Infrastructure South Africa (ISA) has a role to play and needs to be empowered to play it, says organisation head Mameetse Masemola.
As things stand, finance minister Enoch Godongwana’s commitment of R1.1-trillion for public sector infrastructure projects over the next three years will barely scratch the surface of South Africa’s infrastructure crisis.
“The challenge is to get those projects over the line,” she says. In other words, to translate tender procurement into completed projects.
ISA told parliament in June that of 2,549 government tenders advertised in 2025, only 433, or 17%, were actually awarded.
The harsh reality, says Masemola, is that the bulk of the government’s public sector infrastructure budget is not translating into live projects.
“The fundamental thing in our view is that there is no proper upstream plan and preparation for these projects. There’s no assessment of whether the project is going to deliver successfully. You don’t do conditional assessments; you don’t have adequate engineering designs or cost-benefit analysis. None of these things are done properly upfront.
“They’re quick to go into the tender process only to find that if you don’t scope the project well, if it’s not properly prepared and packaged, it’s not bankable.”
Masemola says ISA’s role is to ensure that money made available by the National Treasury is deployed to the right projects in the right areas and that those projects are properly prepared and managed.
So why are so few meeting these minimum standards?
Because ISA hasn’t been empowered to play this role, she says.
“That’s the direction we need to get to. To support the Treasury so that it has confidence that when it says X amount of money goes to this state-owned entity, to that municipality, to that provincial or national government department, those projects are sufficiently derisked and are going to be implemented on time and on budget. We want to be that authority that supports the Treasury in that way.”
ISA is not there yet, but quality assurance is “absolutely” the goal.
“ISA must approve public sector projects as being sufficiently well prepared and having a sufficiently strong business case before they can go ahead,” Masemola says.
The question is why it still hasn’t got the authority to play this role.
Those powers have to be legislated, she says. “They must be derived in law.”
Closing the ‘ambition gap’
ISA, which was established in 2020, has been pushing for at least three years to have more influence over badly planned projects that government entities embark on. But in spite of South Africa’s infrastructure crisis, the government has been in no hurry.
A draft bill to be published for public consultation “will entail these powers so that we can really improve infrastructure outcomes in this country. Something fundamental needs to change for us to achieve the kind of ambitions the government has set out and which the country requires from institutions such as ISA.”
The only way ISA will be able to “close the ambition gap” is by getting stronger support from the cabinet, Masemola says.
“For us to discharge our responsibilities and close the gap between ambition and implementation, we need to be supported and resourced properly.”
She cites repeated reports by the auditor-general flagging billions of rand of fruitless and wasteful expenditure by state entities on ill-advised and badly prepared projects.
“That has been the consequence of a lack of financial and engineering capacity due to skills that have simply left the public sector. If you don’t have the capacity to plan these projects, then by the time they reach the procurement stage, a lot of leakage comes in. Service providers are not equipped to execute projects; they’re abandoned, and billions are being wasted as a consequence.”
All of this could have been avoided if ISA had been given the authority and influence to ensure that projects are not embarked on or funded without its approval.
“Hopefully, that gets to be resolved with the infrastructure development and planning bill … to be approved by the cabinet for publication and public consultation. Because, ultimately, something fundamental needs to change for us to ensure that the R1.1-trillion allocated by the minister of finance is used appropriately and deployed to the right projects.”
Only then will South Africa achieve the “aspirational” 20% of GDP in the gross fixed capital formation target.
To come anywhere close to achieving the National Development Plan (NDP) target of 30% gross fixed capital formation by 2030, “every single year, 16 to 20 major infrastructure projects must get into construction”, Masemola says. “Every single year between now and 2030.”
ISA only supports mega-projects of more than R1bn that will make a significant difference to gross fixed capital formation.
The fact that gross fixed capital formation has fallen to 13.6% of GDP since the Treasury made R903bn available in 2023 is directly related to the lack of infrastructure project completion over the next three years.
“A major component of gross fixed capital formation is infrastructure-related. It’s a measure of infrastructure investment in the economy. Part of the challenge around gross fixed capital formation is the conversion rate.”
To close the infrastructure investment gap by 2030, South Africa will need, in addition to the R1.1-trillion, another R1.6-trillion to deal with the infrastructure backlog, maintain current infrastructure and build new infrastructure, says Masemola.
Based on its track record of completed infrastructure projects, she believes there is no realistic chance of South Africa closing that gap in this timeframe.
“We’ve got to make sure that we are enabling more private sector-led infrastructure projects. That is happening now if you look at the renewable energy project pipeline enabled and supported by ISA, among other entities in government. Many more of those types of projects need to come online and need to be supported properly by the state.”
Among other things, this means ensuring that the permitting, licensing and authorisations they require are streamlined so that these projects can be implemented on the ground.
“Most of these projects in the energy space have gone into commercial operation on the back of work ISA has done in supporting them from a regulatory unblocking perspective.”
Project risks
Red tape remains “a massive problem”, however.
“Often the different regulatory requirements for the same project conflict with each other, preventing projects from going ahead for long periods.”
From a public sector perspective, South Africa is “a long way” from meeting either the 2030 infrastructure investment target or the NDP’s target, she says.
“But from where we’re sitting, there’s likely going to be a major and significant improvement in the renewable energy project pipeline in the next 12 months. Some of these projects are being packaged now by ISA, the Treasury and the Development Bank of Southern Africa and will be coming online in the next few months.”
How concerned is ISA by the announcement that the biggest project of all — the expansion of the power grid — has now been delayed by six months?
“I’m not au fait with the finer details, but these projects are quite complex. Despite the best intentions of the project owners, Eskom and the department of electricity, there could be complications that necessitate this.”
The construction mafia remains one of the biggest risks, she says.
“It is a major concern. We know that projects can be delayed by up to three years because of disruption by these mafias."
Another major concern is municipal spending on “vanity projects”.
ISA needs to have far more of a say in terms of identifying and approving priority infrastructure projects at municipal level, she says.
“The lack of municipal infrastructure is one of the most binding constraints on the economy. We need bulk municipal projects that can unlock economic activity and attract investment.
“We want to be able to do more to support municipalities to prioritise, prepare, package, pay for and implement these projects. That’s a role we see for ourselves.”
The municipal powers argument that has been deployed to prevent ISA from vetting municipal infrastructure projects is a luxury the country can no longer afford, she says.
“The country is impatient, people are impatient, businesses are impatient with the current speed of developing projects and implementing projects in the municipal space.”
