Lesufi announces relaunch of Nasi Ispani, promising 32,000 new jobs
Premier Panyaza Lesufi provides an update on key developments and decisions arising from the recent Executive Council (EXCO) meeting.
Image: Gauteng Gov/X
Gauteng is set to relaunch Nasi Ispani in June, creating 32,000 jobs for Assistant Teachers, Premier Panyaza Lesufi announced on Thursday.
Speaking at a media briefing in Midrand, Lesufi revealed that the programme will recruit the youth across the province, marking a major boost for youth employment and the education sector.
Lesufi said he was undeterred by criticism from opposition parties on the mass recruitment programme.
'The people who are criticising us on Nasi Ispani understand the effectiveness of this programme. We're not doing it for political mileage, we're doing it to fight unemployment.
'But what they're saying now is that you have poor homes, you've got incomplete buildings, traffic lights that have gone down, roads that are not maintained, you've got grass that is not cut.
'On the other side, you've got youth in the townships who are unemployed. So you train them to do the work and pay them,' he said.
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
Next
Stay
Close ✕
The initiative has been characterised by some as a campaign by the ANC to garner support ahead of the 2024 national and provincial elections. The Democratic Alliance (DA) and ActionSA have consistently raised concerns regarding Lesufi's approach since the programme's initial launch in 2023.
Lesufi said this was a 'next round of Nasi Ispani.'
'It's a skills training to be welders, to know how to put in tiles, to be plumbers. So we have already done that. We've got 560,000 and 544,000 unemployed people. They want to be trained, either to be welders, plumbers, electricians, all these things.'
He added that the relaunch will now go to TVET colleges.
kamogelo.moichela@iol.co.za
IOL Politics
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
16 minutes ago
- The Citizen
‘Bring all to dialogue': Experts insist national dialogue must be people-driven
Political analysts stress the need for land restitution and broad participation to ensure a meaningful and effective national dialogue. Experts say the envisaged national dialogue must not be a top-down process, but people-driven and discuss contentious issues like land and racial polarisation. But more importantly, said one expert, the dialogue required full commitment from various actors to find a collective solution to the country's myriad problems. Political analyst and scholar Dominic Maphaka from North-West University said the dialogue was necessary to unite the diverse and divided country. National dialogue necessary to unite country He said, as outlined by President Cyril Ramaphosa, stakeholders, including business, labour, civil society, communities, youth and people with disabilities, should form part of the dialogue to chart the way forward. 'But the dialogue will require a commitment from various actors to form part of a collective solution to the myriad problems faced by the country,' Maphaka said. ALSO READ: Thandiswa Mazwai says she would've accepted invite to national dialogue had Ramaphosa sent it He alluded to the fact that, due to the vibrant civil society, nonstate actors were often at loggerheads with government and opposing its development policies. 'Despite having divergent ideologies, it is not far-fetched that South Africans share common problems in many areas. I therefore think that ideologies should not take precedence in the dialogue; instead, stakeholders should deliberate and find common policy solutions to address common policy problems,' Maphaka said. Ramaphosa yesterday said he would call a National Convention on 15 August, which would set the agenda for the National Dialogue. National Convention to set agenda A follow-up convention would be held early next year. He said the convention would be a representative gathering, bringing together government, political parties, civil society, business, labour, traditional leaders, religious leaders, cultural workers, sports organisations, women, youth and community voices. Some experts believed people and civil society, not government and political parties, should lead the planned dialogue process, including the convention. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa urges caution as floods claims lives in Eastern Cape Political analyst Lesiba Teffo said the national dialogue was not supposed to be driven by the state because that was where the seeds of its failure lay. 'It was contested from inception and some of the initiators are now in the periphery. A reasonable modality would be to start in the provinces whose reports would feed into the national convention. Otherwise, you are likely to end up with another voluminous, glossy and expensive National Development Plan 0.2 Vision 2040,' Teffo said. The need for an all-inclusive national dialogue was first proposed by former president Thabo Mbeki. Mbeki, assisted by Jacob Zuma, was the ANC's first chief negotiator at the pre-1994 Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa) talks before they were replaced by Ramaphosa and Mohammed Valli Moosa. Need for national dialogue first proposed by Mbeki There seemed to be a common view that dialogue should involve various roleplayers – from civil society, to state, business, trade unions and political parties. It is understood that the struggle stalwarts' foundations were involved in consultations to kick off the process, while Nedlac was identified to play a role as one of the facilitators due to its composite nature with business, trade unions, community and government. ALSO READ: 'A meaningless publicity stunt by a limping president': EFF slams Ramaphosa's national dialogue call Political and heritage analyst George Tsibani, who supports the idea of a national dialogue, said such a gathering should address the question of land in its proper perspective. He said democratic South Africa was a result of a negotiated settlement that was underpinned by Sunset Clauses that were a compromise and did not address the land question. 'If we pretend that there was no compromise, it would take the focus away from the land issue. The land redistribution and restitution must form the cornerstone of national dialogue,' Tsibani said. Previous Codesa process failed The previous Codesa process failed to address many issues due to the Sunset Clause that allowed for the continuation of white control of the state. 'So Codesa 2 must address the land issue in its totality, meaning there must be a deliberate restitution of land for the people who lost their land during the colonial and slavery periods,' Tsibani said. NOW READ: Ramaphosa, Chief Justice mourn passing of Judge Temba Sangoni
The Herald
19 minutes ago
- The Herald
Higher education minister keeps up stonewalling on 'SETA panel'
Higher education and training minister Nobuhle Nkabane continues to dig in her heels over the submission to parliament of the names of the 'independent selection panel' she relied on to make controversial appointments to SETA boards last month. Nkabane had until the close of business on Wednesday to submit records and minutes of the meeting of the 'independent panel' that she says advised on the appointments of the chairpersons of Sector Education and Training Authorities that she was last month ordered to reverse by the presidency. But at the eleventh-hour on Wednesday, it emerged that Nkabane wrote a letter dated June 10 to Tebego Letsie, an ANC MP who chairs the portfolio committee on higher education, asking that the June 10 deadline be extended by a further 20 days, to June 20. The higher education committee had given her the deadline of June 11 last week after she refused to disclose the names and full details of her 'independent panel' at a heated meeting, with Nkabane citing the Protection of Personal Information Act. Nkabane landed in hot water several weeks ago after it emerged that she had appointed controversial and politically connected people to chair the boards of the SETAs. Among them were Buyambo Mantashe, the son of minerals minister Gwede Mantashe who was once deputised by Nkabane in that portfolio. Also on the controversial list were former KZN premier Nomusa Ncube-Dube, former KZN MEC Mike Mabuyakhulu and Johannesburg MMC Loyiso Masuku. The move has pitted Nkabane against President Cyril Ramaphosa, who first ordered her to withdraw the names and most recently also asked her to submit a report to him on the matter. Sources in the higher echelons are adamant that Nkabane's stonewalling on this issue is slowly catching up with her and she will soon run out of options, with some casting doubt on the existence of the 'independent selection panel'. In her letter to Letsie, which has since been shared with all members of the higher education committee, she placed on 'record and confirm my full intention to comply with the portfolio committee's request'. Again citing the POPIA and the Promotion of Access to Information Act, Nkabane said she needed more time to ensure that the information she was preparing to send to parliament would be disclosed in a lawful manner. She told her oversight committee that she had been 'assured that I am legally permitted to disclosed the panellists' details in a lawful manner'. 'For these reasons and in acknowledgment of the panellists' rights to privacy, I have written to each of the members of the selection and evaluation panel and advised them of my intention to comply with the portfolio committee's request. 'However, it remains unlikely that my engagements with them will be completed by the 11 June 2025 deadline. In the circumstances, and to allow the panel members an opportunity to respond to my letter or exercise whatever right they may have, I request an extension of the deadline to 30 June 2025.' The higher education committee was expected to discuss its response to Nkabane's deadline request in the coming days.
Daily Maverick
9 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
National Dialogue — Promising concept or an illusion of progress for SA?
President Cyril Ramaphosa's announcement on Tuesday night of a National Convention to start a National Dialogue is clearly meant to get South Africans talking to each other about solving our problems. Be careful what you wish for. At face value the concept of a national dialogue has much to recommend it. We are clearly in deep trouble, and many of our problems appear to be getting worse. The national coalition government appears to have made little progress, our economy is barely stuttering, and the number of people who are unemployed, or under-employed, continues to rise no matter how you define it. And of course, as President Cyril Ramaphosa pointed out, there is our history of a negotiated settlement that ended apartheid. A settlement that is still blamed today for some of our serious problems. All of that said, there are some important questions to ask about the wisdom of this idea. Firstly, very few leaders give up any power voluntarily. Ramaphosa, as leader of the ANC, is appearing to give the impression that the ANC will accept whatever settlement is reached through this process. But at the same time, the ANC will not, easily at least, be able to veto any settlement. This is hugely significant. For the conspiratorially minded, it may even suggest that he has accepted that the ANC will never actually have a large amount of state power again. For some, it could even suggest he has very little faith in whoever will replace him as leader of the ANC. And it certainly reminds us that he has failed to enact a new 'social compact', something he has promised since before he was even elected leader of the ANC. Different agenda However, Ramaphosa might actually have a slightly different agenda. Calls for this national dialogue have been growing for several years. For a long time people called for an 'Economic Codesa', to allow different role players in the economy to sit down and work out how to grow our economy. The person who has been the loudest in his calls for this event is former president Thabo Mbeki. It is interesting then that his foundation, and the foundations of other former presidents, have not been included in the list of people who are supposed to be guiding the process. It must be said that including Mbeki, in any form, is unlikely to be constructive. He has shown that he appears focused on protecting his own legacy. His conduct in the case of the Cradock Four families, in which he opposed an inquiry into the non-prosecution of those denied amnesty by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, suggests a very personal motivation. To claim that his character is ' priceless ' in the face of questions from the families about why the government he led did not prosecute those who killed their fathers and husbands appears to defy rationality. The sheer number of people involved is also interesting. Thirty-one people are included on Ramaphosa's Eminent Persons Group from the most incredibly diverse role is to guide and champion the National Dialogue. While there are business leaders and unionists (none of them are current, but they include Bobby Godsell and Bheki Ntshalintshali) there is also a rugby captain (you know the one), a mountaineer (Sibusiso Vilane), a rocket scientist, a storyteller, the chair of the National Planning Commission (Professor Tinyiko Maluleke), both Bishop Barnabas Lekganyane and Bishop Engenas Lekganyane (representing different strands of the Zion Christian Church), one Anglican Archbishop, an actor (John Kani), a football coach (Desiree Ellis) a former Constitutional Court Judge (Edwin Cameron) and Miss South Africa (Mia le Roux may in fact be there not to represent beauty pageant winners, but as a person who grew up deaf, representing people living with disabilities). While there is much wisdom on this list, it is also not clear what value some others may bring. Impossible position And they have now been placed in an impossible position. It would be hard to say no to the Presidency, and yet now they are going to be asked questions about their views on our politics. Someone like Siya Kolisi, almost universally respected, may find this hugely uncomfortable. Like singers and actors who have made political comments, he has no experience in making trade-offs and has no constituency to protect. Now they will be thrust into the harsh glare of our political spotlight. But this list is also curious because of who is left out. Some ancient schisms, such as that in the Zion Christian Church, are recognised, while others, such as that in the Christian church, are not. There is an Anglican representative but not a Catholic one. Perhaps more importantly, no one appears to represent that most under-represented group in our politics, those who have no job and no income. This gets to the heart of one of our economic problems: organised groups that represent people who are unemployed, such as the Unemployed Peoples Movement, are often left out of the conversation and thus they have very little voice in our society. Huge omission That said, it is a huge omission. It should also be noted that the sheer size of this committee may in fact be an attempt to make sure that nothing is done, that no agreement is reached on anything. This might well be the ruse of an experienced politician, who knows that putting so many people in a room, from so many different parts of our society, will simply result in endless arguments. Technically, this is supposed to result in a bottom-up approach, where people will be given the chance to speak in different parts of the country. On paper, this is inherently democratic. In practice, it can lead to undemocratic outcomes, as the most organised and the loudest voices can overwhelm the debate. And our institutions have shown time and time again that public consultation can be ignored. For years energy regulator Nersa has held public hearings before deciding whether to increase electricity prices. Despite so many people publicly opposing tariff increases, power prices have risen by more than 653% since 2007 (inflation during that time was 129%). Economic reality The reason Nersa did that, despite hearing from so many people who opposed it, was because of economic reality. Eskom needed the money. Public consultation is very often about hearing what people want. Making decisions is about what is possible. Nersa has understood that (Eskom has often complained it has not increased prices enough) and thus had to ignore the public comments. This is why bodies like Nersa are given legal authority to make decisions. They can force people to accept the outcome. This process will have nothing like that. It is also a fallacy to think that getting people in a room together will result in them getting closer. Yes, it can happen. But it can also lead to heightened tensions. During the Codesa talks, the stakes were so incredibly high that very few people were prepared to use violence. The one group that was, the right-wing AWB, eventually used an armoured car to disrupt the talks. But their support was tiny and measured in the hundreds. There are now people in our society who publicly oppose our Constitution and have used violence in the past. One of them, Jacob Zuma, won the support of nearly 2.3 million people in last year's election. He will surely demand to be a part of this process. Incentive Also, before 1994 all of the parties involved knew there would be an election after the process. As a result there was an incentive to appear to be constructive. No such incentive will be present in this situation. Currently, one of the great divides in our politics is between parties and constituencies that support the Constitution, and parties and constituencies that don't. This process of a National Dialogue risks giving those who oppose the Constitution, in all sorts of ways, a much louder voice. Imagine, for example, the separatist voices in our society, those who want independence for the Zulu Kingdom, or those who identify as Afrikaners, or who believe the Western Cape really is different to Mzansi, working together to dominate the process. Also, considering how our politics is in the process of fracturing, creating more parties representing more diverse constituencies, the result could just be a cacophony of voices, making it difficult to come to any conclusion at all. It is true that South Africa is in a difficult, and sometimes dangerous position. As Ramaphosa himself said, in his eulogy for Winnie Madikizela-Mandela in 2018: 'We must acknowledge that we are a society that is hurting, damaged by our past, numbed by our present and hesitant about our future.' He was entirely correct. The history of South Africa, so violent and oppressive, has created deep scars. And thus deep tensions. Sometimes our society can almost look like the most complicated knot of different types of string. When you pull it, you might be able to make sense of it all. Maybe.
