Nkosinathi Sishi defends against accusations in SETA board chair appointments controversy
Image: Department of Higher Education
Higher Education Department Director-General Nkosinathi Sishi on Tuesday bitterly complained about being unfairly implicated in the work of the panel that recommended cancelled appointments of chairpersons of Sector and Education Training Authorities (SETAs) boards.
This is after ANC MP Tshepo Louw said Sishi must be brought to book for misleading Parliament when the Higher Education Portfolio Committee interrogated officials who were part of the panel, but could not attend the meeting last Friday.
Sishi was on the hot seat after the ANC failed in its push to quash the investigation because former minister Nobuhle Nkabane was no longer a minister, but in a vote by MPs, it was decided that officials testify and Nkabane be summoned to give her side of the story.
Louw highlighted that Deputy Director-General Rhulani Ngwenya deposed a statement that following consultation between Sishi and Nkabane, a decision was taken to relocate the responsibility of managing nominations for non-executive board members of entities to her directorate.
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 ✕
He insisted that Ngwenya had indicated that Sishi was quite informed and involved in the process.
'I conclude that part of the problems at the department is the DG, who had a duty to advise and play an administrative oversight role,' he said.
In response, Sishi asked for protection from committee chairperson Tebogo Letsie.
He stated that it was implied he may have influenced certain officials to miss the previous meeting while he was out of the country and someone else was acting in his position.
Sishi said even though Ngwenya apologised for the confusion over the cancellation of the committee meeting, no apology was made to him.
'Some members of this committee have tried to move out from the purpose of the questions to try to suggest I was involved, or I might have participated. I have indicated consistently all the time I have been here that I really would like to appoint chairpersons … but the law does not allow me to do so.'
He said that on the day he saw the list of chairpersons to be appointed, he was with everybody else.
'There was absolutely no time to intervene at that stage. I feel I am unfairly placed in a position where not even the slightest indication by those who were involved includes the DG in what they say, but some people want to include the DG. I think it is unfair,' Sishi said.
Earlier, Sishi indicated that he never saw the list of preferred candidates nor received an email other than when it was tabled at a meeting with the National Skills Authority.
'I never even knew who would eventually be on that list. I accepted that the law does not allow me to appoint a board chair. If we were to be part of the panel, it would be at the discretion of the accounting authority,' he said.
Testifying before the committee, chief of staff Nelisiwe Semane, ministerial advisor Asisipho Solani, and Ngwenya denied being involved in the work of the panel despite being named by Nkabane as panellists.
Semane said her name appeared on the list because Nkabane submitted a list that includes all the panels that she appointed since taking office.
'I did not participate in the selection and recommendation of SETAs accounting authority chairpersons but participated in the process for the recommendation of SETAs accounting authorities and not board chairpersons,' she said.
Ngwenya said she was appointed to provide secretarial support to the panel.
'I viewed this as an assignment of duties rather than a formal appointment, and as such, did not deem it necessary to formally accept the assignment in writing,' she said.
Solani, who was assigned to the nomination committee, said: 'I discharged this role in my capacity as advisor to the minister and no compensation beyond my regular salary was provided.'
The trio said the panel never convened any formal meeting and was not aware how the names of recommended chairpersons came about.
Sishi said it was very clear from what the officials were saying that there weren't any meetings that were held.
'Clearly, the names considered could have come from the accounting authority, who produced the list tabled to the National Skills Authority,' said Sishi.
Letsie said it was clear from the testimonies by the officials that there was never a panel for SETA boards.
'Maybe, there was an intention to have a panel. Maybe it was not implemented in the true sense of the word,' he said.
'This thing could have been easily avoided. If there was no panel, there was no need to say there was a panel,' added Letsie.
mayibongwe.maqhina@inl.co.za
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald
an hour ago
- The Herald
IEC rejects former ANC MP Boy Mamabolo's ‘Mandela for President' party registration
The Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) has rejected former ANC MP Jacob Boy Mamabolo's registration of his new party 'Mandela for President'. The IEC said Mamabolo applied for registration but was rejected due to his failure to meet basic requirements to register a new party and concerns about the name. 'The IEC clarifies the party 'Mandela for President' applied for registration but was rejected for non-compliance with signature requirements and the threshold of required registered voters,' the IEC said. 'Furthermore, the name 'Mandela for President' with associated green and black colours may be construed by voters as connected to founding president Nelson Mandela.' The IEC highlighted inconsistencies with regard to the founding convener's details. 'Discrepancies exist between the party's constitutional documentation and our registration records regarding party leadership. In the preamble of their constitution the party proclaims their founding convener is Mandela Jacob Boy Mamabolo. However, in our registration records in respect of the party leader he appears as only Jacob Boy Mamabolo, which suggests a material aspect in the registration of the party may have been misrepresented. The party remains unregistered.'
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
Jeffery's Red Scare: The NDR, Manufactured Panic, and the Defence of Racial Capital
Anthea Jeffery warns of a covert socialist agenda in South Africa, framing the National Democratic Revolution as a Marxist threat. This article critically examines her claims, revealing the ideological warfare at play and the implications for democracy and capitalism. Image: IOL Anthea Jeffery has spent much of her career warning that South Africa is on a covert march to socialism. Her vehicle of choice is the so-called National Democratic Revolution — a theoretical construct she treats as hard evidence of an unfolding Marxist programme hidden inside government policy. The ANC's reform proposals, however diluted, are presented as proof of a long-haul conspiracy to unravel capitalism, property rights, and democracy. This isn't analysis. It's ideological warfare crafted for a constituency anxious about redistribution. The National Democratic Revolution in its original conception was a phase-based process towards liberation: political rights first, economic reorganisation later. But what Jeffery refuses to acknowledge is that the ANC never implemented its second phase. The so-called revolution halted at the moment of elite pacting. The language remained. The politics shifted. The ANC's alignment with the SACP and COSATU allowed it to maintain liberation credentials, while its actual policies became increasingly orthodox. By the mid-1990s, the alliance had internalised market logic. Redistribution gave way to stabilisation. GEAR formalised this. Privatisation followed. State entities were corporatised. Public services were costed and commodified. Jeffery omits this history. Or she wilfully misrepresents it. She uses the NDR as a container for all post-apartheid policy that inconveniences capital. Land reform, healthcare expansion, employment equity — these are treated as dangerous incursions into free enterprise. She isolates phrases from ANC conferences or SACP newsletters and holds them up as definitive proof of a creeping totalitarian project, while ignoring the decades-long collapse of anything resembling a radical economic agenda. Her institutional base — the Institute of Race Relations — supports this position through a stream of publications designed to conflate moderate state intervention with revolutionary intent. It claims to stand for classical liberalism. In practice, it operates as a cultural and economic firewall for the beneficiaries of apartheid's economic structure. Its function is not to analyse power, but to secure it. Jeffery's periodic references to 1976 are calculated. She acknowledges the significance of the uprising, but removes it from the insurgent currents that animated it. The student protests were not simply a spontaneous reaction to Afrikaans in schools. They were a political rupture. They revived Black Consciousness, anti-capitalist critique, and a pan-African worldview. Many students were detained, tortured, or killed. Others went into exile and carried their radicalism with them. Some joined the ANC. Others looked elsewhere — to the PAC, to newer formations, or to community organising beyond party structures. The UDF, which emerged in the 1980s, institutionalised much of this activism. But its formation marked a shift away from the militancy of 1976. It embraced the Freedom Charter and sought to build broad-based alliances under its framework. It functioned as a civic force rather than a revolutionary front. COSATU, too, while initially militant in worker organising, had by the mid-1980s begun engaging foreign donors and adopting development project language. USAID funding flowed into union education and policy platforms. The edges of resistance were being managed. The revolutionary demands were being absorbed into programmes. The SACP followed a similar trajectory. From its exile-era anti-capitalist declarations to its post-1994 parliamentary positions, the shift was clear. It offered ideological cover to the ANC's pragmatic manoeuvring, describing every compromise as a tactical delay. But the delays became permanent. The economic structure of apartheid remained intact, with new faces at the table. Jeffery does not mention these shifts, because her narrative relies on exaggeration. She needs the ANC to be a radical actor so she can frame even the mildest policy adjustment as evidence of Marxist capture. Her entire thesis depends on mischaracterisation. Redistribution becomes dispossession. Affirmative action becomes racial engineering. Healthcare equity becomes state control. She constructs an ANC that no longer exists and warns against an agenda that has already been abandoned. Her real objective is to delegitimise any challenge to racialised wealth. She is not defending democratic values. She is defending historical advantage. This is evident in the way she treats land. Expropriation without compensation, a policy with strict constitutional limits and very narrow application, is presented as the first step toward Zimbabwe-style collapse. This ignores decades of failed restitution, government inertia, and the market-driven nature of land policy since 1994. The threat, for Jeffery, lies not in the reality of land injustice, but in the idea that it might one day be resolved. AfriForum echoes this approach. Its spokespeople describe land reform as an attack on white farmers and frame any social policy as a threat to white survival. Their version is more racialised, more openly defensive, but the logic is aligned. Both formations reject historical responsibility. Both see equity as a threat. Both amplify fear to protect capital. Other institutions mirror these concerns in more bureaucratic language. Security think tanks publish briefings about instability. Business forums call for restraint. Liberal columnists urge balance. The message is consistent: do nothing that might disrupt the ownership patterns of the last century. Jeffery's argument about the NDR gives this position an intellectual cover. By citing speeches, strategy documents, and ideological jargon, she creates the appearance of serious critique. But it is a formula. She substitutes policy analysis with ideological projection. She avoids the fact that economic transformation has not taken place. She avoids the structural continuity between apartheid and post-apartheid capital. She avoids the reality that Black suffering in South Africa today is largely the result of state capitulation to business interests — interests that she and her institutional network continue to defend. There is no NDR in motion. There is a collapsed developmental state, a political class aligned with private capital, and a society in which poverty and violence have become structural conditions. The state has outsourced its duty to govern. The mines still poison water. The banks foreclose on homes built on land stolen a century ago. And the IRR tells us to be afraid of communism. The youth of 1976 would not recognise this landscape. They would not recognise the bureaucratised opposition that now speaks in their name. Their courage did not come with conditions. Their rejection of the apartheid order was rooted in the knowledge that legal inclusion without material justice is a performance. Their politics, forged in struggle and sharpened by violence, called for redistribution, for accountability, for dignity grounded in structural change. Jeffery does not engage this legacy. She instrumentalises it. She cites it when useful, silences it when it exposes her distortions. Her entire body of work is premised on protecting a system that never addressed the foundational crimes of this country. To suggest that the ANC, in its current form, represents a threat to private capital is absurd. It has managed capital's interests with discipline. It has sacrificed its own popular base to maintain investor credibility. Its ministers tour the world reassuring markets. Its budgets mirror austerity regimes elsewhere. It has enacted neoliberalism while speaking of revolution. The NDR functions now only as a symbolic reference. It is evoked at party conferences, in commemorative speeches, in SACP resolutions that never materialise. On the ground, it has no programme. What exists is a vacuum — filled by private sector partnerships, donor-driven governance, and a mass population structurally locked out. Jeffery chooses to see danger in the symbolism. She ignores the vacuum. She warns of an ideology whose time has passed, while legitimising the system that replaced it. Her contribution is not neutral. It fortifies the walls around wealth. It tells those who suffer to be patient — or to be silent. History did not vindicate the ANC. Nor did it vindicate the defenders of capital. It left the struggle incomplete. The question remains open — who will finish it, and how? Jeffery offers no answer. She only repeats the warnings of old men who saw equality as chaos. * Gillian Schutte is a well-known social justice and race-justice activist and public intellectual. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media.
The South African
2 hours ago
- The South African
Emma Powell quits as DA's international relations spokesperson amid harassment claims
Democratic Alliance (DA) MP Emma Powell has stepped down from her role as the party's international relations spokesperson, citing ongoing harassment, threats, and intimidation linked to her outspoken stance on South Africa's foreign policy. In a statement posted to her X (formerly Twitter) account on Monday, Powell confirmed her resignation, describing a pattern of targeted pressure that has escalated in recent months. Her decision follows recent allegations that she had been spied on by the State Security Agency (SSA). This development further intensified what Powell described as a toxic and dangerous environment for MPs who challenge government narratives. 'Driven by my commitment to the DA's foundational principles, I accepted these risks as the unavoidable cost of standing up to and exposing the Department of International Relations and the ANC's relationships with authoritarian regimes,' Powell wrote. Powell has frequently clashed with the ANC, most recently alleging that President Cyril Ramaphosa's special envoy, Mcebisi Jonas, was denied a US visa – a claim that was met with sharp rebuke from the ruling party. Her foreign engagements have drawn criticism from the ANC, which accused Powell of acting against South Africa's official diplomatic stance. These included a high-profile visit to the United States in March – a trip linked to the dismissal of DA colleague Andrew Whitfield as a deputy minister – and a sponsored visit to Israel in April, both seen as controversial by senior government figures. The DA confirmed that Ryan Smith, Powell's former deputy, will now assume the international relations spokesperson role. DA chief whip George Michalakis thanked Powell for her service, stating she would soon be reassigned to a new portfolio within the party. 'We are grateful for the work she's done on the international stage and will continue to benefit from her experience in Parliament,' said Michalakis. Powell, who has been a DA MP since 2019, said she would remain in parliament to help empower others – particularly women – to lead in politics. Despite stepping down from the international portfolio, Powell made it clear she will continue speaking out against authoritarianism and advocating for transparent governance. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
