logo
Woman thrives in farming after failing matric

Woman thrives in farming after failing matric

The Herald2 days ago

'I noticed a lack of vegetables in supermarkets so I took the opportunity,' she told TimesLIVE.
'They were waiting for trucks that deliver once a week from other provinces and I thought they would order from me every day instead of waiting for the morning delivery truck.
'At first I thought it was an easy way of making quick cash. I was looking for a livelihood, then I started loving farming and understanding it.'
With the help of her husband, Kwetana owns a 13ha farm in Mthatha specialising in seedling, poultry, piggery and crop farming. She supplies products to supermarkets, hotels, schools, restaurants and street vendors.
'He [husband] was funding me with his teaching salary. He believed in me and is my mentor.'
The community gave her the land in exchange for creating jobs.
'The business has grown and I never thought it'd be this big. I have 28 permanent employees, 22 students doing in-service training, four interns and 12 casual workers.'
As a young black woman in agriculture, Kwetana faced numerous challenges, including being undermined by supermarkets and government departments. She recalled being asked 'who sent you?' when seeking funding or help.
Flooding in 2021 also swept her farm twice, but Kwetana persevered, believing in herself with her husband's support.
'Those things were hurtful. I reached a point where I was no longer looking for funding and did my own thing. I don't know how many times I fell and got back up by myself. Those challenges made me strong.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Buy now, panic later: A legal deep dive into South Africa's payment revolution
Buy now, panic later: A legal deep dive into South Africa's payment revolution

Mail & Guardian

time3 hours ago

  • Mail & Guardian

Buy now, panic later: A legal deep dive into South Africa's payment revolution

New legislation seeks to close regulatory gaps to protect consumers and promote a competitive digital finance system. Photo: Nadine Hutton/Bloomberg via Getty Images) Buy now, pay later (BNPL) payment options have strutted onto South Africa's financial runway with the swagger of innovation, offering interest-free instalments, bypassing traditional credit checks and boasting sleek user interfaces that make old-school lay-bys look prehistoric. For consumers, it feels like a dream: swipe today, split it tomorrow. For platforms, it's fintech gold. But beneath the surface of this frictionless façade lies a regulatory grey zone thick with risk, ambiguity and potential litigation. Is BNPL empowering consumers or quietly indebting them? And when the legal hammer finally drops, who's left holding the bill? BNPL services allow consumers to make purchases immediately and pay for them in installments over a set period, usually without interest if payments are made on time. However, as BNPL use increases, so do concerns around consumer debt, regulatory arbitrage and financial exclusion. The central question in South Africa is whether BNPL products fall within the ambit of the National Credit Act (NCA) or the Financial Advisory and Intermediary Services Act (FAIS Act). The National Credit Regulator is responsible for compliance with the NCA, while the Financial Sector Conduct Authority (FSCA) is responsible for compliance with the FAIS Act. The South African BNLP landscape The consumer credit environment in South Africa is governed by the NCA, which regulates all credit providers and mandates affordability assessments along with other consumer protection mechanisms. BNPL providers often argue that they are not credit providers, as their terms and conditions do not constitute a credit agreement. This is because they charge no interest and operate within a very short payment cycle (for example 4 to 6 weeks). As a result, many BNPL firms claim exemption from NCA obligations. According to the Intergovernmental Fintech Working Group, BNPL falls into a regulatory void. The NCR has taken limited action against providers, while the FSCA has yet to issue clear guidance. Consumers thus face reduced transparency, no guaranteed recourse mechanisms and inconsistent contract terms. BNPL's legal classification determines the scope of regulatory obligations. If BNPL is credit, then the NCA mandates affordability checks, registration with the NCR and extensive disclosures (among other things). However, most BNPL operators avoid these obligations by structuring their offerings as payment solutions or deferred billing. The FAIS Act regulates financial advice and intermediary services. BNPL providers rarely claim to offer financial advice and, as such, FAIS oversight is generally not invoked. This ambiguity causes a jurisdictional conflict between the NCR and FSCA, with little hope of resolution. Moreover, South African consumers are often unaware of potential late fees, the implications of missed payments and the lack of legal recourse, especially when providers collapse or change terms unilaterally. While legal classification remains unresolved, enforcement action against BNPL providers in South Africa has been minimal. In practice, the NCR's enforcement has focused largely on traditional credit providers, while the FSCA's mandate remains unclear in the absence of explicit statutory triggers. This lack of supervisory clarity raises risks of selective compliance, where only larger players seek legal advice or act preemptively, while smaller or offshore providers bypass South African oversight altogether. Moreover, without designated supervisory frameworks, enforcement becomes reactive, often occurring only after consumer harm has materialised. The Conduct of Financial Institutions Bill is envisaged to address these regulatory gaps. A modern regulatory regime must therefore address, not only classification and jurisdiction, but also enforcement mechanisms, investigative powers and co-ordinated oversight, possibly through inter-agency memoranda of understanding or joint supervisory task teams. Without this, regulatory gaps become systemic vulnerabilities. Global BNLP landscape UK: The Financial Conduct Authority will regulate BNPL under new legislation taking effect in 2026. Providers will be required to conduct affordability checks, obtain authorisation, and ensure clear disclosures. Consumers will be granted section 75 protections under the Consumer Credit Act. Australia: The Australian Securities and Investments Commission has introduced legislation bringing BNPL under the National Consumer Credit Protection Act. From mid-2025, providers must hold a credit licence, conduct responsible lending assessments and comply with disclosure obligations. These requirements are tailored to balance innovation with consumer protection. US: The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has classified BNPL loans accessed via digital accounts as 'credit cards', triggering protections under Regulation Z. Dispute resolution, refunds and chargeback rights are now part of BNPL transactions, although industry litigation may reverse this. These models demonstrate that proactive regulation, coupled with flexibility, is essential for managing BNPL risks. Comparative legal analysis of South Africa South Africa's current dual-regulator model (the NCR and FSCA) is ill-equipped for the digital fragmentation of modern finance. The lack of a clear BNPL regulatory framework stands in contrast with jurisdictions where regulators have already expanded definitions of credit to include BNPL explicitly. Key takeaways include: The UK's reliance on disclosure and licensing. Australia's focus on credit licenses and suitability assessments. The US approach of function-over-form classification (if it behaves like a credit card, it is regulated like one). The hope is that the Conduct of Financial Institutions Bill will reconcile institutional gaps and avoid regulatory arbitrage by expanding statutory definitions and enforcing consistency. Fintech partnerships and platform liability BNPL services are frequently integrated directly into online retail platforms via application programming interface partnerships. This embedded finance model raises questions of liability, especially when the BNPL provider operates outside the regulatory net. In South Africa, it is unclear whether a platform offering BNPL at checkout could be deemed to be providing or facilitating credit under the NCA. Retailers and marketplaces must consider whether they are indirectly exposing themselves to liability or reputational risk, especially if their BNPL partners engage in misleading conduct, impose unlawful fees or collapse without notice. Globally, regulators are beginning to scrutinise not just BNPL providers, but also the platforms and merchants who offer such services. The UK's Financial Conduct Authority, for example, has signalled that contractual and operational accountability may extend beyond the primary credit provider. South African platforms should pre-emptively assess their BNPL partnerships through the lens of operational risk, consumer protection and reputational resilience. Digital identity and affordability in a credit-light economy One major challenge for effective BNPL regulation in South Africa lies in consumer verification and affordability assessments. Without a robust credit history or consistent income documentation, many consumers who use BNPL services remain invisible to traditional risk models. This opens the door to over-indebtedness, particularly among the underbanked. Future BNPL regulation must therefore account for the reality of fragmented digital footprints and low formal credit participation. There is room for innovation — open banking frameworks, mobile payment data and transactional analytics could support dynamic affordability models. However, this would require legal certainty around data access, privacy and proportional use of financial profiling. BNPL operators who proactively invest in these tools, backed by transparent disclosures and consent practices, will probably be best positioned when regulation catches up. BNPL has redefined consumer finance by promising simplicity and speed but the country risks repeating mistakes seen in unregulated microcredit booms if it fails to address its regulatory gaps. Global trends show that regulation can evolve in tandem with technology. By embracing reform and cross-sector collaboration, South Africa can lead in creating a safe, competitive digital finance ecosystem. Lerato Lamola & Anél de Meyer are partners at Webber Wentzel.

Worker killed at Harmony's Joel mine in the Free State
Worker killed at Harmony's Joel mine in the Free State

The Herald

time5 hours ago

  • The Herald

Worker killed at Harmony's Joel mine in the Free State

A worker was killed in a fall of ground accident at Harmony Gold's Joel mine in Free State on Wednesday. The company said all relevant authorities, family members and colleagues had been informed. It said it was devastated by another loss of life. 'Our safety strategy and culture include both systemic and humanistic factors and controls. These controls are designed to avoid incidents, protect our employees and have to be adhered to at all times. No working area will be accessed unless it has been declared safe,' said Beyers Nel, Harmony CEO. The Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (Amcu) said this was the 11th fatality at Harmony this year, bringing the total fatalities in the South African mining industry to 25. 'Eleven fatalities point directly to the company's failure to provide conditions that are safe for the operation to take place,' Amcu said. The union added that if Harmony dodges analysing organisational failures and blames the deaths on the behaviour of employees, it is likely they will experience more injuries and disasters. Harmony said Thursday has been declared a day of safety across all Harmony's South African operations to engage with the company's employees and stakeholders and to reflect on the company's safety practices at each of its mines. 'Our day of safety is not simply a pause, it is a call to action,' said Nel. TimesLIVE

Many SA households don't have enough food to eat — study
Many SA households don't have enough food to eat — study

The Herald

time5 hours ago

  • The Herald

Many SA households don't have enough food to eat — study

More than 23% of SA households experienced inadequate or severely inadequate access to food, a recently released report on food security has revealed. The report, Food for Thought: Reflections on Food Insecurity, — which was launched by the Socio-Economic Rights Institute (Seri) on Tuesday, — aims to better understand how vulnerable communities in the country experience hunger and food insecurity, particularly in the wake of the Covid-19 pandemic. The results of the report comes from interviews Seri conducted with partner organisations representing informal workers, recyclers, domestic workers, and residents in informal settlements. The report also exposes the harsh realities of food poverty in both rural and urban settings. While SA produces enough food to feed its population, the report highlighted that economic access, not food availability, is the biggest barrier. 'Many households may 'move in and out of hunger' during the course of the month as they have to make decisions about food based on their income. In addition to economic or direct access, another way in which households or individuals are able to access food in dire economic circumstances, is through food aid,' read the report. Low wages, rising food prices, and structural inequalities leave many unable to afford nutritious meals. This not only affecting the unemployed but also working-class families earning minimum wage, the report added. SowetanLIVE

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store