Concerns over Mantashe's changes to draft mineral resources bill
Minerals and Petroleum Resources Minister Gwede Mantashe was lashed for omitting a requirement for Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) participation in applications for prospecting rights.
Mantashe recently gazetted two corrections to the Draft Mineral Resources Development Bill and also nullified a provision for ministerial approval for change of control in listed companies that own mining rights.
Mining expert David van Wyk asked why the minister backed down.
Environmental concerns
'The prospecting companies make huge profits after prospecting reports are out. They sell the prospecting reports to the highest bidder.
'We have a serious problem with the change of control in listed companies. It is what ultimately allows mining companies to walk away from their environmental responsibilities and their responsibility to close and rehabilitate mines,' said Van Wyk.
'This is why we have more than 6 000 abandoned mines. When control of companies changes and the minister, as the custodian of the minerals which, according to the Act, belongs to the public, is not informed of these changes, he is unable to assign responsibility to the owners as he will not know who they are.'
ALSO READ: 'Is it greed or jealousy?': Ramaphosa fires back at critics of BEE, Transformation Fund
Call for state-led mining and revenue transparency
The solution to the problems of environmental and social responsibility, as well as mine closure and rehabilitation, was to establish public ownership not just of the minerals in the ground, but also of the mining process and the extracted minerals, with the state as the custodian and the revenue accruing in a sovereign fund, Van Wyk said.
South Africa does have a stateowned mining company and a sovereign fund, but the share of that company in the overall mining sector is minimal.
There was no account of how much money has accrued in the sovereign fund since its inception, Van Wyk said. Christopher Rutledge, director at the Mining Affected Communities in Action, said the organisation was concerned.
'Pressure of elite interests'
'Following a mere signal of dissatisfaction from the mining sector, Mantashe swiftly amended the draft of the Bill, specifically the removal of the requirement for B-BBEE participation in prospecting rights and the omission of provisions for ministerial oversight of changes in control of listed companies holding rights.
'As we have previously warned, the main purpose of the Amendment Bill represents a further retreat from the constitutional mandate of transformation, accountability and justice for mining-affected communities.
'Rather than correcting the draft Bill, the minister has capitulated even further to the pressure of elite interests, in particular the Minerals Council South Africa, confirming the extent to which the state has aligned itself with industry over people.'
Rutledge said the removal of BEE from the prospecting regime was not a technical correction, but a political decision to sell-out transformation.
ALSO READ: Starlink proposal: Mashatile says Cabinet holds final say on policy changes
Prospecting was the gateway to mining and excluding it from transformation requirements ensures the ownership and control of mineral resources remains concentrated in the hands of historical beneficiaries of apartheid-era privilege, he said.
'This opens the door to unchecked mergers, takeovers and asset stripping with no regard for affected communities, workers, or environmental responsibilities. We reject the illusion that deregulation is a form of reform,' Rutledge said.
Industry engagements
Union federation Cosatu spokesperson Mathews Parks said it was critical that legislation is in sync with B-BBEE to avoid contradictions.
'Cosatu will engage with the minister to get a better understanding of the objectives of the amendments.'
Minerals Council South Africa Allan Seccombe said the organisation would continue to review the Bill and submit its perspectives by 13 August.
'The Bill in its current form does not encourage or sustain the growth and investment that the mining industry needs.'
NOW READ: Cosatu says debate on B-BBEE is needed for beneciaries' benefit
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
12 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Rethinking social literacy in post-apartheid South Africa
Jamil F. Khan 19 August 2025 | 10:27 Literacy Department of Basic Education (DBE) colonialism Picture: Education has always been a political space in South Africa. The battle for custody of knowledge has, in many ways, shaped the society we live in today. Within this battle, ways of knowing and unknowing, remembering and forgetting, are equally valuable commodities. Related to knowing is the practice of literacy, by which many countries measure their social development. This literacy refers to our ability to read and count words and numbers. Literacy in post-1994 South Africa has been a contested space, with our Department of Basic Education having restructured and redefined the education system a number of times. The definitions of milestones and passing requirements have also evolved, the enduring impact of one being the introduction of a 30% pass mark implemented under former Minister of Basic Education, Angie Motshekga. This decision has had an enduring impact, having made its way into social discourse as a signifier of the decline of education in South Africa. Though I would agree that it is a very low bar, this regulation has interacted with the social landscape in an interesting way. It has become a racialised accusation of incompetence and stupidity that is said to be a part of the mediocrity that comes from Black governance. This idea also interacts with the disdain expressed towards Black Economic Empowerment as an aid to Black mediocrity and corruption. Though the mechanics of the pass mark requirement (which is much more complex) are completely misunderstood, ignoring that a report card with a 30% aggregate will not get someone into university, the narrative that all education is inferior makes education a form of corruption itself. Though our literacy rates have shocked us when announced, there is an arena where we are consistently failing: social literacy. South Africans are deeply estranged from each other, with very few tools to read our society the way we would read books. The destruction of a shared social literacy might be one of the biggest prices we paid through colonisation and apartheid. While we might want to focus on seemingly more important things like the economy, we must realise that the social, which is the practice of being human, affects everything else, for as long as humans run those systems. To co-operate in efforts to truly "fix" our country, we must get to know each other better. The motto on our coat of arms says "!KE E:/XARRA //KE" which translates into "diverse people unite" in the indigenous |Xam language. While, of course, profound and beautiful as a sentiment, not least for being expressed in one of our oldest indigenous languages, it is not easy to achieve. The diversity we have comes with deeply painful histories, and in many ways, it was foisted on us with violence. What we hope to celebrate is how we have survived, despite it. To acknowledge these complications when we engage with our diversity, requires a critical diversity literacy (CDL). A framework developed by Wits Professor Emeritus Melissa Steyn, CDL suggests a way for us to read our society better and so become more literate in our engagement with diversity. In order to be critically diversity literate, there are ten criteria that we must commit first is that we must understand that our differences are constructed by unequal power, and they affect us differently and have different meanings attached to them. The second is that we must be willing to recognise that categories, such as race, gender, sexuality, class, ability, with which we name each other, are not just names; they are attached to different levels of privilege and oppression and that they determine our life experiences in various ways. Criterion three demands that we learn ways of analysing privilege and oppression while acknowledging that they are dynamic systems that work together to have cumulative effects on people's lives. Fourth, we must also understand that oppressive systems are not only a part of historical legacies, but they still operate today, right now. Fifth, we are a product of our social experiences and environments. This understanding hopes to steer us away from the totalising discourses that produce stereotypes. Number six asks us to focus on the languages we use to voice our relationships to each other's differences. This does not only, but can, refer to the modification of our diverse group of South African languages, but also learning a vocabulary to speak about and describe privilege and oppression, in any language. Language must evolve to help us meet each other in our interactions. The seventh criterion requires that we, through the use of our newly acquired vocabularies, learn to see through the ways that power has normalised oppression and sanitised privilege, as a natural state of the world. This requires a rejection of the explanations that maintain the status quo. Number eight reminds us that different locations in the world have produced different hierarchies of inequality, and therefore, we cannot apply the same analysis to each location. Here, a historical analysis becomes important again. It also reminds us that people's shared experiences of oppression and privilege across contexts show us that it is not coincidental, but the outcome of coordinated systems of unequal power. The second last criterion, nine, requires an engagement with our emotions. Not only in the sense of expressing our emotions, but also understanding how our emotions towards people who are different to us, shape our actions and reactions towards those people. Being critically diversity literate is as much about feeling as it is about thinking our way to a better place. That better place is envisioned with the tenth and final criterion of CDL, which requires us, while having hopefully internalised the previous criteria, to channel it into our efforts to transform every level of our society into spaces of deepened social justice. The importance of our social literacy and our ability to see ourselves and the divisions that separate us lies in the price of an ever more fractured social contract, that we cannot afford to pay. This is a test we cannot fail because the success of our country relies deeply on our ability to co-exist equitably. To be literate in this way is for us to truly confront the estrangement that still makes co-existence amongst South Africans a difficult task. Jamil F. Khan is an award-winning author, doctoral critical diversity scholar, and research fellow at the Johannesburg Institute for Advanced Study.
Daily Maverick
13 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Have your say on new basic education regulations
South Africans are invited to participate in an important public consultation on new draft regulations under the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Act. These regulations, focusing on school admissions and capacity, aim to improve learner rights and school governance. Find out how you can review the proposals and submit your feedback by 5 September 2025. Minister of Basic Education, Siviwe Gwarube, has officially opened the door for public participation by gazetting the first two sets of regulations under the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Act, inviting South Africans to have their say. The regulations are for the minimum uniform norms and standards for the capacity of ordinary public schools. These are the first draft regulations to be published since the law came into effect last year. Following months of deliberation and increasing pressure from Parliament's Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, which urged Gwarube to finalise and publish the 10 regulations needed to operationalise the law, the regulations on school admissions and school capacity were officially published in Government Gazette Nos 53119 and 53120 on 6 August 2025, marking a significant milestone in the act's implementation. In a statement, Gwarube said the regulations were designed to ensure that the amendments introduced by the act were implemented in a manner that upheld learners' rights, enhanced school functionality and maintained a careful balance of powers between school governing bodies (SGBs) and the government. 'These regulations are instruments that will affect how schools are governed and managed, how children are admitted and how our values as a society are reflected in our education system,' she said. The Department of Basic Education is releasing the regulations in phases to avoid delays caused by bulk publication. Each regulation will be published for public comment after legal vetting, ensuring a transparent and consultative process. However, the staggered release approach has raised concerns from Joy Maimela, Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education. 'The committee has previously called for all the regulations to be gazetted in one go and not in a piecemeal fashion. We want the public to engage on a comprehensive document that will give expression to the intentions of the act,' said Maimela. Defending the approach, Gwarube's spokesperson Lukhanyo Vanqa stated that releasing the regulations modularly was necessary to prevent delays and that it is the most efficient way to proceed. 'The modularised release of the regulations is to avoid delays and to ensure once the drafting and legal vetting by the Office of the Chief State Law Adviser is complete, then the regulation is released for public comment. This is not only practical, it's the most efficient manner of law making. There would be little to no value in not releasing regulations which are ready,' he said. How you can have your say Gwarube has emphasised that this public participation is a key opportunity for all stakeholders to shape the future of basic education. 'The release of these regulations is an important opportunity for education stakeholders and the broader South African public to actively shape the future of basic education in our country,' she said. To facilitate engagement, the department announced plans to launch a national public awareness campaign aimed at helping communities understand the content of the proposed regulations and make informed submissions. How does public comment work? Draft bills, regulations or policies are published in the Government Gazette or on official platforms, providing details on the proposed changes. Interested parties can submit written comments within a specified period (usually 30 days). Submissions are reviewed by parliamentary committees, which may invite submitters to make oral presentations during public hearings. Committees consider the feedback when finalising legislation, fostering collaboration between government and citizens. How to make an effective submission? Identify yourself properly: If submitting on behalf of an organisation or company, use a letterhead. Individuals should clearly state their full name, contact information and address at the top of the submission. South Africa's public comment process also champions child participation, recognising children's right to be involved in decisions affecting their lives. Address the submission: Clearly name the parliamentary committee the submission is meant for. Include a clear subject line indicating what your submission is about. Date your submission. Introduce yourself or your organisation: Explain who you are and why the bill or regulation matters to you or your community. Present your feedback: Outline your concerns, criticism or support for the bill. Provide constructive criticism and suggest possible solutions or recommendations. Request to speak: Indicate if you would like to present your views orally to the committee. See this example of a submission from the Healthy Living Alliance on the Health Promotion Levy on Sugar Beverages.
The Citizen
20 hours ago
- The Citizen
South African mines neglect housing
Studies show up to 70% of mines fail to meet housing commitments, leaving communities without proper homes or basic services. Mining companies operating in South Africa have failed to provide housing for their employees and local communities as required by law, according to recent research conducted by the Bench Marks Foundation. Many mines are surrounded by informal settlements where mineworkers and host communities live. 'South African mines are surrounded by [informal settlements] due to their failure to provide proper, dignified housing for their employees,' said David van Wyk, a researcher for the foundation. Miners remain in informal settlements as companies neglect housing 'For example, we have been calling on a mining firm operating in Marikana, where more than 40 people were killed by security forces, to improve the housing conditions of the people in the area, but to no avail.' Van Wyk said the research also revealed that there was a need for the mining companies operating in the country to strive to bring the mining-affected communities up to similar standards as those in North America and Australia. 'The foundation's latest research, published in our Policy Gap 14, points out that it is unacceptable that South African mines are surrounded by [informal settlements] due to the failure of SA mines to provide proper, dignified housing for their employees. ALSO READ: Post-mining strategy seen as key to economic revival 'There needs to be global uniformity in working and living conditions,' Van Wyk said. The study also found a need for globally comparable wages. It added that the wage gap between South African mineworkers and those in other countries is completely unjustifiable. Wage gap between SA mineworkers and those in other countries 'The weighted mean wage for the lowest-paid categories in mining in the US is $16.21 (about R280) per hour, while in South Africa, the average general mineworker's salary is R177 600 per year, which works out at R91.08 per hour, [that is $4.96 per hour or 30% of the US wage].' According to the study, the mine wage scale model used in SA is outdated and derives from apartheid practices. 'It is time to adapt to global best practice,' the document reads. ALSO READ: Global mining sector revenue fell by 3% in 2024, but gold revenues increased 15% The Mining Affected Communities United in Action (Macua) welcomed the study. Sabelo Mnguni, Macua national coordinator, said the foundation's findings were in line with what 'we have seen and documented in mining communities across South Africa'. 'Mining-affected communities have been living with this reality for decades. Weak enforcement of social and labour plans 'The failure of mining companies to provide proper, dignified housing for workers is a direct result of weak enforcement of social and labour plans under the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act, combined with corporate cost-cutting that prioritises profits over people.' He said to make things worse, informal settlements are often without basic services such as clean water, sanitation and electricity. Mnguni said Macua's research showed that up to 70% of mines have failed to meet legally binding social and labour plans commitments on housing and living conditions. ALSO READ: Mines in trouble for failing local communities 'This is well-documented through our social audit reports and by various community groups, civil society organisations and even parliament. 'The government must strictly enforce social and labour plans housing provisions and hold mining companies legally accountable for non-compliance, including suspending mining rights where obligations are not met. 'The current proposals in the Act undermine these obligations and try to turn them into discretionary provisions,' said Mnguni. The Minerals Council SA did not respond to questions sent yesterday.
