Mashatile welcome's private sector's commitment to help raise R100bn for Transformation Fund
ALSO READ: Mashatile vows to shield R100bn transformation fund from corrupt hands The Department of Trade and Industry previously clarified that the R100 billion initiative was not intended to replace existing black economic empowerment efforts but rather to complement them.The government has partnered with the private sector to raise the funds over the next five years.
Speaking at a business breakfast in Pretoria on Monday, Mashatile welcomed the private sector's willingness to support black-owned enterprises.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
eNCA
an hour ago
- eNCA
Mashatile's Dodgy Mansions, Police Commission Signs Superstar Legal Team
Deputy President Paul Mashatile recently publicly disclosed an expensive mansion in Constantia, Cape Town. This on top of other significant assets, including another mansion in Gauteng. These significant disclosures have raised eyebrows across politics and media, particularly considering the fact that Mashatile is widely seen as a front runner in the race to succeed President Cyril Ramaphosa. If that wasn't enough, following the explosive allegations made by Gen. Mkhwanazi a few weeks ago, the Madlanga Commission of Inquiry has officially begun. The team conducting the inquiry is a who's who of the South African legal world.
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
SAPS under fire for allegedly shielding Mashatile's VIP protection unit amid serious accusations
The SAPS has been accused of protecting Paul Mashatile's VIP Protection following their acquittal in an internal disciplinary process in May. Image: Screengrab The South African Police Service (SAPS) has been accused by the DA of protecting Deputy President Paul Mashatile's VIP protection unit following their acquittal in an internal disciplinary process earlier this year. The party said its Promotion of Access to Information Act (PAIA) application in the disciplinary case involving the VIP protection unit exposes a breakdown in accountability in the police service and a cover-up. The eight officers were filmed assaulting passengers and the driver of a car on the N1 highway in Johannesburg in 2023. The officers were acquitted by the SAPS in May through an internal disciplinary process. The party said the information showed that instead of a swift and transparent disciplinary process, this case descended into a two-year "circus" of postponements, procedural chaos, and excuses, including scheduling conflicts, family obligations, as well as the SAPS's alleged inability to organise basic transport and accommodation. The information also revealed that the case was abandoned because key witnesses had disappeared. The DA said this was not just an administrative failure, but a deliberate failure of justice. "SAPS, a national law enforcement agency with investigative powers, could not even ensure the attendance of its own witnesses, including the original complainant and the person who recorded the now infamous video. Worse still, investigators ignored evidence, failed to pursue obvious leads, and disregarded footage that clearly identified the perpetrators," the party said. In its judgment, chairperson Brigadier Thulani Douglas Tshabalala said the video footage would have been a key piece of evidence, but its authenticity could not be proven and, therefore, was regarded as inadmissible in the hearing. Tshabalala said the lack of witnesses also diminished the arguments of the employer representative, as he did not have sufficient evidence to substantiate any claims made on behalf of the employer. He said, based on the limited information, including the non-attendance of the complainant, witnesses, team leader commander, and Sanral, or the author of the video footage and on the standard of proof as it requires the party (employer representative) with the burden of proof to demonstrate that it is more likely than not their claim of defence will succeed. "The representative failed in providing substantial evidence as there was an unavailability of compliant statements, witnesses to testify, authentication of video footage, and numerous contradictions with regard to the argument of the employer representative and the investigating officer. "The presiding officer applied equally the rule of law on the standard of proof in terms of a balance of probabilities and found the members not guilty as there was no substantial evidence based on what was presented to him as the presiding officer, which results in the members being found not guilty on all charges levelled against them," he said. The DA said the SAPS was protecting the eight officers, adding that even after a court confirmed the admissibility of video footage showing the assault, they still refused to act. "This points to an intentional cover-up and raises serious questions about SAPS's internal integrity, competence, and willingness to discipline politically connected officers." The party added that the role of the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU) throughout the process was equally disgraceful, saying rather than supporting accountability, the organisation seems to have engaged in deliberate delays, strategic withdrawals, and procedural sabotage, shielding the perpetrators instead of upholding justice. Police spokesperson Athlenda Mathe said questions were sent to HR. POPCRU spokesperson, Richard Mamabolo, said the organisation categorically rejects the "baseless and politically" expedient accusations that it has acted in a manner that undermines accountability or due process. Mamabolo said that as a trade union representing law enforcement officers, POPCRU operates within the bounds of the law and collective agreements governing disciplinary processes in the public service. "We remain committed to upholding both the constitutional rights of our members and the broader principles of justice and accountability. The disciplinary processes in question are not determined by POPCRU but by SAPS management, in accordance with prevailing labour laws and internal disciplinary codes. "POPCRU's role, where necessary, is to ensure that due process is followed, that there is no prejudgment, and that members are not subjected to trial by media or political grandstanding," said Mamabolo, adding that it is deeply unfortunate that the DA chooses to mischaracterise the union's role in these proceedings. "We caution against the politicisation of disciplinary processes for the sake of scoring cheap political points. Such actions erode public confidence in our institutions and undermine the very accountability the DA claims to champion," he said. The eight are expected to appear in court for their verdict in August. [email protected]
The Citizen
5 hours ago
- The Citizen
Eskom proceeds with court challenge to five trading licences
Fears 'cherry-picking' of its best customers. Eskom has made good on its earlier threat to challenge in court energy regulator Nersa's granting of licences for electricity trading. It wants trading rules to be finalised first and even suggests that traders contribute to the payment of municipalities' R100 billion arrear debt for bulk purchases. Following Nersa's publication of the reasons for its decisions, Eskom has launched an application in the Gauteng Division of the High Court to have the granting of five trading and one import/export licence reviewed and set aside. The respondents are Nersa and the five licensees: Green Electron Market, CBI Electric Apollo, GreenCo Power Services, Discovery Green and Noa Group Trading. This comes more than decade after the first electricity trading licence was granted to PowerX. Nersa has so far granted around ten such licences. According to the agenda, the regulator will consider two more trading licences and two import/export licences at its 30 July meeting, as well as an application by a municipality for separate distribution and trading licences. If granted, Eskom may join the new licensees to the action. Traders, also referred to as aggregators, are essentially middle-men between independent power producers and end-users. They enter into agreements with multiple generators and sell to multiple customers with diverse energy requirements, at a margin to compensate them for taking some of the risk. This enables especially smaller businesses to access renewable energy despite being unable to take the full production of a specific independent power producer or enter into a 20-year off-take agreement. ALSO READ: Electricity trading? Not so fast, says Eskom Eskom's argument In an affidavit in support of the application, Eskom senior manager for legal matters Mohlago Masekela says the licensing decisions 'form the beginning of a fundamental change of policy by Nersa that has not been the subject of public consultation and the implications of which appear not to have been explored by Nersa.' According to Masekela it will 'upend the entire landscape of electricity provision in this country, without taking meaningful steps to understand the consequences before doing so. 'Under the guise of promoting competition and labouring under material misapprehensions about the law and the facts, Nersa has allowed a free-for-all in which traders are allowed to poach the best of Eskom's customers without carrying any of the redistributive obligations that the tariffs paid by those customers to Eskom enable Eskom to discharge.' Eskom contends that its distribution licences and those of municipalities, grant them the exclusive right to distribute and trade in electricity in the licensed distribution areas. It relies on Nersa's distribution rules that prohibit two or more distributors to operate in the same area. According to the utility, no rules have ever been made to deal with electricity trading as a separate licensed activity. Although Nersa has acknowledged the need for such rules and has embarked on a process to finalise it, it proceeded to approve trading licences in the meantime. This, Eskom states, is irrational. Eskom submits it is not possible to lawfully issue individual trading licences on an ad hoc basis, without considering the impact on the businesses of Eskom and municipalities of traders cherry-picking its best clients and setting conditions to balance the rights of such traders with those of Eskom and the municipalities. ALSO READ: Nersa approves cross-border electricity trading Eskom argued that instead of promoting competition, the granting of the trading licences will lead to unfair competition, because traders will have the flexibility to offer large power users, that are consistent payers, discount tariffs, while Eskom is bound to regulated prices. The utility states that 'simply opening up a free-for-all for traders in areas of supply previously provided by either Eskom or a municipality, has the potential of causing profound risk to the viability of the system'. 'Eskom continues to hold the various obligations arising from the obligations in its distribution licences, but can now have its most reliable and lucrative customers taken from it by traders given permission to trade in the same area of supply.' It continues: 'Ultimately, since it is funded by both the taxpayer (in the form of government assistance given in the recent past) and the electricity consumer, it is taxpayers and smaller electricity consumers who are not attractive to traders, who will pay the price for this.' Some of the issues Eskom believes should be addressed in the trading rules include which customers will be allowed to chose who they buy electricity from, thereby demarcating the trading market. If customers are for example allowed to buy from a trader, but top-up continuously or on an ad hoc basis from Eskom's supply, the rules could provide for Eskom to set differentiated tariffs in such cases 'that reflect the true cost of providing these specific services.' ALSO READ: Presidency 'very concerned' about licence for Eskom transmission unit Eskom further suggests that the matter of the R100 billion-odd arrear municipal debt must be dealt with in the trading rules by restricting traders from operating in defaulting areas or establishing a financial clearing house that prioritises the payment of Eskom arrears before disbursing revenue to traders. It suggests that the cross-subsidisation regime should be preserved, with traders being required to contribute to a subsidy pool or municipal support levy. It is not yet clear whether Nersa and the five traders will oppose Eskom's application. This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
