War of words between AfriForum and Steenhuisen over farm murders
AfriForum's community safety spokesperson Jacques Broodryk has criticised Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen.
Image: afriforum
A heated exchange has erupted between AfriForum's Jacques Broodryk and DA leader John Steenhuisen over the prioritisation of farm attacks and murders.
Last month President Cyril Ramaphosa, along with some of his cabinet ministers, including Steenhuisen who is Minister of Agriculture, visited US president Donald Trump in Washington to fend off false claims of white genocide in South Africa.
However, Trump ambushed the group with videos and articles to prove that white farmers were being targeted for their land.
Steenhuisen, speaking at that meeting, reiterated that he was working with the police ministry to curb farm killings in the country.
'As the Minister of Agriculture it is something that I am particularly exercised with my colleagues at police and my colleagues in the justice cluster to stop, making farm attacks and stock theft a priority crime. And it affects all farmers in South Africa,' Steenhuisen said at the Oval office.
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 ✕
The controversy stems from Steenhuisen's recent statements in the US, where he emphasised the need to declare farm attacks and stock theft priority crimes.
According to Broodryk, Steenhuisen's words are nothing more than empty promises, and it's time for him to take concrete action.
"It is unfortunate that it took a humiliating meeting with the leader of the US for the Minister of Agriculture to come to his senses and finally admit that farm attacks and murders should be declared a priority crime," Broodryk wrote in a statement.
"This is despite the issue being ignored until now."
Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen hits back at Afriforum over farm murders.
Image: Henk Kruger/Independent Newspapers
Broodryk's sentiments are rooted in AfriForum's long-standing call for farm attacks to be prioritised, a plea they consider to have fallen on deaf ears.
The organisation's research reveals that more than 95% of all farm attack and murder incidents remain unsolved, with convictions made in only 66 cases out of 1,402 incidents recorded between 2019 and 2022.
According to Broodryk the crux of the issue lies in the government's refusal to prioritise farm attacks, despite the severity and frequency of these crimes.
Broodryk contends that other crimes, such as rhino poaching and cash-in-transit heists, have been given priority status, while farm attacks are neglected.
"While rhino poaching is considered a priority crime and political murders receive special attention through dedicated task teams, farm attacks do not receive the same treatment," he said.
"Clearly, politicians' lives are considered much more important than those of our farmers."
In contrast, Steenhuisen claims that his office has been working with the Minister of Police's office to address farm attacks.
"There has been collaboration between my office and the Minister of Police's office, including a joint parliamentary portfolio committee meeting between Agriculture and Police," Steenhuisen said.
He also said he highlighted the issue of farm attacks in his speech during the State of the Nation Address (SONA) months before his Washington visit.
Steenhuisen fired back at Broodryk, saying that he had been working behind the scenes to address farm attacks and that AfriForum's accusations were unfounded.
"It is simply not true that I first raised this issue in the Oval Office," Steenhuisen said.
"If the gentleman concerned had taken time to meet with me before shooting from the hip, I could have told him of the numerous interventions that have taken place and are yet to take place."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
41 minutes ago
- The Citizen
E-toll debt bites into traffic light repair budget
The DA has raised serious concerns about an imminent budget shortfall that will see Gauteng's provincial traffic light maintenance grind to a halt before the end of July. This looming crisis threatens the safety and mobility of millions of road users across the province, including key urban areas such as Pretoria. 'This will affect the whole of the province,' warned Evert du Plessis, DA Gauteng spokesperson for Roads and Transport. 'There are traffic lights that belong to and are maintained by the province in every metro and municipality. Pretoria will definitely be affected as well.' The budget shortfall was revealed during a recent Gauteng Provincial Legislature (GPL) Transport, Roads, and Logistics Committee meeting. Committee members were told that the allocated funds will be exhausted before the end of July, just three months into the financial year. In Pretoria, provincial roads, designated by the letter 'R', crisscross the city and act as vital connectors between suburbs and national routes. These include major corridors like the R55 and connecting streets, where intersections often depend on traffic signals to regulate the complex flow of daily commuters. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that provincial roads often intersect with national (Sanral) and municipal roads, creating shared responsibilities between all three spheres of government. 'We don't have a specific list for dysfunctional traffic lights on Tshwane's provincial roads as it changes on a daily basis,' explained Du Plessis. 'There are, however, a substantial number of provincial and national roads that cross metro boundaries. So all three tiers of government must take responsibility for their own infrastructure.' However, without a functional maintenance budget, Gauteng's provincial authorities will soon no longer be able to service their share of these intersections. Du Plessis said this shortfall is more than just an administrative hiccup. 'Non-functioning traffic lights pose a real threat to public safety, placing motorists and pedestrians at risk of collisions, violent crime at intersections, and delays that disrupt the daily routines of workers, parents, and emergency services. 'For the remaining nine months of the year, motorists could be stuck in gridlock, relying on pointsmen instead of functioning systems to reach their destinations,' he said. The DA has linked the budget collapse to Gauteng Premier Panyaza Lesufi's decision to commit provincial funds to paying off e-toll debt, an obligation the province was never legally bound to. Lesufi said on March 18 that the Gauteng government will absorb the e-toll debt and will continue to service it. He also confirmed that the provincial government has gone to the Development Bank of Southern Africa for a loan to be able to service the shortfall on e-tolls. The total e-toll debt that the provincial government has to pay back is more than R20-billion. This includes R12.9-billion for the historical debt, R4-billion for interest, and R4-billion for maintenance. The government has agreed to repay this debt in five equal annual instalments, with the first payment of R3.8-billion being made on September 30, 2024. 'This is another example of service delivery money being squashed by an irrational political commitment,' said Du Plessis. The party has called on Gauteng MEC for Roads, Transport and Logistics, Kedibone Diale-Thabela, and the head of the department, Thulani Mdadane, to urgently redirect funding and prevent a province-wide gridlock. 'New technology and the assistance of law enforcement would also go a long way to address this ever-escalating problem,' he added. The DA pledged to continue pressing the issue in the GPL, demanding answers and accountability from the ANC-led provincial government. 'A DA-led Gauteng government would not allow residents to be placed in such dangerous or frustrating situations,' he said. 'We will prioritise funding for traffic lights as a matter of extreme urgency to ensure the safety and well-being of all road users in Gauteng.' Do you have more information about the story? Please send us an email to bennittb@ or phone us on 083 625 4114. For free breaking and community news, visit Rekord's websites: Rekord East For more news and interesting articles, like Rekord on Facebook, follow us on Twitter or Instagram or TikTok At Caxton, we employ humans to generate daily fresh news, not AI intervention. Happy reading! Stay in the know. Download the Caxton Local News Network App Stay in the know. Download the Caxton Local News Network App here
IOL News
11 hours ago
- IOL News
Employer groups seek urgent interdict against Employment Equity regulations
The Department of Employment and Labour is forging ahead with the implementation of the Employment Equity Amendment Act. Image: Leon Lestrade/ Independent Newspapers The National Employers' Association of South Africa (Neasa) and Sakeliga have officially notified the Minister of Employment and Labour, Dr Nomakhosazana Meth, of their intent to seek an urgent interdict against the contentious Employment Equity (EE) regulations. This comes after the department published two sets of EE Regulations on 15 April - the General Administrative Regulations, and Regulations on Sector Numerical EE Targets - following the commencement of the Employment Equity Amendment Act, No. 4 of 2022, on 1 January 2025. The proposed regulations mandate employers to adhere to strict hiring quotas based on race, sex, and disability, with penalties for non-compliance reaching up to 10% of a company's turnover. Section 15(A) of the Equity Employment Amendment Act empowers the minister to set numerical targets. According to the Act, the Minister may, after consulting the relevant sectors and with the advice of the Commission for Employment Equity (CEE), for the purpose of ensuring the equitable representation of suitably qualified people from the designated groups at all occupational levels in the workforce, by notice in the Government Gazette set numerical targets for any national economic sector identified in terms of subsection (1). 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 ✕ Neasa on Wednesday said the urgency of this interdict stemmed from concerns voiced by the associations about the potential for these regulations to inflict irreparable harm on both public and private sectors. Neasa and Sakeliga argue that the minister's plan risks the allocation of resources ineffectively in a futile attempt to meet what they describe as 'impossible' compliance requirements. Under the proposed framework, companies would be required to categorise themselves into one of 18 economic sectors and adjust their workforce composition according to a series of demographic quotas. These quotas, referred to as 'numerical sectoral targets,' highlight a drastic shift in hiring practices, where businesses are instructed to limit appointments or promotions of employees from so-called over-represented groups, which includes many white male staff members. The end goal of these targets is to ensure that every single designated business (50 or more employees) in South Africa, regardless of industry, has a workforce that is representative of the racial and gender demographic composition of the country. The 2025 CEE Annual Report shows that at Top Management, the White population representation at 61.1% is approximately eight times their Economically Active Population (EAP), and the Indian population representation at 11.9% is more than four times their EAP at the Top Management level. In contrast, said the report, the African population representation is at 18.0%, which is approximately four times below their EAP, and the Coloured population representation at 6.2% is below their EAP at this occupational level. The CEE Report concludes that the lack of equitable representation at the Top Management level does not bode well for the future sustainable economic growth of the country and the representation of the demographic population distribution in the workplace in terms of population groups, gender, and disability. The Report said that at the Senior Management level, the picture remains appalling for the Africans, with the White and Indian Population representation remaining significantly higher than their EAP. However, critics of the regulations, including Neasa and Sakeliga, maintain that the measures contravene established constitutional rights and impose unachievable demands on employers. The economic repercussions, they argue, could be dire, potentially leading to significant job losses and overwhelming legal uncertainties that would disrupt business operations across the board. "The regulations and the Employment Equity Act (as amended in 2023) establish unlawful, unconstitutional, and impossible demands. Their consequence would be severe financial harm to businesses and extensive social harm through economic disruption, increased unemployment, and legal uncertanty," Neasa said. "We informed the minister that, in addition to our urgent application against the 2025 administrative regulations and sectoral targets, we also intend to challenge the Employment Equity Act on additional grounds."
Daily Maverick
13 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
The DA's employment equity case attempts to reverse transformation and entrench white minority privilege
The Democratic Alliance's (DA's) legal challenge to the Employment Equity Amendment Act (EEAA) is a thinly veiled attempt to reverse economic transformation and thereby entrench white minority privilege. The party's claim that its court action is in opposition to 'grand social engineering' rings hollow given the enduring legacy of apartheid's social and economic architecture. In truth, the DA's stance on EEAA is an ideological inheritance, a continuation of their historical resistance to redress; part of its raison d'être to fossilise colonial and apartheid racial and gender hierarchies. To appreciate this, let us briefly consider the Department of Employment and Labour's 24th Commission for Employment Equity (CEE) Annual Report (2023/24). It exposes the fiction that the private sector is a transformed happy terrain which the DA seeks to shield from the supposed 'interference' of the government. The report illustrates a country still struggling to shrug off the shadow of economic apartheid. For example, while the white population group constitutes 7.7% of the nation's economically active population (EAP), it nevertheless held 62.1% of top management level positions in 2023. Representing 2.6% of the EAP, South Africans of Indian descent held 11.6% of these posts. At 80.7% of EAP, black Africans hold 17.2% of top management roles, while coloureds, at 9% of the EAP, account for a paltry 6.1%. These disparities are neither natural nor God ordained; they are an outcome of Verwoerdian economic violence against Africans, coloureds and Indians. The CEE report also damningly notes that the majority of recruitment, promotion and skills-development opportunities at this highest echelon continue to flow to the white population group. This is not merit, it is the perpetuation of a boardroom order where white privilege remains the default. Conveyor belt of privilege The disparity reflected at top management cascades downwards to the senior management level where whites at 7.7% of EAP occupy 48.5% of positions, Indians who constitute 2.6% of EAP hold 12.4%, while black Africans hold 27.6% of positions despite being 80.7% of the population. The lion's share of opportunities still flows to those already at the top, which means that transformation is perpetually decked against a conveyor belt of privilege. The private sector emerges as the stronghold of this resistance. While the government has made commendable strides, achieving 74.7% black African representation at top management, the private sector languishes with a pitiful 14% black African representation at this level, effectively maintaining the apartheid-era status quo, where 65.1% of top posts are held by white individuals. Alongside racial disparities is gender inequality. Across all sectors, men dominate top management by more than two-and-a-half times females (roughly 73% male). While the government shows marginally better female representation at 35.4% in top leadership, the private sector registers 10% less, at 25.8%. This glass ceiling, often a result of old boys' clubs dressing up exclusion as 'culture fit', is an outcome of a patriarchal culture which compounds racial exclusion and puts paid to the mythology of a self-correcting market. Nowhere is this private-sector exceptionalism and entrenched bias more grotesque than in the DA-run Western Cape, their self-proclaimed bastion of good governance. There, white males alone occupy a staggering 57.2% of top management positions and 34.4% at senior management level. This is in a province where white people constitute only 17% of the population, compared with 42% coloured and 38% black African – who together form 80% of the residents. This is not a reflection of a 'dearth of qualified candidates'; it is a damning testament to a systemic racial and gender bias thriving under a political administration that pays lip service to equality while actively fighting the tools designed to achieve it. Coloured and black African professionals are corralled into the lower tiers by an exclusionary 'culture fit' that walks and quacks like 'job reservation' in post-apartheid South Africa. These are the gatekeepers making crucial investment and employment decisions and shaping institutional cultures that too often exclude black African, coloured and Indian talent. In its affidavit to the North Gauteng High Court, the DA wilfully misrepresents the amended Section 15A of the EEAA, which empowers the minister to set 'numerical targets', as a draconian imposition of immutable 'quotas'. Yet, the original Employment Equity Act (EEA), in Section 15(3), explicitly clarifies that affirmative action measures 'include preferential treatment and numerical goals, but exclude quotas'. The Constitution itself was drafted to smash apartheid's economic architecture, not to immortalise it, and the Employment Equity Act is one of our key demolition hammers. Transformation failure The current amendments provide a desperately needed impetus precisely because the 'context-sensitive employer-led plans' so cherished by the DA have demonstrably failed to achieve substantive transformation, as the CEE statistics brutally confirm. Furthermore, the Act is far from being the rigid cudgel the DA portrays. Section 15A (3) explicitly provides for nuanced, differentiated targets responsive to occupational levels, sub-sectors or regions. Critically, Section 42(4) explicitly permits any employer to 'raise any reasonable ground to justify its failure to comply'. The Act has consistently emphasised the appointment of 'suitably qualified' individuals. Nothing in the Act prohibits the appointment of a candidate from a non-designated group if a diligent, exhaustive search does not find a suitably qualified candidate from a designated group. In practice, the Act operates much like our critical-skills visa process – nuanced, consultative and always mindful of maintaining standards. This inherent flexibility exposes the DA's opposition as ideological warfare rather than a practical critique. Their true grievance is with the erosion of racial privilege. Qualified franchise, swart gevaar This position is not new for the DA. As recently as 1978, 47 years ago, the DA, then called the Progressive Party, championed a qualified franchise for black people over universal adult suffrage or 'one person, one vote'. Revealing – more than it concealed – its contempt for black people, this party, which claims liberal credentials, argued that black people needed to have attained a certain level of education and own property in order to vote. No doubt a strategy to manage the savages. After rebranding as the Democratic Party, it opposed the Labour Relations Act of 1995 and the original Employment Equity Act of 1998 on grounds that these laws offend against 'meritocracy'. You can accuse the DA as you will, but inconsistency in protecting white minority privilege cannot be one of its faults. The DA's dire prophecy that the Act will cripple investment or decimate employment is an old swart gevaar red herring pure and simple. After the original EEA took effect, between 2001 and 2007, South Africa's economy grew between 4.5%-5.5%, while unemployment dropped by 11%, proving that equity policies can coexist with economic expansion. The real drags on investment are challenges such as energy and logistics bottlenecks and crime, not the presence of black African women and men in the C-suite. By selectively championing Section 9(1) of the Constitution (equality) while ignoring the clear mandate of Section 9(2) – the solemn duty to enact measures that advance those historically disadvantaged by unfair discrimination – the DA reveals its true colours. It aligns itself with every white-supremacist argument ever used to defy meaningful change. This constitutional mandate demands decisive, active intervention, not passive hope or transformation on its terms – optional, non-binding and perpetually negotiable. No Bantustan boardrooms The EEAA, fortified by the undeniable truth of the CEE's findings, stands as an indispensable instrument in our protracted struggle to dismantle structural racism, unlock the full spectrum of South African talent and forge an inclusive economy – a boardroom that is not a Bantustan reflecting a 7% minority. We cannot allow the boardrooms of corporate South Africa to remain gated enclaves. The consequences for doing so would be more than symbolic. These are the individuals who shape investment decisions, workplace cultures and corporate governance. If they do not reflect our nation, neither will our economy. Besides, we can forget about social and political stability – something to which the DA either pays lip service or does not appreciate, or both. The DA has no history of genuinely advancing the interests of black people in general, Africans, coloureds and Indians in particular, in our country. Its historic positions are consistent with this latest offensive and an affront to the eradication of the legacy of colonialism and apartheid. South Africans must ask – whose freedom is advanced if the DA wins? Certainly not the coloured engineer passed over because she 'won't fit the culture'. Not the black African professional locked out of a training programme because the boardroom is 'already diverse enough'. The only winners would be those who mistake yesterday's privilege for today's right.
