre in Boksburg, Gauteng Province. Approximately 500 delegates from the Environmental Health fraternity attended this event.
As part of the commemoration, the National Department of Health invited the South African Institute of Environmental Health to participate in a panel discussion to address Legislative Review aimed at centralizing Environmental Health Functions, specifically Water Quality Monitoring, Food Control, and Chemical Safety at the National Level. The objective of the discussions was to explore the feasibility, benefits, and risks associated with the centralization of these three municipal health services functions, as well as to identify the legislative changes necessary to facilitate this centralization.
The assembly was informed that in many instances, the Minister of Health faced challenges in obtaining reports from municipalities, particularly during outbreaks. The situation prompted the Minister to contemplate the centralisation of these specific municipal health services functions. The delegates overwhelmingly agreed that the Municipal Health Services functions should remain with Local Government level. The main challenge identified with delivery of municipal health services was general lack of human resources and financial resources in the municipalities country wide. The National Department of Health was advised to seek the most effective means of engaging with municipalities and supporting municipalities rather than pursuing the nationalization of these functions.
At present, Municipal Health Services (MHS) in South Africa are a mandated responsibility of local government, as outlined in The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa (Act No. 104 of 1996) and the National Health Act 61 of 2003 and the Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act No. 117 of 1998) aimed at promoting health and preventing disease through various environmental health and other factors. These essential services encompass water quality monitoring, chemical safety, food safety, waste management, health surveillance of premises, vector control, and environmental pollution control, along with the control of communicable diseases, excluding immunizations and the management of human remains. These services are provided at the district municipality level and metropolitan municipalities. This is clearly in keeping with the President of South Africa District Delivery Model for service delivery closest to the communities.
The Municipal Structures Act, 1998 (Act No. 117 of 1998), deals with the executive authority of various structures and in Section 84(1), assigns functions relating to environmental health to the district and metro Municipalities and Section 82(1) states Municipal Health Services as one of the mandated functions delegated to District and Metropolitan Municipalities.
2. Current challenges
2.1. Human resources
The World Health Organisation (WHO) standard for the staffing of Environmental Health Practitioners (EHPs) is 1 EHP per 10,000 population; however, these staffing levels are also applicable to South Africa as outlined in the National Environmental Health norms and standards and the National Environmental Health Policy of 4 December 2013. Currently the country has 1712 (October 2024 stats), Environmental Health Practitioners servicing a population of 64.7 million (2025 estimated population), which translates to a shortage of 4758 Environmental Health Practitioners. This figure is significantly below the expected standard, indicating that South Africa has considerable progress to make, particularly in delivering municipal health services to rural regions that are more underserved and face higher rates of preventable diseases that could be addressed through EHP interventions.
The shortage of Environmental Health Practitioners within the country affects both urban and rural communities making them vulnerable to environmental health factors such as physical, biological and chemical agents.
This shortage of human resource needs is a major factor affecting the delivery of adequate environmental health services to both urban and rural communities, thus increasing the vulnerability of disease outbreaks, food outbreaks, water pollution and chemical poisoning. It must be pointed out that nationalizing and changing the designation of personnel for environmental health services will not improve these services without proper human resources and support from national government departments.
2.2. Funding
The primary issue regarding funding for municipal health services is its classification within the equitable share rather than as a conditional grant. If it were designated as a conditional grant, the funding would be specifically allocated for municipal health services; however, as part of the equitable share, it is vulnerable to being redirected for other municipal purposes. This situation is likely to pose challenges in district municipalities that lack environmental health personnel, resulting in limited awareness of health-related issues. It must be highlighted that during the commemoration, a national treasury panel member advised that the two spheres of government cannot request funding for the same function. It was therefore advised that National Department of Health should support Metros and Districts to render MHS services at local government level.
3. Reasons for the petition
3.1. The municipal health services functions earmarked for centralisation are essential for municipalities to generate revenue, thereby further debilitating them. It must be pointed out that National Department of Health must not make the same mistakes they made when the devolution of Municipal Health Services was done without additional funding, no resources and no support. Careful planning and thorough investigations and consultation must take place with its implications before this decision is made.
3.2. There is a significant likelihood that many municipalities may cease to view the remaining functions as services exclusively provided by Environmental Health Practitioners.
3.3. The centralisation of specific functions will lead to an increased encroachment into the domain of environmental health by other professions. This will create fragmentation of environmental health services. If this happens, it will take services far from communities and access will be very difficult.
3.4. We have observed instances where municipalities have struggled to provide services; in such cases, the concerned National Department intervenes by supporting these municipalities rather than withdrawing services.
3.5. There were district health offices across the country staffed by senior environmental health practitioners who collaborated closely with district municipalities; however, these positions have remained unfilled since the retirement of those officials.
3.6. Similarly, the vacancy rate of Environmental Health Practitioners increased significantly in Metropolitan municipalities due to financial challenges facing municipalities in the country.
3.7. Environmental Health Practitioners employed by municipalities are significantly more connected to local community structures compared to their counterparts in the national department.
3.8. Since the service was devolved to municipalities, not a single Minister from the Department of Health has visited any municipality to specifically address environmental health concerns. Municipalities are the sphere of government closest to communities and accountable to community services thus these critical municipal health services earmarked for nationalisation are pertinent to local communities and municipalities.
3.9. At present, environmental health practitioners are better equipped than when the services were with Department of Health.
3.10. Changing the designation of Environmental Health Practitioners will lead to more confusion, affecting Labour Relations issues and will affect our standing in the Global arena in Environmental Health. If this change is proposed, it will have implications for curriculum for universities offering this qualification and the status of Environmental Health Practitioners in the country and globally.
4. Petition request
The South African Institute of Environmental Health, therefore, respectfully requests that consider the following:
4.1. Cease the centralisation to the National level of government of Water Quality, Food Control and Chemical Safety, as these functions are closest to communities and municipalities are better suited to deliver these services to local communities and are also suitably accountable for the delivery of these services to local communities. These functions are primary source of income generation for municipalities.
4.2. Support to the municipalities, particularly those perceived as failing to deliver environmental health services as anticipated.
4.3. Ensure that the National Department of Health, along with the Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, to intervene and ensure that municipalities are filling the vacant environmental health positions to comply with the national ratio.
4.4. Establish National-Local support structures to assist with coordination, reporting, and capacity development in Municipal Health Services.
5. Conclusion
Environmental Health Services are best delivered by local government, closest to communities, accountable to citizens, and directly responsive to public health needs. Centralization and changing designation will not resolve resource constraints but may instead weaken governance and community engagement. The SAIEH calls for collaborative strengthening of local capacity as the sustainable way forward.
See Annexure A, for all the undersigned parties.
Submitted by:
David Nemakonde
The President
South African Institute of Environmental Health
Cell: 072 184 8012
Email: saiehnational@gmail.com or nemakondend@gmail.com
Website: www.saieh.co.za
1,340
Petition created on January 14, 2026