Gauteng ramps up security and fixes infrastructure for G20 summit
But geopolitical tensions and rising crime threaten to derail the boom.
As the G20 summit nears, the province is ramping up security and improving infrastructure to keep the visitors coming.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
4 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
IDT board committed to transparency amid ongoing investigations
The board of the Independent Development Trust says it is committed to transparency and accounting amid ongoing investigations at the state agency responsible for implementing social infrastructure programmes. The board said it was treating all matters before it with the serious urgency it deserved and had launched a number of concurrent processes to bring stability to the organisation. Over the past week, the board said it held lengthy meetings to address these matters, including the PwC forensic investigation into the oxygen plant tender, the circulating video containing allegations of bribery by suspended IDT CEO Tebogo Malaka and the organisation's spokesperson, Malaka's suspension and concerns relating to a number of tenders and supply chain processes linked to them. 'While sensitive investigations are under way, the board is taking all necessary steps to safeguard public funds, protect projects that deliver social infrastructure for underserved communities, as well as poverty alleviation projects like the extended public works programme.' The board said it was fulfilling its legal mandate by acting on substantial information, following all applicable laws . 'Once in a position to do so, the board will provide the public with a detailed briefing on the actions taken and the findings of its investigation. The board is fully aware that restoring trust in the organisation requires openly sharing the measures implemented to strengthen governance and protect public funds.' The board said it was committed to doing so at the earliest possible stage without compromising any ongoing criminal investigations. Malaka and her spokesperson, Phasha Makgolane, are alleged to have offered Daily Maverick journalist Pieter-Louis Myburgh R60,000 to drop a story he was working on relating to Malaka's business affairs, including how she was funding the construction of her multimillion-rand home at Waterfall Country Estate in Midrand. TimesLIVE
Mail & Guardian
11 hours ago
- Mail & Guardian
G20, endorse a tax on the world's ultra-rich to feed the world's starving
Rohingya refugees in Bangladesh. A 0.3% tax would generate enough to secure life's necessities for many tens of millions of the world's most vulnerable. Photo: File As host of this year's G20 Summit, South Africa could help end one of the greatest injustices in the world today — the cavernous gaps in wealth and in access to life's basic necessities. Most acutely, people living through humanitarian crises are dying for want of food and medicines because funding for aid agencies is wholly insufficient. Yet, our world is awash in wealth. Nobel Peace Laureate and former World Food Programme executive director David Beasley The G20 summit scheduled for This shortfall translates into food rations being cut to well below minimum daily human requirements, which can lead to people ' Those suffering are invariably among the world poorest and most vulnerable people — people who have survived genocide and mass atrocities in Governments have moral and human rights obligations to increase their funding, but between a highly parochial, ill-conceived 'America First' US foreign policy, pressures to vastly increase defense spending in Europe, and economic uncertainty, even a return to recent levels of funding — themselves inadequate — are remote. It would be wrong to yield to this unconscionable reality. If governments refuse to fund humanitarian needs, they must find another way. There could hardly be a fairer way than asking the world's richest people to give a sliver of their wealth to save their lives and restore the dignity of the world's poorest people. The G20, whose members are home to the overwhelming majority of the world's billionaires, would be the natural forum for nurturing a humanitarian assistance tax into existence. At last year's Summit in Brazil, G20 leaders Using strategies not available to a typical taxpayer, the ultra-rich are able to earn vast fortunes that go virtually untaxed. Billionaires pay an effective tax rate equivalent to To compensate, a This tax scheme The world now has slightly more than On average, billionaires enjoy a 7.5% annual pre-tax wealth increase (after inflation). With a minimum effective tax of 2% of their wealth in place, these super rich individuals would see their wealth increase by 5.5% year-on-year — $55 million for every $1 billion of wealth. That leaves plenty of room for them to continue to significantly increase their wealth while also paying a small humanitarian assistance surcharge. And even a small tax for humanitarian assistance could make an enormous difference. A tax equivalent to 0.2% of ultra-high-net-worth individuals' wealth and applied to all current billionaires worldwide would raise $23.5-29.4 billion. Increase the tax to 0.3% and include centi-millionaires, and it would raise at least $52.9 billion. That exceeds this year's UN appeal and would also encompass much or all of a separate, partially overlapping Consider the world's worst displacement crisis, Sudan, with It doesn't have to be this way. If higher-income governments refuse to meet their responsibilities through regular budget processes, then they should meet them by imposing a humanitarian wealth tax. It is not too much to ask that the super-rich pay their fair share so that the world's most disadvantaged people can live with the dignity due every human being. Human dignity is the first right listed in South Africa's Constitution. By pushing the G20 to endorse a humanitarian assistance tax on ultra-high-net-worth individuals, South Africa can breathe life into its highest value and share it with the world. Eric A Friedman is the global health justice scholar at the O'Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law at the Georgetown University Law Center in Washington, DC. Lawrence O Gostin is a distinguished university professor and founding O'Neill Chair in Global Health Law at the Georgetown University Law Center, and co-faculty director of the O'Neill Institute.
IOL News
16 hours ago
- IOL News
South Africa's National Dialogue: A cry for help or a catalyst for change?
Nomvula Zeldah Mabuza is a Risk Governance and Compliance Specialist with extensive experience in strategic risk and industrial operations. She holds a Diploma in Business Management (Accounting) from Brunel University, UK, and is an MBA candidate at Henley Business School, South Africa. Few moments in South Africa's democratic history have so starkly reflected the widening gap between policy intention and institutional delivery. The announcement of a National Dialogue comes at a time when social trust is fraying, growth has stalled, and many South Africans feel locked out of their country's economic future. With unemployment at 32.9%, public debt at 74% of GDP, and GDP growth projected at just 1.1% for 2025, the dialogue presents both a symbolic threshold and a substantive opportunity. Whether it signals a willingness to confront structural failure or merely gestures at inclusion without consequence remains to be seen. But what is clear is that the path forward cannot be paved with rhetoric alone. Simultaneously, South Africa's evolving relationship with BRICS, following the bloc's 2024 expansion to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the UAE, adds a new layer of geopolitical complexity. While the New Development Bank offers infrastructure funding, the absence of strategic clarity has raised concerns about the country's ability to fully leverage these National Dialogue could offer a turning point, but only if it prioritises tangible outcomes over symbolism. This includes measurable progress on economic stabilisation, BRICS alignment, sectoral coordination and governance reform. It must also amplify the voices of those most affected by systemic failure, unemployed youth, rural communities and the working poor. If designed with vision and integrity, the dialogue can catalyse reform; if not, it risks becoming yet another footnote in a long history of political deflection. The backdrop to the National Dialogue is a faltering economy and an increasingly disillusioned population. South Africa's official unemployment rate remains at 32.9%, with youth unemployment above 50%. The Gini coefficient stands at 0.63, among the highest globally, while GDP growth lags behind BRICS peers, projected at just 1.1% for 2025. In comparison, India's economy is forecast to grow by 6.4% and Brazil's by 4.2%.The fiscal picture is equally troubling. South Africa's public debt has surged to 74% of GDP, limiting investment in public services, infrastructure and employment-generating industries. Inefficiencies at Transnet and key ports cost the economy an estimated R60 billion annually, highlighting chronic underperformance in critical state institutions. South Africa is no stranger to national engagements that raise hope but falter on follow-through. The true test of this dialogue will not be who participates, but what survives beyond the agenda. Without hard implementation mechanisms, even the most inclusive process risks reinforcing public scepticism. One of the clearest indicators of South Africa's institutional fragility lies in its power utility, Eskom. Although the past year has seen relative grid stability following aggressive maintenance and emergency procurement measures, the underlying structural weaknesses remain unresolved. Decades of underinvestment, cadre deployment, skills loss and procurement failures have hollowed out the institution's capacity, leaving it vulnerable to future shocks. Despite temporary reprieve, Eskom's operational and financial recovery remains precarious. At the heart of the issue is not the question of private sector involvement, but of restoring capable, accountable public ownership that works. South Africans do not want their core infrastructure auctioned off to private interests; they want it to function transparently, efficiently and in service of the public good. The National Dialogue must confront this directly by addressing institutional reform, skills rebuilding and depoliticisation without drifting into a quiet transfer of public assets under the guise of reform. South Africans are not resisting progress; they are demanding that it serve the people functionally, transparently and without forfeiting public rural areas, where over 70% of people live in poverty, economic exclusion remains entrenched. Despite these realities, policy responses have often lacked urgency and coherence. Government-led strategies, such as Operation Vulindlela, have shown promise but remain uneven in implementation. A functional National Dialogue must prioritise structural reform over political optics. It must drive consensus around energy stabilisation, fiscal consolidation and employment growth. Without this, South Africa risks further marginalisation, both domestically and within the BRICS bloc. South Africa's deepening ties with BRICS offer both a lifeline and a liability. The bloc's 2024 expansion to include Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the UAE has raised BRICS's share of global trade to nearly 20%. For South Africa, this presents the opportunity to act as a continental conduit, particularly through the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). The New Development Bank has earmarked $5 billion for African infrastructure, including rail modernisation, a potential boon given the estimated R60 billion in annual export losses linked to logistics bottlenecks. BRICS partnerships in digital technologies and green energy also present pathways for economic diversification, especially relevant given the country's 50% youth unemployment rate. Yet, South Africa's economic heft pales in comparison to other members. With a GDP of $373 billion, its voice is dwarfed by China's $18.3 trillion and India's $3.4 trillion economies. Furthermore, rising tensions within the bloc, particularly between China and India, could complicate South Africa's ability to pursue mutually beneficial outcomes. Over-reliance on BRICS may also undermine longstanding relationships with Western trading partners, who account for 40% of the country's trade. The National Dialogue must confront these geopolitical trade-offs head-on. A clear BRICS strategy, anchored in national priorities and linked to AfCFTA implementation, must be developed. South Africa finds itself in a unique geopolitical moment—serving as a BRICS member in an expanded bloc while also holding the G20 presidency from December 2024 to November 2025, the first African nation to do so. This dual stewardship presents both a rare opportunity and a test of agency, requiring South Africa to balance multipolar ambitions with national and continental priorities across two vastly different global platforms. The creation of a dedicated BRICS coordination task force, spanning government, business and academia, could help ensure investments translate into broad-based development, otherwise, the risk remains that BRICS will deepen existing inequalities rather than dismantle them. South Africa's core governance failures lie not in the absence of policy, but in its lack of execution and coordination. The 50% youth unemployment rate is not simply an economic statistic; it reflects a structural mismatch between skills training and the demands of the labour market. Vocational education and technical training remain underfunded and undervalued, even as BRICS partners ramp up investments in future-facing industries. Land reform is similarly stagnant. Nearly three decades after democracy, only around 10% of commercial farmland has been redistributed, leaving rural inequality largely intact. These delays are not just historical injustices; they are economic risks that perpetuate instability. Rebuilding functionality will require more than new plans; it will depend on capacity audits, merit-based appointments and independent oversight to anchor reform in real systems change. Corruption compounds these failures. South Africa scored 41 out of 100 on the 2024 Corruption Perceptions Index, reflecting enduring concerns about procurement irregularities, political interference and the lack of institutional is also an inability to fully leverage multilateral platforms. Despite access to the New Development Bank and the BRICS Network University, South Africa has not meaningfully harnessed these to address local development gaps or skills deficits. For the National Dialogue to succeed, it must go beyond rhetoric. Multi-stakeholder task forces should be mandated to resolve sector-specific issues, with clear timeframes and reporting lines. Strengthening the National Prosecuting Authority and reinforcing public procurement transparency will be essential in rebuilding trust. The concept of a National Dialogue, when executed with genuine intent, can serve as a powerful mechanism for collective reform. Framed as a consensus-building forum between government, civil society, business and labour, South Africa's dialogue will only succeed if it avoids the hallmarks of past engagements, symbolism without substance. To be effective, the dialogue must be rooted in four focus areas. First, economic stabilisation, including clearly defined timelines for job creation, infrastructure investment and fiscal consolidation. Second, strategic BRICS integration, with a national plan to align New Development Bank funding with country priorities while expanding the reach of AfCFTA to small businesses and rural economies. Third, sectoral coordination, through task teams that address misalignments in education, energy and land reform. Fourth, governance reform, focused on anti-corruption efforts and the strengthening of prosecutorial lessons offer guidance. Tunisia's post-revolution National Dialogue resulted in a widely supportedconstitution and renewed democratic consensus. By contrast, Burundi's failed dialogue collapsed under state interference and exclusionary tactics. The inclusion of marginalised voices will be critical. Youth, women and rural communities must be active participants, not passive observers. Transparent monitoring and public reporting on the dialogue's outcomes should be mandated to prevent the process from becoming yet another chapter in policy theatre. None of these imperatives are blind to the reality of South Africa's political landscape. Deep reform does not unfold in a single summit. But if the National Dialogue is to matter, it must outlive the day it ends. Change will depend on continuous pressure, public vigilance and a generational commitment to institutional is being tested now is not whether South Africa can convene yet another national conversation, but whether it can translate that conversation into durable, measurable progress. This is not a cry for help; it is a call for leadership.
