Controversy erupts over Godongwana's virtual attendance at Budget meeting
The EFF and the MK Party raised concern that Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana attended virtually the joint meeting to address MPs on the Budget, and that each MP was asked to speak not for more than five minutes.
Image: Phando Jikelo / GCIS
The meeting in Parliament where Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana was to brief MPs about the 2025/26 Budget on Friday got off to a bumpy start with calls for its postponement.
The EFF and the MK Party raised concern that Godongwana attended the meeting virtually and that each MP was asked to speak not for more than five minutes when making inputs.
EFF MP Omphile Maotwe said the arrangement made with Godongwana by the co-chairpersons of the finance and appropriation committees was very wrong.
'Why is the minister given a preference of being on a virtual platform which none of us is aware of?' Maotwe said.
She asked that the meeting be postponed and Godongwana be called again to come.
'He is busy addressing other platforms, not this sitting. He knew about this sitting a long time ago,' Maotwe said.
Tidimalo Legwase, chairperson of the Select Committee on Appropriations, explained that MPs in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) knew the joint meeting was hybrid.
'We plan for hybrid sessions,' Legwase said.
In objecting to the allotted speaking times, EFF MP Sinawo Thambo said the meeting was not a continuation of the Budget process.
'We deal with a new Budget, a new Fiscal Framework and Revenue proposals. Let us allow as much input as possible,' said Thambo.
In response, Legwase stated that there were still more meetings to take place at committees, and Friday's meeting was not the last to deliberate on the Budget.
But MK Party MP Brian Molefe said the meeting was called for a presentation by Godongwana to the committees.
'It is surprising that, this being the minister's meeting, he is not present. He is only available online. I don't know why we had to be dragged here if the minister is not going to be here,' Molefe asked.
He also noted that Godongwana had addressed a breakfast meeting with the business community on Thursday.
'I don't understand why the minister is not present at the meeting of Parliament to discuss the Budget,' Molefe said.
ANC MP Seaparo Charles Sekoati urged MPs not to engage in semantics and asked that the meeting proceed.
But, MK Party MP Des van Rooyen said the meeting should not be reduced to a compliance exercise.
'What has been done by the minister is completely wrong. He knows it very well, this is a physical meeting. As to why he opted not to be here physically is quite disturbing,' Van Rooyen said before warning that it was no longer business as usual.
'I want to suggest to the MPs in this meeting that we postpone this meeting,' he added.
DA MP Denis Ruyder appreciated Godongwana's attendance with his National Treasury team.
'We are used to having virtual meetings and running successful meetings and engagements.
I don't think there should be a problem whether the minister is here or not. We are still to get the same answers,' Ruyder said.
He also said it was normal to set a time for MPs to ask questions.
'Five minutes is more than adequate, generally. We should push ahead,' Ruyder added.
Mmusi Maimane, chairperson of the Appropriations Standing Committee, noted that there was a tradition of holding the meeting with the Finance Minister a day after the Budget was tabled.
He pleaded against the postponement of the meeting, citing the deadline to pass the Budget.
'If we don't proceed, we will miss the opportunity to do hard work to process the Budget,' Maimane said.
After input from several other MPs, Godongwana was allowed to address the meeting.
He apologised for the inconvenience caused, and explained that he had addressed a breakfast meeting with business on Thursday because he was informed the joint meeting was moved to Friday.
He also said he had moved his doctor's appointment to Friday, thinking that the joint meeting would follow the Budget on Thursday.
'To that extent, I apologise and I must make the point that it is not the first time that we have had this interaction with the committee virtually,' he said.
Godongwana asked that, should the meeting continue at 2pm, he be excused to brief NEDLAC on the Budget.
[email protected]
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
an hour ago
- The South African
SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 disbursed this WEEK
SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 will be disbursed this week, on Tuesday 3 June 2025. And not a moment too soon, following the uncertainty over Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's Budget. As many will remember, SASSA grant increases were actioned back in April 2025, however, there was uncertainty whether VAT increases being overruled might lead to a reduction in SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 Nevertheless, it's been confirmed that the Department of Social Development (DSD) budget allocation of R285-billion for social grants in the 2025/26 is unchanged. However, recipients of SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 should make the most of the above-inflation adjustment. Because the allotment actually drops again in 2026/27, to just R260-billion, due to the redistribution/repurposing of SRD grants from next year … However, over 60s receiving SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 needn't worry for now about their portion. The South African Social Security Agency's rejig of SRD into a universal basic income grant could actually free up even more money for SASSA 'core' grants like Older Persons, for those who actually need the financial assistance. For now, South Africa's elderly enjoy above-inflation increases from earlier this year. In fact, South Africa's pensioners over 75 enjoy the highest grant paid out nationally – R2 330. While over 60s receive R2 310 monthly. Let's remind you who is eligible. And if you haven't done so already, how you can apply … The 2025 Postbank Black card debacle has left SASSA wanting to cut ties completely with Postbank. Image: File Roughly 28-million residents receive SASSA grants each month (45% of the population) in South Africa. The vast majority of these are R370 SRD grants and child support. However, many would argue the most critical are more than 4-million elderly pensioners. If you are over 60 and meet the following financial qualifying criteria, you should absolutely apply for SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025. Note that all applications must be done at a SASSA office with an official present to oversee and assist you. Be sure to present the following documents and biometric data: Official identity document (ID) – smart card or green booklet. Documents proving marital status. Proof of residence (a utility bill with your name on it qualifies). Confirmation of proof of income and/or financial dividends. All information regarding your assets, including a valuation of property. Declaration of any private pension in your name (if applicable). Valid three months' statements certified by your bank (not more than three months old). Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) membership book, or discharge certificate from your previous employer. A copy of your will, and first and final liquidation and distribution accounts if your spouse has passed away in the last five years. Take note of the remaining SASSA Older Person grant pay dates for 2025. Image: File Furthermore, SASSA has started strict mandatory data checks with Home Affairs, Correctional Services, and the Unemployment Insurance Fund for grant applicants. Likewise, SASSA now has biometric verification for grant beneficiaries using alternative forms of identification, other than the standard 13-digit South African ID number. These checks will only increase in voracity as SASSA expects to deliver quarterly reports to Parliament on the efficiency of its progress. This is all in the name of ensuring grants are reviewed and cancelled in good time to save money per recipient. Millions are spent annually on paying grants to long-dead recipients (presumably to other family members still collecting the grants). More importantly, the agency needs to be able to confirm an applicant's income and assets. Those who have sufficient means through a private pension, savings and personal assets, will not be granted SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025. Moreover, it was announced in Parliament recently that SASSA will conduct stricter financial checks on beneficiaries in a bid to keep fraud/wastage down. This takes the form of monthly spot-checks on applicants' bank accounts to ensure they're not lying about their income. And this is not just for SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 but also SRD, child support, disability and care dependency. If you're over 60, here's how you can apply for SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025. Image: File SASSA officials will enforce the following income and asset limits: You cannot earn more than R8 070 per month ( R96 840 per year) if single. per month ( per year) if single. The income limit is R16 140 per month ( R193 680 per year) if married. per month ( per year) if married. Total value of your assets declared must not exceed R1 372 800 if single. if single. And your assets cannot be valued higher than R2 745 600 if married. Thankfully, these asset and means tests have not changed in several years. Even though SASSA Older Person grants in June 2025 are higher than they've ever been. And remember, if your grant application is denied, you have 90 days to appeal the decision with the Department of Social Development. For application queries you can contact SASSA directly here: SASSA Toll-Free Call: 0800 60 10 11 SASSA Head Office: 012 400 2322 Email SASSA: grantenquiries@ 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.
The Citizen
2 hours ago
- The Citizen
Premature to claim White House encounter as a South African slam dunk
The exchange delivered no economic deal, it left exposed to the world some of the grimmest aspects of life in this country and it has exacerbated tensions in the GNU The local consensus is that President Cyril Ramaphosa's visit to the White House was a great triumph. Overwhelming though that consensus is, it's mistaken. The pre-trip narrative was that, firstly, the SA team would put President Donald Trump right about the 'fake news' that led him to grant refugee status to Afrikaners, caused him to mistake land redress for property confiscation and led him to confuse economic transformation with racial discrimination. Second, SA would make it clear it would not be dictated to on such 'internal matters', or in how it conducted its foreign relations. Nevertheless, the main goal, once Trump had been put in his place, was to walk away with a solid trade deal. That's not how it played out. ALSO READ: Was Ramaphosa heckling EFF's payback for White House embarrassment? To date, there has been no announcement of any trade deal. As far as we know, given that some of the meeting was conducted behind closed doors, the foreign affairs friction was not even mentioned. Instead, the hubris that underlies the ANC's strategy in dealing with the US has caused another diplomatic gaffe. Having had its previous US ambassador declared persona non grata because of rude remarks about Trump, it made the same mistake again. Ramaphosa chose Mcebisi Jonas, chair of MTN Group, as his special envoy to Washington. Not only did Jonas in 2020 make deeply insulting remarks about Trump, but MTN is embroiled in four US lawsuits in which it is alleged that the company knowingly helped Iran-sponsored terrorist groups. Jonas didn't attend the White House meeting, supposedly at 'his own request'. ALSO READ: Is it a deal, Trump? — SA's proposed trade agreement with US after White House visit The Presidency spokesperson has since conceded that 'displeasure' from the Trump administration was the reason for Jonas' absence and that Ramaphosa may have to find a new special envoy. As for the schooling of Trump, well, what a disaster that was. Far from being smacked down, Trump placed the issues of racial violence and expropriation of private property under a mercilessly harsh global spotlight. The media can do as much fact-checking as it likes to debunk the false narrative of a white genocide. Grassroots international public opinion doesn't care to make much distinction between whether genocide is already underway or merely in the throes of being orchestrated. Worldwide, ordinary people were appalled by the footage of 100 000 EFF supporters in pseudo-military garb promising to 'kill the Boer, kill the farmer''. IN PICTURES: Ramaphosa meets Trump at the White House Ramaphosa's failure to condemn the chant unambiguously was a huge opportunity missed. All he managed was the mumbled response that such violent chants were 'not government policy', that most criminal violence was against blacks, and that whites were not being 'disproportionately' killed. Far from being a victory, the Oval Office debacle has put under critical scrutiny issues – political violence, expropriation without compensation, race quotas in employment and investment decisions – that until now have been largely glossed over by the media. It makes for a deeply unflattering picture of South Africa in the outside world and, at home, it immensely complicates the power dynamics between the ANC and the DA, its major partner in the government of national unity (GNU). Despite Trump's bluster, shabby showmanship and sometimes reckless exaggerations, it's premature to claim the White House encounter as a South African slam dunk. The exchange delivered no economic deal, it left exposed to the world some of the grimmest aspects of life in this country and it has exacerbated tensions in the GNU. If this is a triumph, God knows what a defeat would look like. READ NEXT: White House showdown? Ramaphosa looks to 'reset relationship' with Trump next week
Daily Maverick
8 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
EFF vs fuel levy increase — court challenge tests legality of fiscal decisions
The EFF has filed an urgent court bid to block Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana's fuel levy hike, arguing it is irrational, economically harmful and unlawfully implemented. This is not just the EFF showing commitment to its stance against the increase, but a relatively novel legal precedent that could have far-reaching implications. A last-minute legal bid On Thursday, 29 May, the EFF filed papers in the Western Cape Division of the High Court to block a fuel levy increase announced eight days earlier during the Minister of Finance's Budget 3.0 tabling. The case makes an unusual use of Rule 53 of the Uniform Rules of Court — a procedural mechanism regularly used to challenge administrative decisions — to challenge a fiscal measure introduced by the Treasury in Budget 3.0. 'We took this action after repeated efforts to caution the minister and appeal to his conscience failed,' said the party in a statement issued on the same day, stating that an increase without a Money Bill 'risks the entire national Budget being declared invalid by the courts'. Though it hasn't sparked the same political uproar as the aborted VAT hike, the fuel levy increase is just as important, as a fuel increase touches aspects of almost all supply chains, increasing costs across every facet of life. As economist Dawie Roodt told Daily Maverick, '… in terms of the effect on the poor, that is pretty much the same as the VAT increase'. The fuel levy increase — 16c per litre for petrol and 15c for diesel — is scheduled to come into effect on 4 June. The EFF is seeking urgent relief before this happens. The EFF Treasurer-General, Omphile Maotwe, told Newzroom Afrika the Treasury intended to gazette the increase on 3 June, 'to allow us no window or opportunity to interdict', hence the urgent application. The EFF's legal logic The application has two parts: Part A seeks an urgent interdict halting the increase and Part B calls for a full review and potential nullification of the decision, with the EFF arguing the increase must be reviewed in light of worsening inflation, stagnant wages and the fallout from the abandoned VAT hike. While it's true that the fuel levy is a regressive tax, Roodt argues that the Treasury's hands are largely tied regarding other measures to generate revenue. 'South Africa's tax burden is already dramatically redistributive. You can't make it more so,' he said. In its founding affidavit, the EFF argues that the fuel levy hike is procedurally flawed and substantively irrational. There was no consultation with Parliament, no socioeconomic impact assessment and no engagement with affected sectors. The party says the decision punishes low- and middle-income households already buckling under cost-of-living pressures. While the minister has statutory power to adjust the levy, the EFF argues that using this mechanism — without oversight or legislative process — amounts to executive overreach. The party called the increase 'yet another demonstration of the anti-black, anti-poor, neoliberal Budget the ANC government continues to impose on the people of South Africa'. No word yet from Treasury By the time of publication, the National Treasury had not responded to detailed questions from Daily Maverick about whether a socioeconomic impact study had been carried out, whether consultations with industry had occurred, and what the Treasury would do if an interdict were granted. This article will be updated once a response is received. Minister in the Presidency Khumbudzo Ntshavheni did not discuss the fuel levy, but defended the broader Budget at a briefing to the media on Friday, 30 May. 'This pro-poor Budget means [that] on every rand, 61 cents of consolidated, non-interest expenditure funds will be spent on free basic services … social grants for those in need.' A silent tax indeed The fuel levy is often called a 'silent tax' — embedded in pump prices and not itemised like VAT. Its revenue flows into the National Revenue Fund and is not earmarked for roads or transport. Between 2012 and 2022, the general fuel levy rose from R1.77 to R3.93. It now accounts for about 6-7% of pump prices. The 2025 increase is expected to raise R2.9-billion. Filling a 50-litre tank will cost about R8 more — a cost that ripples through logistics, transport and food prices. Unlike some OECD countries, South Africa lacks fuel subsidies or robust public transport, making the levy a heavier burden for poor households. Can fiscal decisions be challenged in court? Yes, as the EFF and DA's challenge of the VAT hike showed clearly — but this time the mechanism is different. That case primarily rested on constitutional and procedural grounds. In this matter, the EFF is invoking Rule 53, seeking a review of the minister's decision. The rule requires the state to produce the full record of decision-making, allowing the applicant to supplement their case. Rule 53 is usually applied to administrative actions — permits, suspensions, authorisations — and not budgetary policy. The stakes next week The urgent interdict will be heard on Tuesday, 3 June. If granted, the levy will be paused pending the main review. If refused, it may take effect as scheduled, making a later review moot. Should the court ultimately side with the EFF, it could invalidate the hike retrospectively, forcing the Treasury to re-table it through proper legislative channels. The ruling could also set a legal precedent, inviting future litigation over fiscal instruments previously seen as untouchable. Who really pays? Much of South Africa's fiscal debate is cloaked in specialised language: 'consolidation paths', 'debt stabilisation', 'medium-term frameworks', but the impact is direct: it's on you and I. Fuel taxes inflate the cost of moving people and goods, from taxis to tractors. The EFF's challenge isn't likely to unravel the Treasury's broader strategy, but it could set a strong precedent for how fiscal policy can be challenged; at its core, the case asks who gets to hold the pen when new taxes are imposed, and if the courts should step in if Parliament does not. DM
