Latest news with #OmphileMaotwe
eNCA
7 hours ago
- Business
- eNCA
EFF says Insourcing Bill will end tender fraud, exploitation
JOHANNESBURG - Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) MP, Omphile Maotwe, has tabled the Insourcing Bill in Parliament. The Bill seeks to compel all state organs to insource all services, including security, cleaning and maintenance. The Bill provides that, where insourcing is not possible, state entities must apply for authorisation to secure an exemption. Trade union federation COSATU has thrown its weight behind the proposed legislation, calling it 'progressive.' According to COSATU outsourcing has been a key enabler of corruption and state capture, undermining the state's ability to deliver essential public and municipal services. Supporters of the bill believe that insourcing will curb tender fraud and protect workers from exploitation. Speaking to eNCA, Maotwe said: 'the majority of the state services are being outsourced and what has since led to that is corruption. The root cause of the problems we have is due to the tendering lead to corruption, where people [to an extent] kill each other and fight for these tenders." She adds that many of these tenders have not brought any new change.
Eyewitness News
23-07-2025
- Business
- Eyewitness News
Budget 2025: MK Party, EFF call Appropriation Bill anti-poor
CAPE TOWN - The two biggest opposition parties, the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), said they will not vote in support of the Appropriation Bill, calling it anti-poor. The National Assembly is currently debating the bill, which appropriates money to all government departments. ALSO READ: The Appropriation Bill is the last hurdle in the contentious budget process, which has taken longer than usual due to Government of National Unity (GNU) infighting. The MK Party said it rejects the budget that fails to bring about change for poor South Africans, while the EFF said it's no different to previous budgets. The official opposition, the MK Party, said the Appropriation Bill fails to address blockages in the economy like unemployment and funding key frontline services. The party's Sanele Mwali said the GNU continues to pursue the same policies that have also failed to address economic stagnation. 'Today, unemployment sits at 43%, with youth sitting at over 60%. Food prices have been rising with government unable to regulate effectively the food cartels in our country.' EFF Member of Parliament (MP) Omphile Maotwe said the budget is just a copy and paste of previous administrations, which most GNU partners rejected in the past. 'We are still not sure why some in the GNU today support this budget because it is the same budget that was tabled in the past ten years, and they rejected it in each of those years.' The party said the bill should be amended to increase the health and basic education budgets to employ more doctors and teachers.
Daily Maverick
03-07-2025
- Business
- Daily Maverick
Currency of credibility – Sarb nationalisation debate in Parliament opens a legacy hornet's nest
The SA Reserve Bank is still partly privately owned, a legacy quirk shared by only a handful of countries. Now, as Parliament reopens old calls to nationalise it, critics warn the real risk isn't who owns the shares, but whether new resolution powers and deposit insurance can protect ordinary savers – and whether the political signal could shake confidence in the rand. South Africa's central bank is an anomaly: part-private, with somewhere between 800 to 1,000 shareholders. In reality, those shareholders have no real say over monetary policy, but are largely a legacy from the early days of central banking – a relic that's survived global reform and local battles alike. That quirk has come before Parliament with public comment regarding the proposed, EFF sponsored, South African Reserve Bank Amendment Bill, which aims to nationalise the SA Reserve Bank (Sarb) – buying out its private shareholders and shifting the shares fully to the state – has resurfaced alongside the Financial Sector Laws Amendment Act, which arguably does far more to rewrite the country's bank failure rulebook. 'What is the problem with government being the sole shareholder on behalf of the 61 million people of South Africa?' asked EFF MP Omphile Maotwe during a Standing Committee on Finance hearing on 2 July 2025. 'If you say there will not be any change, so what is the problem when we want this thing to be in the state?' Old Mutual Wealth's chief investment strategist Izak Odendaal is blunt in his comment to Daily Maverick: 'The real shield for credibility isn't a share register but the constitutional guardrails that keep the Sarb's policy boring – on purpose'. That view clashes with economists and market watchers who say the real safeguard isn't who holds the shares, but whether the backstop works when it matters. What does history tell us? Dawie Roodt is an economist and a Reserve Bank shareholder, a fact that for transparency he declared to Daily Maverick. 'I use it for my work… but to be really honest, I have not been [to] an AGM for many, many years as well.' The dividend, he adds, is fixed and around R8 annually. 'Almost all central banks started off as privately owned banks,' he explains. That legacy has shifted in most countries, but not fully here. Private shareholders still appoint half the Sarb's directors, a governance guardrail Dawie believes still matters. 'I think that's a very good idea… you get this extra set of eyes. See what happened to Eskom or the Post Office – there was no private sector oversight.' New powers, old questions The deeper reform sits in the Amendment Act. It hands the Reserve Bank resolution authority status: power to step in if a bank fails, override insolvency, push through rescue or wind-down. It also launches the Corporation for Deposit Insurance (Codi), South Africa's first explicit deposit insurance fund – R20-billion funded by the banks themselves, not taxpayers. But that parachute remains untested. Odendaal argues that while Codi aligns South Africa with global norms, the real stress test is when confidence wobbles. 'A banking system runs on trust,' he told Daily Maverick. 'If that breaks, no insurance fund is big enough – so the signal from Parliament really does matter.' Defending the founding papers The Institute of Race Relations (IRR) argued a nationalisation-related point to Parliament that the Bill risks overstepping constitutional lines. '[This Bill] effectively provides for expropriation without compensation, which is not constitutional… Compensation has to be borne by agreement… No compensation can never be agreeable, and it must be just and equitable,' IRR representative Gabriel Crouse told MPs during the hearing. Treasury also raised somewhat adjacent nationalisation concerns. Chris Axelsson, Director-General for Tax and Financial Sector Policy, said during the hearing: 'The main point in terms of the amendment Bill that we are concerned about is the rights of the current shareholders… There's no recognition of what will happen if from one day they hold the shares and the next day the state owns those shares. It would be a forced takeover – like an expropriation of those shares.' He warned of 'bilateral investment treaties' that could drag South Africa into international legal fights. 'Changing the composition of ownership doesn't result in any material change in the current role of government… The current structure doesn't have any impact on the mandate and the independence of the Sarb.' For now, the cost of buying out shareholders remains unknown, but any forced expropriation could invite protracted litigation and ripple through foreign investor sentiment, a risk flagged repeatedly in hearings. Credibility is the currency For Roodt, that's the point. 'The only thing that changes is the signal – and that's not a good signal because what we have currently works very, very well,' he said. 'You don't even have to change policy. You just have to change the ownership… the market is going to lose confidence.' The myth that shareholders can steer monetary policy doesn't survive contact with how the Sarb works. 'As a shareholder, I have absolutely no say [in monetary policy]… the governor and deputy governors are presidential appointments,' Roodt said. 'The argument that shareholders influence policy is completely incorrect.' Despite the heat of the debate, no concrete timeline for the nationalisation amendment has been confirmed. Odendaal warns that drawn-out political noise alone can bleed credibility fast, even before a vote is called. Meanwhile, markets and savers watch whether the Sarb's resolution powers and its new insurance backstop can survive the first real test unscathed. The currency of credibility Odendaal's line on the real backstop remains verified: 'Deposit insurance is the parachute – don't panic, your money's safe,' he said. Odendaal says the Reserve Bank's real currency is credibility. 'You want your central bank to be dull and dependable,' he says. 'Once it becomes political theatre, you risk paying that cost in the currency.' Roodt's bigger worry is whether the Sarb stays ahead of the next wave: stablecoins, central bank digital currencies and the new money landscape. 'Money plays a crucial role in a modern economy… there are new kinds of money… the landscape could change completely,' he said. 'If the Reserve Bank doesn't stay on top of new technology… they risk becoming irrelevant.' 'Leave it as it is. If it's not broken, why fix it?' Roodt said. The test for South Africa's central bank won't be its share certificates, but whether the resolution powers, deposit backstops and credibility hold when the next wobble hits. DM
Eyewitness News
04-06-2025
- Business
- Eyewitness News
Parliament's finance committee approves fiscal framework, revenue proposals underpinning budget
CAPE TOWN - Parliament's standing committee on finance has approved the fiscal framework and revenue proposals that underpin the 2025 budget, setting the scene for the less contentious adoption of its report in the National Assembly than was the case in March. Following two days of deliberations, the African National Congress (ANC), Democratic Alliance (DA) and ActionSA voted in favour of the report. However, the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party and Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) dug in their heels saying the fuel levy is an unnecessary inclusion that will impact the poor. Wednesday's joint meeting of the finance committees of both houses was far less tense than when it considered an earlier version of the budget framework, which contained a value-added tax (VAT) increase that split the Government of National Unity (GNU). ALSO READ: Main opposition parties reject Treasury's assertion of pro-poor budget However, opposition parties took issue with the increase in the fuel levy, which was included in this third version of the budget tabled by the finance minister two weeks ago. The MK Party's Brian Molefe said other means could have been found to raise R4 billion in a R2 trillion budget. "The fuel levy is regressive and it is not pro-growth, because the fuel levy dampens consumption, expenditure, and it is inflationary as well." After losing Tuesday's court case on the matter, the EFF's Omphile Maotwe made one last appeal for the committee to retract the increase. "If we can stand up and say we reject the fuel levy, that's something we can give the people of South Africa." But with no support to force the finance minister's hand again, both opposition parties rejected the fiscal framework and the committee's report, which will be put to a house vote next Wednesday.
IOL News
01-06-2025
- Business
- IOL News
EFF rejects fuel levy as an attack on the poor
EFF treasurer-general Omphile Maotwe has written to Finance Minister Enoch Godogwana rejecting the fuel levy. Image: Nhlanhla Phillips / Independent Newspapers By: Omphile Maotwe On 21 May 2025, the Minister of Finance tabled the third version of the 2025/26 national budget. Instead of solutions to South Africa's deepening fiscal and social crisis, the Minister delivered a cold and calculated betrayal. He proposed an increase to the general fuel levy by 16 cents per litre for petrol and 15 cents for diesel. True to what the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and the country has come to expect from the GNU led administration, the proposal was dishonestly framed as a 'regulatory adjustment' instead of a tax increase. This levy aims to recover R1.3 billion in revenue after the courts struck down the unlawful VAT increase that featured in the initial budget proposal. The EFF is clear that the fuel levy is not a regulatory tweak but rather a tax hike that is being unlawfully imposed through the Customs and Excise Act, instead of through the Money Bill Act, as mandated by section 77 of the Constitution. We reject this proposal precisely because it is illegal and anti-poor. Our Constitution empowers only parliament to impose a national tax through the money bill. The Minister should therefore not be using administrative regulation to introduce a tax increase. The levy is a tax, even the government's own Budget Review refers to this fuel levy increase as part of 'fuel taxes on petrol and diesel.' Proceeding with it in this manner will only serve to defy the constitution, undermine Parliament's authority, and rob South Africans of their right to participate in fiscal decisions that directly affect their lives. The judiciary was clear in its handling of the initially proposed VAT increase by the Minister. A 2% VAT increase was proposed which was brought down to 0.5% but ultimately through the work of the EFF, it was recognised as a tax measure implemented outside of the law by the judiciary and subsequently suspended. Yet here we are again with a Minister who is determined to continue to undermine parliament and the courts. As the EFF we recognise this as arrogance, contempt and a blatant disregard of the law. The economic consequences of this illegal fuel levy will be devastating. While R1.3 billion may seem insignificant to Treasury, its impact on the working class and ordinary people of this country will be economically challenging. Fuel costs are a direct driver of inflation in transport, food, and essential services. For a worker commuting daily, a student relying on taxis, or a small trader transporting goods, this increase is not abstract. It is an attack on their survival. Our country is facing an economic crisis. That much is clear but as the EFF we will always be the voice that shields the poor from carrying an economic burden that results from poor governance and mismanagement. The crisis was not created by our unemployed youth in Tembisa or the grandmother in Giyani. It was not created by the street vendor in Umlazi or the taxi driver in Mthatha. The crisis was created by the ANC government through corruption, mismanagement, and a neoliberal austerity agenda that punishes the poor and protects the rich. The EFF has taken decisive action regarding the fuel levy and on 26 May 2025, we wrote to the Speaker of the National Assembly and the Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Finance, demanding immediate parliamentary intervention. We called for the Minister of Finance to withdraw the proposed levy because it must be introduced through the Money Bill Act. We further urged the Finance Committee to place this matter on its agenda, summon the Minister to account, and reaffirm Parliament's constitutional authority over all revenue measures. This matter deserves urgent attention because if the levy is allowed to proceed in its illegal state, we run the risk of further legal challenges and collapsing the fiscal framework. No legitimate parliament would endorse a budget that is tainted by unlawful taxation. What is most alarming is that if the 2025/26 Budget is not adopted by 31 July as required by the Constitution, the government could face an administrative shutdown under section 21. The EFF however is not opposed to raising revenue legitimately. We support progressive taxation that will fund development, create much-needed jobs, and render services to our people. But taxation must be lawful, fair, and aimed at those with the most. The government needs to urgently impose a wealth tax, close corporate tax loopholes, and end illicit financial flows. Revenue can also be raised by scrapping the bailouts to failing state-owned entities but the EFF is against putting further strain on the poor and working class. Imposing a fuel levy is a political decision and must be recognised as such. The EFF will not be silenced or intimidated by political bullies who continue to disregard the law, due process and undermine parliament and our constitution. We stand ready to fight against the injustices that will emanate from this tax increase that is disguised as an adjustment. We will fight against it in the corridors of parliament, in the confines of the courtrooms, and ultimately on the streets and on the picket lines. We will challenge this decision because we recognise it for exactly what it is, a bid to squeeze the poor and continue to cushion the rich and politically connected. Parliament should not allow the fuel levy to proceed as it threatens to render our institutions irrelevant. The people of South Africa did not vote for a government that will govern without notice, and parliament should be at the forefront of protecting the people who have entrusted us to lead and represent them. We call on all progressive forces to demand accountability, consultation, and for parliament to reclaim its power. The time has come for parliament to decide if it will stand with the people of South Africa or bow down to an unaccountable executive. The EFF stands with the people. * Omphile Maotwe is the Treasurer General of the Economic Freedom Fighters and a Member of Parliament ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media
