logo
Industry sees red after Mantashe says no BEE for mining exploration, contradicting draft Bill

Industry sees red after Mantashe says no BEE for mining exploration, contradicting draft Bill

Daily Maverick2 days ago

A new mist of uncertainty has shrouded mining policy just as progress is being made on other fronts such as the looming rollout of the long-awaited mining cadastre to address the applications backlog for mining and prospecting rights and permits.
The draft Mineral Resources Development Bill (MRDP) has stirred a hornet's nest in the mining industry and with the ANC's GNU political partner the DA, and its ill-conceived nature was on full display on Wednesday when Minister Gwede Mantashe confusingly said the BEE requirements for exploration were not there and would be removed if they were.
'Now, and in the future, there's no provision for BEE on exploration,' Mantashe, the Minister of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (MPR), said during a media briefing at the conclusion of the AGM for the Minerals Council SA, the main body representing the country's mining industry.
That's neither the Minerals Council's reading of the draft Bill nor Daily Maverick's interpretation of it.
'We raised this point over and over in our engagements with the department that the amendments must specifically exclude prospecting companies from empowerment requirements … Yet in this draft Bill, none of that is included,' Minerals Council CEO Mzila Mthenjane said in a statement on Tuesday.
The thing about prospecting – or exploration – is that it is an extremely high-risk activity that onerous BEE rules will severely curtail. And without exploration, the South African mining industry has no viable long-term future.
Daily Maverick asked Mantashe to clarify this afterwards and he responded by saying: 'If there is a BEE requirement in the Bill for prospecting, it must be removed.'
So, the industry's complaints on this front are not falling on deaf ears, though it has raised concerns that its inputs were not included in the draft.
And a new mist of uncertainty has shrouded policy just as progress is being made on other fronts such as the looming rollout of the long-awaited mining cadastre to address the applications backlog of mining and prospecting rights and permits.
Overall, the industry is not happy with the Bill, which once again moves the goal posts at a time when investors are crying for certainty for a sector that remains crucial for South Africa's low-growth and high-unemployment economy.
'When we ask ourselves this question, does this Bill promote investment and create jobs, we see it has some serious short-comings,' said Paul Dunne, the CEO of Northam Platinum, who was re-elected as president of the Minerals Council SA.
'They are both substantive in nature and technical … Council is a very considered, professional advocacy group. We represent at least 99% of the mining industry in this country and our submission [on the draft Bill] will be made public when the right time comes, and we will engage very, very robustly with the department and the minister on this issue,' he said.
The good-natured Dunne added: 'The minister knows us very well. We are very tough. And minister, we are coming.'
That raised a chuckle from the audience and Mantashe, but it is no laughing matter – except for lawyers, who are going to giggle all the way to the bank.
The draft Bill raises the almost certain prospect of arduous and time-consuming legal and court battles – another obstacle to the investment that the mining sector and wider South African economy desperately need to reach faster levels of growth and job creation.
It has also raised hackles in the GNU, which is supposed to be the ANC's main governing partner.
One bone of contention is embedding the Mining Charter into the legal framework, which could once again unleash the 'once empowered, always empowered' debate which the industry has already won in court. But fresh legal scraps could loom on this front.
This played out in the courts when Gupta stooge Mosebenzi Zwane was the minister in charge of mining, and the term refers to the industry's contention that once a company reached a required BEE ownership threshold that should be set in stone even if black shareholders decided to sell their stakes – which is the point of owning shares.
The government at the time held that mining companies needed to endlessly keep topping up BEE stakes, a state of affairs that would dilute value and repel foreign as well as domestic investment.
'By expressly including the Mining Charter as law and not simply policy, the Bill allows for the rapid overturning of t'once empowered, always empowered', opening the door to the need for constant injections of new BEE investors, a feature which would on its own make investing a lossmaking prospect,' MP James Lorimer, the DA spokesperson on Minerals and Petroleum Resources, said in a statement.
'The Bill is poorly thought out. It is contradictory and unclear in several places. It grants new powers to the Minister to rule the industry according to his own whim.'
What this means
More policy confusion and uncertainty at a time when South Africa needs both to extract wealth, investment and job creation from its rich minerals endowment. It will also test the GNU and likely trigger a tsunami of legal challenges for South Africa's already stretched court system. The ANC is acting like it has a two-thirds majority in Parliament on this front and has yet to be pulled back to Earth by the laws of political gravity.
Mantashe on Wednesday reminded the industry of its racist past, and that is no bad thing – in an age when US President Donald Trump is parroting fascist-inspired lies about 'white genocide', hard historical truths need to be confronted head-on.
The South African mining industry was the economic bedrock of apartheid, subjecting an overwhelmingly black migrant labour force to ruthless exploitation.
But the times are changing and the industry – partly in response to government regulation and union demands but also wider concerns among investors foreign and domestic – has made strides from the indignities of the apartheid past on a range of fronts, including ownership, wages, communities, health and safety.
BEE as a mantra has not delivered a utopia while enriching a relatively small elite, and it is also starting to look like a fossilised relic in an age when – despite the Trump administration's efforts to turn the tide – capital is largely looking for kinder, gentler returns.
The Bill, for now, is not law and open to public comment. Break out the popcorn for the fireworks. DM

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Place name changes likely to run foul of shaky political coalitions, especially at local level
Place name changes likely to run foul of shaky political coalitions, especially at local level

Daily Maverick

time13 minutes ago

  • Daily Maverick

Place name changes likely to run foul of shaky political coalitions, especially at local level

In late March 2025, thanks in no small part to an invitation by colleagues from the Gauteng Geographical Names Committee, I gave input on the Gauteng leg of the countrywide South African Geographical Names Amendment Bill public consultation workshops. The Bill is a proposed amendment of the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture's (DSAC) South African Geographical Names Act 118 of 1998 – the principal place names statute in the country – as part of the national department's efforts to seamlessly standardise geographical names across South Africa. The well-attended Gauteng public engagement workshop formed part of nine consultative provincial visits by the department, following which the department will incorporate stakeholders' submissions and table the Bill to Parliament for further consideration. At the workshop, attendees were assigned to three breakout rooms – commissions – where we discussed the Bill's proposed clauses and later gave the department feedback at the plenary. The SA Geographical Names Amendment Bill proposes substantial and striking changes to the 1998 Geographical Names Act. This includes formalisation of South Africa's nine provincial geographical names committees advising and making place name recommendations to provincial members of the executive committee; adequate placename research and consultation; and formation of an independent three-to-five-expert placenames Appeals Tribunal that will review 'rejected' placename proposals. Intriguingly, the Appeals Tribunal, anticipated to be appointed by the national minister of Sport, Arts and Culture, will purportedly have more power than the national minister. Clauses around provincial geographical names committees authorise their setup, formalisation, morphology (10 to 15 experts), functioning, and tenure (five years of national council as opposed to the current three years spelt out by the principal act). 'Rigorous public participation' Provisos pertaining to research and adequate consultation mandate rigorous public participation and make requisite authorities' ample communication with local communities, from start to finish. Given that placename changes in South Africa have courted considerable controversy, with a lack of consultation having been cited as one potent driver of fiercely opposed toponym changes, clauses around adequate community participation and appeals are arguably a welcome proposal. Yet, the Bill is seemingly silent on matters of place-naming and name-changing at the local level. Indeed, the Bill does not make provision for local geographical names committees or bodies advising and giving geographical names recommendations to relevant members of the mayoral committee at the municipal sphere, referring to them only as 'subcommittees'. I raised this as an issue at the plenary and at the commission I was assigned to. Following this, some local geographical names committee members from Gauteng's local municipalities lamented the absence of clauses around local geographical names committees in the two-tier governance model characteristic of district and local municipalities, raising questions around how committees in such setups would be constituted. While some Gauteng Geographical Names Committee members argued that such omissions would be made up for by the fact that some local geographical names committee members also sat on the provincial geographical names committee in Gauteng and possibly others countrywide, thereby acting as transmission belts, the 'neglect' of local geographical names committees on the Amendment Bill remained palpable. Not only is this surprising, but it is also concerning, given naming-related controversies and ongoing on-the-ground governance issues at municipal level. In South Africa, (re)naming-related controversies, including petitioning, litigation and picketing, are arguably most pronounced at the local sphere of government. Consider, for instance, the then-ANC-controlled City of Tshwane's contested 2012 renaming of 25 streets in Pretoria Central and surrounds, which dragged on for years owing to, inter alia, court action by opposing AfriForum. Or the controversial wholesale renaming of Durban's 108 streets, which, following the Democratic Alliance's successful appeal at the Supreme Court of Appeal on grounds that the eThekwini Metropolitan Council had not followed proper procedures in its first phase of renaming, saw nine new street names being reverted. Unstable coalitions More concerningly, the Amendment Bill does not address the proverbial elephant in the room – pronounced unstable coalition arrangements across all governmental spheres, especially at the municipal level. Because South Africa's biggest political parties are increasingly unable to secure outright majority wins at local polls since 2016, hung councils have become a staple of the country's electoral politics, having grown from 27 in 2016 to 66 in 2021. This is most evident in many South African metropolitan municipalities where, thanks to multiple motions of no-confidence, shaky coalitions have proliferated. For instance, a 2024 study by The Outlier shows that since the 2016 local polls, no mayor in Johannesburg has been able to finish his/her term. Political opportunism This is evidence of political instability imposed by coalition arrangements in a country that is yet to promulgate laws for governing them. Suffice to say, the dearth of laws governing coalition arrangements in South Africa's largest urban centres and elsewhere has created opacity and made room for political opportunism. Some of this political opportunism is evident in (re)naming. Here, the case of eThekwini, where renaming controversies have mainly played out between the proposing ANC and the opposing IFP, is instructive. Take, for example, the controversial 2011 renaming of Mangosuthu Highway to Griffiths Mxenge Highway in honour of the ANC veteran, civil rights lawyer and anti-apartheid activist who was assassinated by an apartheid death squad on the road in question in 1981. In an open letter to the then KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) premier, the IFP had lamented that the name change was highly provocative, divisive and detrimental to reconciliation efforts in a province with a sordid history of party-political violence. The IFP had also posited that the name change would undermine community will, since residents in Umlazi, a township through which the highway passes, had in effect specifically requested the previous honour. Notwithstanding the IFP's objections and arguments, the ANC in eThekwini and KZN had okayed the renaming on the grounds that Buthelezi was a living person. The IFP found this reasoning irrational since several geographical features were named after statesman Nelson Mandela, then a living person, like Prince Mangosuthu Buthelezi. In an interesting turn of events, in November 2021, a decade after the renaming and shortly after South Africa's disastrous sixth municipal elections, the ANC, determined to form coalitions with the IFP in KZN's 21 hung municipalities, was left with little choice but to bow to several IFP terms and conditions. One was that the ANC rename Griffiths Mxenge Highway back to Mangosuthu Highway. The ANC allegedly agreed to abide by this 'coalition precondition' and several others, which then led to the surprising coalition. While Griffiths Mxenge Highway has not been renamed back in honour of the IFP's now-departed leader, this saga demonstrates that geographical name-changing initiatives are liable to be held hostage by party politics and can be used for party-political bargaining. Where to now? Where does all this leave the geographical names committees at provincial and local levels? How do we ascertain that the political authorities to whom the South African Geographical Names Council and naming sub-committees report take the committees' voices/recommendations seriously? Really, how do we ensure that the committees are meaningfully engaged and 'shielded' from party-political manoeuvring? Equally, while the Amendment Bill makes provision for the establishment of an autonomous and powerful placenames Appeals Tribunal, how sure are we that the body will be truly impartial and independent, especially given its (future) functioning in a highly charged party-political setting? According to a Gauteng City-Region Observatory occasional paper on municipal demarcation in Sedibeng and Gauteng (particularly) and SA (generally), supposedly independent bodies in areas such as municipal (re)demarcation, another controversial issue in the country, have been affected by party politics. For instance, before the establishment of a single Municipal Demarcation Board, there existed provincial boards that made boundary demarcation-related decisions. The provincial demarcation boards, like the one for Gauteng, had made partial boundary re-demarcation decisions informed by political partisanship and aimed at gerrymandering. In fact, several gerrymandering instances in the 1990s were largely responsible for the removal of municipal and ward demarcation responsibilities from provincial control and the establishment of an independent national body that would make final delineation decisions. Disturbingly, the same Gauteng City-Region Observatory occasional paper finds that notwithstanding the national Municipal Demarcation Board's quasi-independence and enjoyment of constitutional protection, opposition parties and ordinary citizens alike have sometimes accused it of, inter alia, political slant in favour of the ANC, and making demarcation decisions without proper consultation. In the context of existing naming committees and the proposed Appeals Tribunal, since most name changes in South Africa have been proposed by political parties and authorities across all governmental spheres, how certain are we that the Appeals Tribunal and place-naming committees will be truly neutral, impartial and independent? With the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture having finalised the province-to-province consultative workshops around its proposed Amendment Bill, the jury is still out on whether the Bill will pass in Parliament. More importantly, there is no telling whether questions around local geographical names committees, messy coalition arrangements and incessant party-political changes at the municipal level will be considered and incorporated in the resultant amended Act.

Starlink in South Africa: A lifeline or a Trojan Horse
Starlink in South Africa: A lifeline or a Trojan Horse

IOL News

time2 hours ago

  • IOL News

Starlink in South Africa: A lifeline or a Trojan Horse

Understanding Starlink: Costs and controversies in South Africa. Image: Reuters As South Africa contemplates relaxing Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) regulations to enable Elon Musk's Starlink to operate within its borders, a fierce national conversation must begin not about internet speeds, but about sovereignty, trust, and transformation. On the surface, Starlink is everything this country has been waiting for: a space-age solution to a deeply terrestrial problem. In a country where only 10–15% of rural households have stable internet and where countless schools, clinics and police stations still struggle with basic connectivity, the promise of fast, reliable satellite broadband sounds like nothing short of a miracle. But South Africa has been down this road before. Too often, technological 'solutions' have arrived draped in global capital, wrapped in good intentions, and laced with fine print that erodes local agency. And this time, it comes delivered by Elon Musk, a billionaire with a South African birth certificate but a political track record that suggests deep contempt for this country's values, institutions, and transformation agenda. Elon Musk has previously claimed Starlink was barred from operating in South Africa because he is not Black, an allegation South African officials refuted. Image: AFP Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ Economic Implications: Bridging the Digital Divide By providing high-speed internet access, Starlink could spur educational opportunities, healthcare delivery, and economic development in regions currently lacking robust infrastructure. However, concerns persist regarding the affordability of Starlink's services for low-income households. The cost of equipment and subscriptions, currently upwards of R10,000 for the initial setup and about R1,000 per month, may remain prohibitive, thereby limiting the service's reach to those who might benefit most. Moreover, the impact on existing internet service providers and the broader telecommunications market dynamics warrants careful consideration to avoid unintended economic disruptions. Rural Connectivity in Numbers: What the Data Says According to recent Icasa and Stats SA data, only 1 in 10 rural households in South Africa have access to stable broadband internet. In provinces like the Eastern Cape, Limpopo, and parts of KwaZulu-Natal, connectivity levels fall far below even that, creating a chasm between urban and rural access to information and services. Schools and educational institutions in these areas face immense challenges, and teachers often lack digital resources, and learners cannot access online learning platforms. Police stations, clinics, and municipal offices in rural communities frequently struggle with outdated or unreliable internet, hampering everything from filing crime reports to accessing national health databases. If made accessible through government partnerships or subsidisation, Starlink could potentially revolutionise service delivery in these critical sectors. Reliable internet could enable: E-learning platforms, including access to online textbooks, Zoom classes, and coding workshops. Real-time data sharing and crime monitoring for police stations. Telemedicine services in rural clinics. The Infrastructure We Desperately Need South Africa needs a Starlink-like technology. Urgently. The digital divide is a national emergency. In many rural communities, schoolchildren are still being taught without internet access, educators are cut off from digital training resources, and police stations file paperwork by hand. For millions, reliable internet is not just a tool; it's the key to upward mobility, access to education, government services, employment and entrepreneurship. Fibre rollout has been uneven and slow, hampered by budget constraints, corruption, and poor planning. For many municipalities, it simply isn't coming. Starlink bypasses this bottleneck completely. Its satellite network can beam high-speed internet to anywhere in the country, virtually overnight. Its potential to transform rural economies, unlock innovation, and bridge geographic isolation is immense. If implemented responsibly, Starlink could become the backbone of South Africa's digital future. But there is a catch. And it's not a small one. Elon Musk: A Troubling Messenger for a Promising Message This isn't just about technology. It's about who controls it, what values they bring, and how they wield influence when they disagree with a sovereign state. Musk has made no secret of his disdain for South Africa's transformation policies. He has repeatedly called BEE 'racist', falsely implied that South Africa persecutes minorities, and re-platformed extremists on X (formerly Twitter) who push the debunked narrative of 'white genocide' in South Africa. He has also used his AI chatbot, Grok, to propagate misleading information about the country's crime, land reform, and race relations, often to an international audience unfamiliar with South Africa's nuanced, post-apartheid reality. In short, Musk has demonstrated he is not simply a tech CEO; he is a right-wing and racist political actor with a clear ideological agenda, one that aligns disturbingly well with global far-right narratives. The same man seeking control over vast swathes of South Africa's internet infrastructure is the man publicly undermining its constitutional efforts to redress historical inequality. Can Starlink Be a Trojan Horse? We must then consider a chilling possibility: what if Starlink is not just a communications tool but a potential ideological delivery mechanism? Because Starlink operates independently of local ISPs and existing telecom frameworks, it creates a 'grey zone' where South African regulatory oversight may be severely limited. Suppose Starlink users connect directly to satellites, bypassing local data routing. In that case, it becomes exponentially harder for Icasa or the Department of Communications to monitor or enforce content compliance, cybersecurity laws, or data protection standards. There is a real risk that Starlink's user interfaces could favour Musk-owned platforms, including X and Grok, by default, particularly in rural or first-time internet environments. In such areas, where people have never encountered the internet before, what they first encounter shapes their worldview. If their first exposure to global information comes filtered through Musk's ideological lens, South Africa may find itself nurturing a digitally colonised generation, raised on disinformation, anti-BEE sentiment, and narratives hostile to democracy and inclusion. Musk's history of publicly antagonising states, suggests that he does not hesitate to politicise access and operations. The infrastructure we welcome in a crisis could become a tool for coercion down the line. Desperation Must Not Lead to Dependency South Africa is not naïve. We know what foreign capital can do when left unchecked. We've seen the headlines about tech giants hoarding data, undermining labour rights, and lobbying against taxation and transformation. Yet we are also a country of immense potential, home to some of the most entrepreneurial, resilient, and digitally fluent young people on the continent. We deserve the best infrastructure the world can offer, but on our terms. Letting Starlink in without robust, transparent, and enforceable conditions would be an act of desperation masquerading as progress. It would open the floodgates for a private surveillance satellite network managed by a man who has shown hostility toward our democracy, contempt for our redress laws, and a worrying willingness to deploy his platforms in the service of racial disinformation. We Need the Technology, But Not the Ideology Here's the bottom line: South Africa needs what Starlink does. But we do not need what Musk represents. If Starlink wants to operate in South Africa, it must commit formally, contractually, and transparently to: Respecting BEE or offering clear, independently monitored equity equivalence programmes. Routing local traffic locally, with compliance with data protection laws. Maintaining strict neutrality in content prioritisation, with no bias toward X or Grok Submitting to regulatory oversight and policy compliance, like every other communications provider This is not a technophobic stance. It is a constitutionally grounded, economically rational one. We should welcome the infrastructure, but not on bended knee. Digital Inclusion Beyond Starlink: The Broader Blueprint While Starlink presents a high-tech, fast-paced solution, it cannot be the sole pillar of South Africa's digital inclusion strategy. More community-orientated, cost-effective models have shown promise and should be scaled up. Some alternatives include: TV White Space technology: Leveraging unused broadcasting frequencies to deliver broadband to remote areas at lower costs. Municipal broadband initiatives: Cities like Tshwane have experimented with free public Wi-Fi zones. A national roll-out of such models could bridge urban-rural divides. -Zero-rated data services: The success of zero-rated educational platforms like Siyavula and university portals during Covid-19 lockdowns shows how mobile networks can support learning and service delivery. Public-private infrastructure sharing: Local ISPs, in collaboration with the government and telecom giants, can pool resources to extend fibre-optic networks incrementally. Community mesh networks: Examples in Kenya and India show how decentralised, community-owned networks can operate at minimal costs with local buy-in and employment. These models foreground inclusivity, localisation and sustainability, important considerations if digital equity, and not just digital expansion, is the ultimate goal. Nco Dube a political economist, businessman, and social commentator. Image: Supplied

Malatsi: Communications sector's proposed policy changes already provided for in law
Malatsi: Communications sector's proposed policy changes already provided for in law

Eyewitness News

time4 hours ago

  • Eyewitness News

Malatsi: Communications sector's proposed policy changes already provided for in law

CAPE TOWN - Minister of Communications Solly Malatsi has once again moved to defend proposed policy changes in the sector, saying he's not attempting to do anything not already provided for in law. Many believe the regulations are being designed to benefit foreign satellite company Starlink, the company of tech mogul Elon Musk. On Thursday, Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni, a former communications minister, said no discussions were had with Musk during government's visit to Washington last week. Malatsi has been at odds with political parties in Parliament this week - including the African National Congress (ANC), over regulations that would forego Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) requirements for communication operators in favour of equity equivalents. READ: Malatsi defends policy directive to ease company transformation targets and BEE requirements Responding to member's statements in the National Assembly on Thursday, Malatsi again sought to explain the move, telling the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party that he was working within the prescripts of the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) Act, passed during the administration of their leader, Jacob Zuma, in 2014. 'This is not some invention by a villager from Limpopo called Malatsi. It's there in the rules.' Answering questions at a post-Cabinet briefing earlier in the day, Ntshavheni also defended her actions as a former communications minister. 'We've never considered Starlink. I've never said that. I said South Africa considered developing or introducing satellite communication in the country.' Malatsi said the new regulations will create a more competitive environment for multiple operators.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store