Battle for SA's education future: BELA Act divides stakeholders as deadline approaches
Image: GCIS
As the closing date for public comments on the controversial Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act approaches, reactions from education stakeholders remain mixed, with some raising concerns about implementation and equity, while others welcome the legislation as a step toward accountability and fairness in South Africa's public schools.
The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, Joy Maimela, warned that some of the regulations 'might undermine the legislation's intention.'
'Firstly, the committee has previously called for all the regulations to be gazetted in one go and not in a piecemeal fashion. We want the public to engage on a comprehensive document that will give expression to the intentions of the Act.
'While we understand the intent may be to avoid technical delays, this fragmented rollout undermines the coherence, urgency and integrity of the BELA implementation process. South Africa's children cannot afford to wait for bureaucratic caution or political compromise,' said Maimela.
She added: 'Furthermore, it is noted that some of the terms used in the regulations seem to deviate from the Act. It gives the impression that the regulations aim to undermine the intention of the Act.'
Maimela warned that this could contradict Parliament's goal of transforming South Africa's education system and might instead perpetuate the exclusion of vulnerable learners.
'The regulations on admissions, for example, refer to taking into account the demographics and education needs of the 'surrounding community'. In the Bela Act the responsibility for admission policy lies with the head of department (HOD) and is based on the 'broader Education Districts'. This potentially reinforce local demographic homogeneity, contrary to the type of inclusivity the Act intended.'
She further noted: 'This, once again, points to keeping previously disadvantaged learners out via location. Historically it has been linked to exclusion. It seems these regulations are attempting to re-write the Bela Act and re-introduce matters that were unsuccessfully contested in the Bela Act legislative drafting process.'
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 ✕
Ad loading
Andre De Bruyn from EUSA
Image: Supplied
'The committee will continue to closely monitor this process and engage robustly with the Minister on the gazetted regulations, which seem to deviate from the national objective,' emphasised Maimela.
Gwarube said the regulations provide 'an important opportunity for education stakeholders and the broader South African public to actively shape the future of basic education in our country.'
'These regulations are instruments that will affect how schools are governed and managed, how children are admitted, and how our values as a society are reflected in our education system. I call on all South Africans, including parents, teachers, school governing bodies, civil society, education experts and community members to participate meaningfully in this public comment process. Your voice matters. Let it be heard in shaping the policies and regulations that govern the education of your children,' said Gwarube.
The Educators and Allied Workers Union, Western Cape (EUSA) has raised concerns about proposed learner–teacher ratios, warning they will remain 'a pipe dream' unless consistently enforced across all schools. André De Bruyn, Chairperson of EUSA, said:
'Post level 1 educators are bearing the brunt, often with very little or no administrative time, together with overcrowded classes. Poorer schools face relentless pressure to admit more learners, resulting in severe overcrowding, while affluent schools seldom face the same demands. Wealthier schools have the resources to challenge the department in court over forced admissions.'
He added: 'If budget constraints are blamed, who will be appointing the teachers and building the classrooms to make a 1:40 ratio possible? The Department of Basic Education ultimately pursues its predetermined agenda regardless of community engagement. More and more demands are being put on teachers, especially in poorer schools, while the vision of 1:40 and 1:30, if not enforced in all schools, will remain an illusion.'
The South African Democratic Teachers' Union (SADTU) expressed strong criticism of the regulations and the Minister's approach. SADTU highlighted that the Minister issued implementation guidelines earlier this year, which the union rejected as unlawful, arguing that only formal regulations have legal standing.
Vanessa Le Roux from PEESA
Image: Supplied
'The issuing of guidelines appears to be an attempt to sow confusion, delay the implementation of the Act and advance the DA's political agenda against the full implementation of Sections 4 and 5,' said SADTU in a statement.
The union emphasised its commitment to safeguarding learners' constitutional right to quality education, warning that any provisions undermining these rights would be opposed. SADTU confirmed it is studying the draft regulations and will submit formal comments by the 5 September 2025 deadline.
Vanessa Le Roux of Parents for Equal Education South Africa (PEESA) welcomed the BELA Bill, seeing it as a mechanism to enforce equity and accountability in public schools.
'As an organisation there is mixed feelings, especially because we reside in the Western Cape, over the years we saw the inequalities growing to the point where we feared that education will only be for those who can afford it.
'On the other hand we don't want to take away the power from the SGB/community, who is the real authority when it comes to schools, however what we saw over the years is that governing bodies, in especially township schools are not equipped with enough knowledge to govern the school, and ultimately the principal runs that school to the point where they are involved with finances of the school.'
Le Roux said out of all the 9 Provinces in public participation, the Western Cape was the only province who took real issue with the Bela Bill and said it came down to a case of accountability.
'For far too long these former model C schools have gotten away with the violation of the rights to basic education for all learners, and they were protected by the education department.
'So whether they call it centralisation of power, we from poor communities, call it a step in the right direction. The same rules, policies, and laws should be applied. It is a matter of addressing inequalities, discrimination, and racism in public schools. We welcome the implementation of the Bela Bill with much hope, and open arms.'
tracy-lynn.ruiters@inl.co.za
Weekend Argus
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
11 hours ago
- The South African
Double standards? Renaldo Gouws on Gayton's K-word 'pass'
Axed DA MP Renaldo Gouws has reacted to news that Gayton McKenzie will not be probed over his old social media posts, which included the K-word, as they did not fall within the timeframe of him being in public office. Last year, the outspoken YouTuber courted controversy over using the racial slur. However, Gouws was shown the door by an internal party committee. Gayton McKenzie's K-word bombshell tweets have led to many political parties calling for his resignation as minister. However, Parliament spokesperson Moloto Mothapo stated that an ethics committee could not probe the posts – dated between 2013 – 2017 – as the Patriotic Alliance leader was not yet an MP at the time. Unlike Renaldo Gouws, Gayton McKenzie's K-word tweet hasn't had any repercussions – for now. Images via X He said: 'In terms of Item 4(2)(a) of the code, read with Item 4(3)(f), conduct committed before a person becomes an MP does not fall within the scope of the code. 'Accordingly, no complaint has been opened by the registrar, and both parties were informed of this in writing earlier today. There is, therefore, no competent complaint before the ethics committee.' Meanwhile, the South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) is set to make a statement on the On social media, many South Africans have questioned how Renaldo Gouws was held accountable for using the K-word, while Gayton McKenzie was not. Setting the record straight, Gouws claimed that the DA took action against him, and not parliament. He posted on X: 'It was the DA that terminated my membership with the party after 13 years due to social media and political pressure. Touching on the YouTube clips in which he said the K-word, he continued: 'The video in question was uploaded in 2010, three years before I joined the DA. The DA was also aware of the video, as I declared it to them. It was considered dealt with as early as 2013. He added: 'Unfortunately, the Federal Executive disagreed with the Federal Legal Commission's (FLC) findings, which stated I should remain as a Member of Parliament. The Fedex decided to overturn the FLC decision. A disgruntled Renaldo Gouws added, 'Almost a year later, and the DA still refuses to share the minutes of that meeting with me so that I can know why they decided to overrule the findings by the FLC. So much for a 'transparent' political party'. 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.
IOL News
17 hours ago
- IOL News
Battle for SA's education future: BELA Act divides stakeholders as deadline approaches
Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube Image: GCIS As the closing date for public comments on the controversial Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act approaches, reactions from education stakeholders remain mixed, with some raising concerns about implementation and equity, while others welcome the legislation as a step toward accountability and fairness in South Africa's public schools. The Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, Joy Maimela, warned that some of the regulations 'might undermine the legislation's intention.' 'Firstly, the committee has previously called for all the regulations to be gazetted in one go and not in a piecemeal fashion. We want the public to engage on a comprehensive document that will give expression to the intentions of the Act. 'While we understand the intent may be to avoid technical delays, this fragmented rollout undermines the coherence, urgency and integrity of the BELA implementation process. South Africa's children cannot afford to wait for bureaucratic caution or political compromise,' said Maimela. She added: 'Furthermore, it is noted that some of the terms used in the regulations seem to deviate from the Act. It gives the impression that the regulations aim to undermine the intention of the Act.' Maimela warned that this could contradict Parliament's goal of transforming South Africa's education system and might instead perpetuate the exclusion of vulnerable learners. 'The regulations on admissions, for example, refer to taking into account the demographics and education needs of the 'surrounding community'. In the Bela Act the responsibility for admission policy lies with the head of department (HOD) and is based on the 'broader Education Districts'. This potentially reinforce local demographic homogeneity, contrary to the type of inclusivity the Act intended.' She further noted: 'This, once again, points to keeping previously disadvantaged learners out via location. Historically it has been linked to exclusion. It seems these regulations are attempting to re-write the Bela Act and re-introduce matters that were unsuccessfully contested in the Bela Act legislative drafting process.' 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 ✕ Ad loading Andre De Bruyn from EUSA Image: Supplied 'The committee will continue to closely monitor this process and engage robustly with the Minister on the gazetted regulations, which seem to deviate from the national objective,' emphasised Maimela. Gwarube said the regulations provide 'an important opportunity for education stakeholders and the broader South African public to actively shape the future of basic education in our country.' 'These regulations are instruments that will affect how schools are governed and managed, how children are admitted, and how our values as a society are reflected in our education system. I call on all South Africans, including parents, teachers, school governing bodies, civil society, education experts and community members to participate meaningfully in this public comment process. Your voice matters. Let it be heard in shaping the policies and regulations that govern the education of your children,' said Gwarube. The Educators and Allied Workers Union, Western Cape (EUSA) has raised concerns about proposed learner–teacher ratios, warning they will remain 'a pipe dream' unless consistently enforced across all schools. André De Bruyn, Chairperson of EUSA, said: 'Post level 1 educators are bearing the brunt, often with very little or no administrative time, together with overcrowded classes. Poorer schools face relentless pressure to admit more learners, resulting in severe overcrowding, while affluent schools seldom face the same demands. Wealthier schools have the resources to challenge the department in court over forced admissions.' He added: 'If budget constraints are blamed, who will be appointing the teachers and building the classrooms to make a 1:40 ratio possible? The Department of Basic Education ultimately pursues its predetermined agenda regardless of community engagement. More and more demands are being put on teachers, especially in poorer schools, while the vision of 1:40 and 1:30, if not enforced in all schools, will remain an illusion.' The South African Democratic Teachers' Union (SADTU) expressed strong criticism of the regulations and the Minister's approach. SADTU highlighted that the Minister issued implementation guidelines earlier this year, which the union rejected as unlawful, arguing that only formal regulations have legal standing. Vanessa Le Roux from PEESA Image: Supplied 'The issuing of guidelines appears to be an attempt to sow confusion, delay the implementation of the Act and advance the DA's political agenda against the full implementation of Sections 4 and 5,' said SADTU in a statement. The union emphasised its commitment to safeguarding learners' constitutional right to quality education, warning that any provisions undermining these rights would be opposed. SADTU confirmed it is studying the draft regulations and will submit formal comments by the 5 September 2025 deadline. Vanessa Le Roux of Parents for Equal Education South Africa (PEESA) welcomed the BELA Bill, seeing it as a mechanism to enforce equity and accountability in public schools. 'As an organisation there is mixed feelings, especially because we reside in the Western Cape, over the years we saw the inequalities growing to the point where we feared that education will only be for those who can afford it. 'On the other hand we don't want to take away the power from the SGB/community, who is the real authority when it comes to schools, however what we saw over the years is that governing bodies, in especially township schools are not equipped with enough knowledge to govern the school, and ultimately the principal runs that school to the point where they are involved with finances of the school.' Le Roux said out of all the 9 Provinces in public participation, the Western Cape was the only province who took real issue with the Bela Bill and said it came down to a case of accountability. 'For far too long these former model C schools have gotten away with the violation of the rights to basic education for all learners, and they were protected by the education department. 'So whether they call it centralisation of power, we from poor communities, call it a step in the right direction. The same rules, policies, and laws should be applied. It is a matter of addressing inequalities, discrimination, and racism in public schools. We welcome the implementation of the Bela Bill with much hope, and open arms.' Weekend Argus
Daily Maverick
17 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
#UniteBehind takes Parliament to court for letting corrupt MPs off the hook
The activist group argues that changes to Parliament's code of conduct allow MPs implicated in State Capture to evade accountability. #UniteBehind activists protested outside Parliament on Tuesday. The activist group has taken Parliament's Registrar and Joint Ethics Committee to court, challenging Parliament's new code of conduct. In 2022, #UniteBehind laid complaints in terms of Parliament's code of conduct against six ANC MPs who were implicated in State Capture, including grand-scale corruption at the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa (Prasa). They were Fikile Mbalula, Mosebenzi Zwane, Joe Maswanganyi, Dikeledi Magazi, Sfiso Buthelezi, and Dipuo Peters. In April 2023, #UniteBehind started litigation against the committee for failing to act 'diligently', accusing the committee of 'an unreasonable, and unexplained, delay in handling the complaints'. The organisation amended its notice of motion in February 2025 after discovering that an amended code of conduct had been adopted. #UniteBehind claims this was done without public participation and without alerting them. The case was heard on Tuesday before a full bench in the Western Cape High Court: Judge Lister Nuku, Judge Hayley Slingers and Acting Judge Jonker. Gregory Solik, the advocate representing #UniteBehind, told the court the new code of conduct was unconstitutional, since it was introduced during the course of the litigation. #UniteBehind argued that it constituted an 'attempt to circumvent judicial scrutiny'. When #UniteBehind prepared and filed its final affidavit, it was not informed by Parliament that the code of conduct had been amended and implemented. Solik also argued that if the challenge to the code of conduct is dismissed, then the court should declare the 'no-jurisdiction clause' invalid. This new clause allows MPs to resign to avoid disciplinary action against them. The amended code states that the ethics committee does not have 'jurisdiction' to consider a complaint if the member ceases to be an MP. Also, if the committee is considering a complaint against a former MP, then it may not proceed with the complaint and 'must close the complaint file'. Solik argued that making this clause invalid would ensure that former MPs implicated in corruption could be held accountable by Parliament – Parliament could still complete investigations and refer matters to the National Prosecuting Authority. 'It may be a small measure of justice, but that justice can still be enforced,' said Solik. #UniteBehind further argued that the 'secrecy provisions' of the new code of conduct should be declared unconstitutional. This includes a clause that 'all documents, evidence and information in the possession of the Registrar must… remain confidential', as well as another clause stating that meetings considering 'the recommendation report of the Registrar will be closed to the public and non-Committee Members'. But the respondents argued that #UniteBehind was trying to 'revive a case that was dead', said advocate for Parliament Zinzile Matebese. In an answering affidavit, Anthea Gordon, Registrar of Members' Interests in Parliament, said that #UniteBehind's amendment to its notice of motion, challenging the new code of conduct, was 'disingenuous' and 'an abuse of the court process'. Parliament asked the court to reject #UniteBehind's request. The respondents argued that the process to amend the code started in 2022 and culminated in the adoption of the amended code by the National Assembly in May 2024. They added that it 'was never adopted in haste as suggested by the applicants', nor was it kept secret. Matebese argued that confidentiality of the information clauses was important because it 'might result in unintended consequences for the whole committee' if it were removed. The confidentiality clauses were necessary to protect MPs' information, and the information of their spouses' affairs, which is protected under other legislation such as the Protection of Personal Information Act. In his closing statement, Solik noted that the initial complaints were made because of the 'total abdication of responsibility by Parliament' to address the rot at Prasa. He encouraged the court 'not to lose sight of what the complaints were about', which is that people are 'subject to violence on a daily basis when they use public transport'. Judge Nuku reserved judgment. Protest outside Parliament About 100 #UniteBehind supporters marched from the Cape Town Civic Centre to Parliament, holding placards stating 'No more rigged ethics code', 'Don't protect corruption' and 'No ethics. No Justice. No accountability'. The march ended outside Parliament, where a marquee was set up and several hundred more people joined the protest. DM
