For the poorest South Africans, 1 April 2017 may indeed be April Fool’s Day as they return empty-handed from SASSA collection points, when the contract of Cash Paymaster Services (CPS), distributors of social grants on behalf of SASSA, comes to an end on 31 March.
For the poorest South Africans, 1 April 2017 may indeed be April Fool’s Day as they return empty-handed from SASSA collection points, when the contract of Cash Paymaster Services (CPS), distributors of social grants on behalf of SASSA, comes to an end on 31 March.
For more than 16 million beneficiaries, the next few weeks remain uncertain and deeply worrying. For people dependent on the Child Support Grant (R350 pm), the Grant for Older Persons (R1510 pm), the Disability Grant (R1510 pm), the Grant-in-aid (R350 pm), the Care Dependency Grant (R1510 pm), the War Veteran’s Grant (R1530 pm), the Foster Care Grant (R890 pm) and the Social Relief of Distress Grant, the unmitigated mess created by the incompetence and leaderless SASSA may be a case of life or death. Government’s R10 billion a month spend on the poorest of the poor is in serious jeopardy.
2017 FW de Klerk Goodwill Award to Wayne Van Niekerk and Anna (Ans) Botha It is a great pleasure for me to welcome you all
It is finally clear after the NEC of the ANC’s 8 January statement (which was, as usual, delivered by the current president) that there will be a new ANC president on 8 January, 2018. It is also clear that the groups within the NEC had to reach a compromise on the declaration, but that the group concerned about Zuma’s leadership and negative example was slightly on the winning side.
A closer reading of the entire written speech (which was not delivered in full, due to the weather conditions) shows that this is a carefully balanced statement covering a wide range of issues. But it also covers issues that Zuma (or his supporters) would not have included. One of these is the assurance that the nuclear programme will only be implemented at a pace and cost that the country can afford – the first time that something like this has been said publicly. The other issue is corruption (and with that factionalism, with money as undertone). Two other recent statements also referred to this.
The triumphant announcement of the 2016 matric results by the Minister and Department of Basic Education has subsequently been tempered as the harsh searchlight of reality has dawned.
The Day of Reconciliation was somewhat of a latecomer to the slate of negotiated and agreed on public holidays in the new South Africa.
The Day of Reconciliation was somewhat of a latecomer to the slate of negotiated and agreed on public holidays in the new South Africa. The first celebration took place on 16 December 1995 and was crafted in a way that aimed to acknowledge and affirm two different histories, one which emerged in 1838 at the Battle of Blood River, initially called Dingaan’s Day, and subsequently called Day of the Vow and Day of the Covenant. The second momentous event on the same day in 1961 was the formation of Umkhonto we Sizwe, the armed wing of the ANC.
The triumphant announcement of the 2016 matric results by the Minister and Department of Basic Education has subsequently been tempered as the harsh searchlight of reality has dawned.
Opposition political parties, specialist education NGOs, business, journalists and the private sector have rightly raised questions about the pass rate of 72.5%, announced by Minister Angie Motshekga on 4 January 2016. The questions have been motivated not by cynicism nor by opportunism but a shared concern that our children deserve better two decades since the demise of racially separate education. The Preamble of our Constitution, powerfully captures the aspiration envisaged for all citizens but perhaps especially so for the “born frees”, when it proclaims a commitment to “Improve the quality of life of all citizens and free the potential of each person”.
The deadline for President Zuma to appoint the commission of inquiry as per the Madonsela State Capture Report, came and went quietly at the end of November. Hours before the deadline, the President submitted a court application to review the Madonsela Report and its recommendations. With such an action, the recommendations are temporarily suspended. He and his legal advisors apparently don’t take any chances.
His argument is that her directive is invalid because he, as per the Constitution, did not decide independently to appoint such a Commission and that only he (and not the Chief Justice) can take this action. Mr Zuma further argues that he may not be judge and jury in his own court, as the Commission would have to report to him.
The Constitution does indeed state in section 84(2)(f) that the President is responsible for appointing commissions of inquiry. On the other hand, section 96(2)(b) provides that members of the Cabinet and Deputy Ministers may not “act in any way that is inconsistent with their office, or expose themselves to any situation involving the risk of a conflict between their official responsibilities and their private interests”. Surely that which applies to the Cabinet should also apply to the head of the Cabinet.
