Nkabane says even with budget increase over next 3 years, DHET may not meet growing demand
Nkabane also told MPs during her department's budget vote that the R47 billion allocation for student funding, through the National Student Financial Scheme (NSFAS), was also insufficient.
Nkabane tabled her department's budget in the National Assembly on Thursday, which stands at R142 billion.
But she warned that the department might not be able to cover all students in the sector due to the growing demand.
"It increases to R150 billion in the next financial year (2026/2027) and to R158 billion in 2027/28. In real terms, this growth is not sufficient to meet growing demands for additional resources."
ALSO READ: Parties rejecting budget of Higher Education Dept punishing SA students
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
22 minutes ago
- The Star
Key witness admits confusion over signatures in Rushil Singh fraud trial
Masabata Mkwananzi | Published 10 minutes ago The key witness in the high-stakes fraud trial of businessman Rushil Singh stunned the Palm Ridge Specialised Commercial Crimes Court when he admitted under cross-examination that he may have confused crucial signatures forming the foundation of the State's case. Testifying before Judge Venter, the witness, who had submitted three affidavits implicating Singh and his late sister Nishani Singh in defrauding Investec Bank, conceded that he was not qualified as a handwriting expert and may have incorrectly attributed one sibling's signature to the other. This admission cast immediate doubt on the reliability of his testimony. Inside the courtroom, Singh remained composed in the dock, dressed in a black hoodie and matching track pants. With a notebook in hand, he took detailed notes as the case against him appeared to weaken. The trial centres on allegations that between 2017 and 2022, Rushil and Nishani Singh used falsified bank guarantees, purportedly issued by Stanbic Bank Ghana, to secure over R150 million in credit facilities from Investec. The State's case relies heavily on documentary evidence, much of it signed, to prove intentional fraud. But the reliability of that evidence is now in question. Speaking outside the courtroom to The Star, Advocate Dharmeshan Moodliyar from Group 16D, who represents Singh, said the witness's credibility had been 'severely compromised' by repeated contradictions and inconsistencies in his evidence. 'This witness relied on multiple affidavits to build his accusations, but under cross-examination, the inconsistencies began to pile up. By the time we got to his third version, his story simply did not hold,' Moodliyar said. He pointed to a key moment when the witness originally claimed Singh had signed fraudulent audited financial statements submitted to Investec. Under pressure, however, the witness admitted the signature in question did not belong to Rushil Singh. 'He insisted at first that the statements were audited and carried my client's signature. When we pressed him, he was forced to acknowledge that it was not Rushil's signature at all. That is not a minor discrepancy; it goes to the heart of the case,' Moodliyar told the court. He added that the ongoing contradictions made it impossible to trust the witness. 'If someone cannot be consistent about something as fundamental as a signature, how can we accept the rest of his evidence as credible?' Moodliyar confirmed the defence will call its own handwriting expert to independently verify the signatures misidentified by the witness. He also argued that the entire case against Singh is built on circumstantial evidence, with no solid foundation to support a conviction. As proceedings drew to a close, Judge Venter adjourned the matter. The trial is expected to resume tomorrow, with the defence set to continue its attack on the State's version of events. With more witnesses due to take the stand and the prosecution under mounting pressure, the outcome of the case now appears far less certain than when the trial began. The Star [email protected]
Eyewitness News
38 minutes ago
- Eyewitness News
Ramaphosa raises limit for private donations to political parties to R30m a year
Lindsay Dentlinger 19 August 2025 | 7:35 President Cyril Ramaphosa at the Union Buildings in Pretoria on 1 August 2025. Picture: Simphiwe Nkosi/EWN CAPE TOWN - President Cyril Ramaphosa has officially raised the limit for private donations to political parties to R30 million a year. He's acted on a resolution taken by the National Assembly in May after a revision of the limit and the threshold for declaring donations by Parliament's home affairs committee. Like the donation limit, the declaration threshold has also been doubled to R200,000. ALSO READ: • Perfecting the political funding arena still a work in progress - IEC • Symposium thrashes out solutions to strengthening political funding law • Godongwana thinks political parties should be wholly funded from national fiscus After removing the R15 million donation limit private donors could make to political parties and independent candidates just before last year's May elections, the Western Cape High Court forced Parliament to reinstate the limit in August last year and for political parties to backdate their declarations to the Electoral Commission until a new limit was set. The original limits were set in 2018 when the National Assembly passed the Political Party Funding Act. In a proclamation published in the government gazette, President Ramaphosa has now determined the new donation limit to be R30 million. All donations more than R200,000 will now also have to be declared. Speaking in the Western Cape last week, the IEC's manager for political funding, George Mahlangu said no party would be off the hook in declaring its donations, and even if below the declaration threshold, parties are expected to record these in their annual financial statements.
The Citizen
14 hours ago
- The Citizen
Mkhwanazi ad hoc committee adopts draft terms of reference in ‘marathon', ‘poorly managed' meeting
The final draft of the terms of reference is expected to be circulated to MPs within two days. Parliament's Ad Hoc Committee investigating KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Police Commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's explosive allegations has adopted draft terms of reference after over 10 hours of deliberation. The committee, which met virtually on Monday, was tasked with considering and adopting the framework that will guide how MPs conduct their inquiry. The document, initially presented last week, outlines the purpose of the process, procedures for witness testimony, and other operational details. The committee, which has until 31 October to conclude its work, will operate independently of the judicial commission of inquiry, which is also set to investigate Mkhwanazi's claims. The commission will be chaired by former acting deputy chief justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga. Mkhwanazi ad hoc committee debates terms of reference The meeting, scheduled to run from 11am to 2pm, stretched late into the night as MPs debated which clauses should remain, be amended, or be removed. Parliament's legal services division presented the initial draft terms of reference, while political parties also made their submissions. The document's table of contents covered areas such as the legal framework, the objectives and scope of the inquiry, provisions for public participation, allocation of resources, the timeframe, and the venues for meetings. After adopting the first section, MPs debated proposals by the MK party relating to the legal framework, including how to handle classified and sensitive information. ALSO READ: Parties question ANC MP's election in Mkhwanazi ad hoc committee, logistics concerns raised Most members agreed that the committee should adhere to existing National Assembly protocols. 'There is a process for documents that are classified to be declassified legally, and I would like this committee to unravel whatever criminality. 'We do know that documents pretty much get classified to cover up criminality. So there is legislation available to us,' said EFF MP Leigh‐Ann Mathys. The MK party also suggested that the committee refer matters to relevant authorities rather than determining criminal liability, to preserve the separation of powers. Watch part one of the meeting: Objectives of the inquiry The Democratic Alliance (DA) proposed that monthly progress reports be submitted to the National Assembly. However, parliamentary legal adviser Andile Tetyana reminded members that the committee is only mandated to submit a final report by the end of October. He also noted that the DA's suggestion to probe possible human rights abuses and the role of unions in shielding compromised police officers would require expanding the committee's scope. READ MORE: 'Same as Phala Phala' – Police committee member not optimistic about Mchunu investigations 'This falls outside of the scope of the House resolution,' Tetyana said. DA MP Ian Cameron defended the idea of regular updates. 'It is a good principle to have consistent feedback, especially when there might be a frustration due to previous inquiries, whether in or outside Parliament, that people, particularly the public, feel that they are not taken into confidence.' Scope and logistics MPs then debated the scope of the inquiry. The ANC proposed that Mkhwanazi's allegations form the basis for identifying witnesses. The committee's chairperson, Soviet Lekganyane, confirmed that the KZN police commissioner would ideally be the first witness, with others called depending on his testimony. DA MP Lisa‐Maré Schickerling supported the approach but urged careful wording. 'We don't have an issue with it; however, we cannot only say that we are going to base everything on one person because other information is going to come out.' External legal counsel will be limited to collecting, organising, and presenting evidence. READ MORE: Ramaphosa says Madlanga commission mustn't take more than one year They will also determine the questioning format for witnesses, in consultation with the chairperson and committee. The MK party's proposal to appoint an external forensic investigator was rejected. According to Tetyana, public participation will be key to the process. Hearings are expected to begin in Johannesburg before resuming in Cape Town after the parliamentary recess. Watch part two of the meeting: On venues, the terms of reference recommend physical sittings in the parliamentary precinct or another suitable location. Virtual and hybrid sessions were ruled out. MPs also agreed that extensions could be sought from the Speaker or through a parliamentary resolution if needed. Detailed timelines will be set out in a draft programme by parliamentary staff, rather than being included in the terms of reference itself. 'Marathon meeting' Some MPs expressed frustration with how the meeting was managed. 'In my view, the proceedings have been wholly inadequate and have done less to support the virtual work of this committee and more to frustrate what should have been a clear and coherent process in adopting the terms of reference. 'We moved haphazardly from page to page between vastly different and unrelated submissions in a manner that was neither coherent nor streamlined, leaving the process unnecessarily confusing,' ActionSA MP Dereleen James said. James also accused some MPs of undermining the decorum of the meeting with constant interjections. 'This meeting was poorly managed,' she added. MK party MP David Skosana described it as a 'marathon meeting'. The final draft of the terms of reference is expected to be circulated to members within two days. NOW READ: Here are some of the rules outlining Parliament's Mkhwanazi allegations probe
