School safety and sanitary support get boost in Lim Edu budget
POLOKWANE – The Department of Education has received a total budget allocation of R42.5b for the 2025/26 financial year, MEC Mavhungu Lerule-Ramakhanya announced during her budget vote speech at the Limpopo Legislature on April 8.
Strengthening school safety
Among the key priorities in the budget is school safety, with R4m allocated to tackle the growing incidents of crime and violence in schools.
The MEC cited recent break-ins at Kuschke Agricultural School and Taxila Secondary School, as well as similar incidents in Vhembe and Seshego, as examples of the urgent need for intervention.
'Social ills such as bullying, drug abuse, gangsterism, rape, and suicide are on the rise,' she said.
'We will intensify interventions by renewing memorandums of understanding with relevant departments and stakeholders, she said.'
The department will also host a Limpopo Schools Safety Indaba to strengthen partnerships aimed at curbing violence and improving the safety of learners and staff.
Dignity for girls
A notable allocation of R40.287m will go towards the Sanitary Dignity Project, which aims to provide sanitary towels to 3 000 female learners across the province.
Scholar transport and independent schools
The scholar transport system will receive R365.2m, aimed at preventing geographical exclusion for learners who live far from schools.
Independent schools in the province are set to receive R175.5m in recognition of their role in expanding access to education.
Budget breakdown
The R42.529b budget represents a 6.7% increase from the adjusted appropriation of R39.8b in 2024/25.
The breakdown is as follows:
Equitable Share: R37.8b.
Conditional Grants: R3.8b.
Own Revenue: R794.7m.
Economic classification allocations:
Compensation of employees: R32.5b.
Goods and services: R4.4b.
Transfers and subsidies: R4.b.
Capital assets: R1.4b.
At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading!
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
a day ago
- The Citizen
R530 million budget brings water relief to Limpopo traditional leaders, but concerns persist
Limpopo Premier Dr Phophi Ramathuba acknowledged that water provision in Limpopo had regressed to 64.2%. Traditional leadership, such as headmen chiefs and paramount chiefs across Limpopo, have received clean borehole water from the R530 million annual budget tabled by the department of cooperative governance, human settlements and Traditional Affairs. The Fetakgomo/Tubatse local municipality was the first to roll out the programme, with many praising the council and the Sekhukhune district municipality. But does the entire 6.4 million Limpopo populace have this basic human need, as promised by the ANC-led government during the advent of democracy in 1994? In the 2025/26 financial year, the Limpopo cooperative governance, human settlements and traditional affairs department under the leadership of MEC Basikop Makamu told The Citizen it has allocated a total budget of R2.5 billion this financial year (2025/26) to bankroll its day-to-day activities, including the provision of fresh tap water to traditional houses and their offices throughout the province. MEC Makamu said the budget allocation per programme is R449 million for administration, R1.2 billion for human settlements, R333 million for cooperative governance and R530 million for traditional affairs. Makamu promised the department will continue having the best interests of all its traditional leaders at heart, as he said they were on the coalface of human development because of their proximity to communities. Collaboration needed This week, Fetakgomo/Tubatse local municipality mayor Eddy Maila echoed Makamu's sentiments, saying his municipality and traditional leadership were working together to change lives in Burgersfort and surrounding farms and villages. 'We are a mining town and water is essential to our mining explorations and for our day-to-day work in our communities. Maila said the Fetakgomo Tubatse local municipality is not a water service authority. But the municipality, he said, relied on the Sekhukhune district municipality to provide water and sanitation services. 'But I can tell you that since mayor Minah Bahula assumed office, we have seen vivid interventions that she has made to ensure that our people have access to water. 'With her intervention, clean running water has been provided to our magoshi (traditional leadership) under Fetakgomo Tubatse through the drilling of durable boreholes. 'These include Ga- Seroka, Tau Mankotsane, Ga Radingwana, Ga Masehleng, Ga Mampuru, Ga Phasha, Ga Manoke, Selatole, Ga Mashabela, Mareseleng, Maakubu, Ga Riba, Ga Selala, Ga Maroga and Mafarafara.' ALSO READ: Mathabatha admits Limpopo's water challenges Water issues During his state of the local municipal address at the weekend, Maila said in March this year, he and his entourage accompanied Bahula to hand over two contracts for bulk water services in Ga Malekane and Ga Mampuru. These intervention, he said, is bound to see the water challenges addressed with precision and distinction in the sub-region. Limpopo Premier Dr Phophi Ramathuba acknowledged that water provision in Limpopo had regressed to 64.2%. Areas hard-hit by the shortages are the Capricorn, Vhembe, Sekhukhune and the Mopani regions. The Premier said her office has established a task team to address water shortages in the province. 'We acknowledge that water access in Limpopo has regressed to 64.2%, leaving 35.8% of our people without this necessity.' Giyani water project Meanwhile, the R1.3 billion water reticulation project in Giyani is well underway. Phase 1 of the project is now complete and Phase 2 has started in earnest. This project is part of the broader Nandoni-Giyani water project and is funded by the water services infrastructure grant. It aims to improve water access for residents who have faced water shortages in the area since 2009. The department of water and sanitation has since allocated a whopping R4.5 billion to restore water in Giyani since August 2014 to date. NOW READ: Limpopo reels from GBVF and ritual murder surge
The Citizen
3 days ago
- The Citizen
Gauteng MEC to visit Maponya Mall to assess ongoing tensions in public transport sector
Gauteng MEC to visit Maponya Mall to assess ongoing tensions in public transport sector Gauteng MEC for Roads and Transport, Kedibone Diale-Tlabela, will visit Maponya Mall on Thursday to assess ongoing tensions in the public transport sector, engage with affected stakeholders, and review the situation on the ground. This is according to the South African Government News Agency ( The visit follows a violent incident on Wednesday at the mall, allegedly involving taxi operators and e-hailing drivers, which resulted in one fatality and left two others injured. ALSO READ: One dead in suspected taxi violence at Maponya Mall In response to the growth of e-hailing services, President Cyril Ramaphosa signed an amended National Land Transport Act (NLTA) 5 of 2009 into law last year, allowing e-hailing operators to apply for operating licences in the same manner as other public transport providers. @sowetourbannews Community blocks roads following e-hailing violence at Maponya Mall, Soweto Protestors march in support of e-hailing drivers after a e-hailing driver was killed in a suspected taxi violence attack on August 13. Workers of Maponya Mall also came out in numbers in their uniform to join the protest. 📹: @ #maponyamall #klipspruit ♬ original sound – Soweto Urban News – Soweto Urban News The National Land Transport Act was originally presented to the president in 2020 but was returned to the National Assembly for reconsideration. The revised Bill updates the Act to reflect developments since its implementation, simplifies provisions, and resolves issues that have arisen. ALSO READ: WATCH: Community protests after the death and injuries of e-hailing drivers It also makes allowances for non-motorised and accessible transport and expands the minister's powers to introduce regulations and safety measures. The Gauteng Department of Roads and Transport continues to monitor the situation closely and aims to ensure the safety of commuters while maintaining order in the sector.
Mail & Guardian
4 days ago
- Mail & Guardian
‘Inclusive' housing a start but we need deeper affordability in Cape Town
The City of Cape Town has announced housing development that is 'moving towards inclusion' – but inclusion for whom? Photo: File Sometime during July, I was scrolling through a property site, perusing accommodation options while trying to plan my future. I found a flat — two bedroom, bathroom, 115m² in Cape Town. 'That could work,' I think — until I see the price. R35 000 a month. I scroll further. Nothing under R19 000. I know I'm not the only Western Cape local who has had that gut-punch moment while trying to find a place to live. So, when the province's infrastructure MEC Tertuis Simmers announced on 25 July that new 'affordable' and 'social' housing development plans would soon be made available in Cape Town's inner city, I was intrigued. Sceptical, yes, but curious to hear the full story. But after reading The new developments — including the Leeuloop Precinct, the Founders Garden and the Prestwich Precinct — promise about 1 766 social housing units, 120 affordable housing units, and a total of 1 892 residential units. But these homes won't be offered on a first come, first served basis. Access depends on eligibility, which raises key questions about who qualifies and which income brackets will be prioritised. Simmers frames these developments as part of a broader effort to 'redress past spatial injustices'. But they also arrive in the shadow of the protracted The case centred on the province's 2015 decision to sell the Tafelberg property in Sea Point — one of the last well-located pieces of public land on the Atlantic Seaboard — to a private school, rather than using it for affordable housing. Activists argued that the sale entrenched apartheid-era spatial exclusion and that the city had also failed to use its powers to make inner-city land available for lower-income residents. Although the initial In his letter, Simmers draws a distinction between social housing and what used to be called RDP (Reconstruction and Development Programme) housing (now Breaking New Ground or BNG). Social housing refers to state-subsidised rental units for households earning R1 850 to R22 000 a month, regulated under the Social Housing Act and managed by accredited institutions. These units are exclusively to be rented and cannot be sold. In contrast, affordable housing, as defined by the Western Cape government, targets households earning R3 500 to R30 000 a month. This can include both rental and ownership options, often supported through indirect subsidies like cross-subsidisation (where market-rate units fund affordable ones) or discounted public land. Unlike social housing, affordable housing does not require oversight by the To fund all of this, the Western Cape government is pioneering alternative and blended finance approaches — combining public grants, private investment and land value strategies. One such strategy involves selling high-end units to subsidise affordable ones, as seen in Leeuloop and Founders Garden. This cross-subsidisation model is clever, but it carries risks, especially when 'public good' is tied to private market success. Who gets included? So, what exactly counts as 'affordable'? The income bracket defined — R3 500 to R30 000 a month (with 'primary targeting' of R3 500 to R27 200) — is both broad and politically charged. At the lower end are precariously employed workers, informal traders and grant-reliant households. For them, 'affordable' can only mean deep subsidies and permanent rent caps — the kind Simmers promises will be delivered. At the upper end are upwardly mobile professionals earning R25 000 or more, many of whom already have access to credit and housing finance. Yet they too fall under the 'affordable' banner, allowing developers to meet policy thresholds while catering to a far less precarious demographic. This raises some hard questions — will developments cater more to the R25 000+ income band than the R3 500 one? Will rent controls or purchase subsidies reflect this disparity or flatten it? And if they flatten it, who benefits most from this? By flattening such a wide spectrum into a single category, the policy risks hiding the very inequalities it claims to address. Developers can technically 'tick the box' for affordability while still targeting higher-income tenants who pose less financial risk. This matters. Back home, Johannesburg's inclusionary zoning policy — while progressive on paper — has struggled with To avoid repeating these failures, Cape Town's inclusionary housing policy needs more than ambition, it needs enforceable protections. At minimum, the city ??? must: Mandate permanent affordability clauses in all publicly subsidized housing contracts; Ringfence units for lower-income households (for example, R3 500 to R7 500 a month), with clear rent ceilings and oversight; and Publicly disclose allocations and affordability terms, to ensure transparency and accountability. Without these safeguards, affordability risks becoming a short-lived marketing tool, especially when it depends on market-rate units to cross-subsidise the rest. Proximity to wealth tends to redefine affordability over time, reshaping who belongs in a neighbourhood and who gets priced out. What inclusion should look like What bothered me most about Simmers' letter was both his opening — which I've referenced in this piece — and his end. I start with his opening in full: 'These projects are not just about building homes, they are about redressing spatial injustice, unlocking economic potential, and creating inclusive, dignified communities in the heart of Cape Town.' It's a powerful promise. And, to be clear, these projects aren't nothing. They mark a step up from elite-only development and signal an overdue acknowledgement of spatial exclusion. But it also risks becoming a symbolic gesture if we don't ask what meaningful inclusion actually looks like, beyond performance metrics and market-friendly strategies. Inclusionary housing is a promising start, but it cannot be the end goal of urban housing policy. A truly 'inclusive' housing policy would admit that the crisis isn't just about housing shortages. It's about land ownership, racialised inequality, labour precarity and historical exclusion. If inclusion is the goal, then it must be systemic, not symbolic. We need more than mixed-income buildings. We need a city that treats housing not as an asset class, but as a right. True inclusion means long-term affordability that doesn't depend on market success. While Simmers emphasised rental caps, what happens 10 or 20 years from now when land speculation returns? Who gets to stay then? We need models that prioritise stability over profit: community land trusts, cooperative housing and public land reserved for non-profit development. And we need those models to be protected from financialisation and resale. A few 'affordable' units scattered among luxury towers won't undo a century of exclusion. Inclusion must mean redistributing access to land, to services and to opportunity. That means building deep affordability in central areas, not just moderate affordability for professionals priced out of the suburbs. Simmers ends his letter by saying: 'Social and affordable housing in the inner city is no longer a dream …' and I wonder whether he realises what's actually keeping that dream out of reach — and for whom. The truth is, we can debate 'inclusion' until our faces turn blue. But unless we challenge the structural drivers of exclusion — runaway private rentals, the spread of Airbnb, the encroachment of 'digital nomad urbanism' — the dream of inner-city housing will remain just that: a dream. Even the most well-intentioned affordable housing projects will be drowned out by speculative forces unless they're accompanied by serious rental control, strong protections against commodification and a commitment to housing as a public good. To make this vision real, the city must legislate deep affordability, enforce it and ensure that inclusion means lasting access — not just temporary proximity. Nicola van der Westhuizen is a PhD candidate in social anthropology in the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences at Stellenbosch University.
