Tafelberg court case is a tragedy 

29 November 2019

The Western Cape High Court has been the battleground for spatial justice and housing justice this week.

The arguments presented by the Provincial Government to defend the decision to sell the Tafelberg School site in Sea Point - rather than use it for social housing, or mixed-income housing which includes social housing – are tragic for the fight to spatially transform our city.

Instead of embracing the constitutional and moral obligation to address the racial and spatial legacy of apartheid by using public land in well-located areas of the city, including the city centre and its immediate surrounds, the Province has adopted a position that is hostile to these obligations.

If these arguments prevail we will never see affordable and social housing being developed in areas where it is needed.

These arguments are being presented in our High Court on behalf of a government that claims to have prioritised “spatial transformation”. 

The hair-splitting and highly technical legal arguments are irreconcilable with the true meaning of “spatial transformation”.

These arguments are also irreconcilable with Premier Alan Winde’s commitment to “unblocking” Tafelberg.

During the Premier’s State of the Province address on 18 July 2019 Winde made a promise to “unblock Tafelberg” and other projects like it.

On 29 August 2019 during Questions to the Premier, in the Western Cape Provincial Parliament, I asked the Premier whether he remained committed to unblocking Tafelberg and if so how.

The Premier said “yes I did commit to it…we are working to try and find a solution and not ten years’ worth of extended litigation”.

Despite this commitment the application to review and rescind the previous cabinet’s decision, to sell Tafelberg rather than use it for social housing, has dominated Court 1 of the Western Cape High Court for a week – with both Ndifuna Ukwazi and the National Minister of Human Settlements contesting the legality and rationality of that decision.

Amongst the unsustainable and tragic positions adopted by the provincial government is that the provision of affordable housing on the urban peripheries is sufficient fulfilment of their constitutional obligations. 

They also argued that Sea Point is not part of the description of a restructuring zone described as “CBD and surrounds”.  This position is adopted even though the Provincial Government participated in years of planning and feasibility work to use the Sea Point site for social housing. 

As a whole the Provincial Government has adopted an attitude that is defiant and hostile. 

They simply failed to communicate a position that demonstrates a commitment to changing our urban form.

They appear happy to dig in their heels and fight this out. 

Even if the 2017 cabinet decision is found to be legally compliant the Premier has not lived up to his commitment – which he volunteered – and his government is demonstrating a tragic attitude to their moral obligation to address the apartheid structure of our towns and cities.

Issued by Brett Herron, Secretary General, GOOD, 29 November 2019