
When lies Trump truth — debunking the migrant myth in South Africa's healthcare crisis
There is no question that South Africa's public health system is in crisis. Healthcare professionals, policy analysts and political parties highlight systemic dysfunction, characterised by chronic underfunding, collapsing infrastructure, staff shortages and weak governance. ActionSA itself has admitted that Gauteng's health crisis stems from ' inadequate project management, lack of accountability and consequence management, coupled with a lack of skilled personnel and inefficient supply chain processes '.
Few would dispute that the state, across all spheres, has failed to deliver quality, accessible healthcare to all. Yet, the claims that foreign nationals are 'overburdening' hospitals or 'abusing' the system continue to dominate the discourse. So widespread is this scapegoating that it has taken on the illusion of truth.
But there is no credible evidence to support such claims.
On the contrary, multiple studies, including government-commissioned reports, show that many migrants – especially those who are undocumented – actively avoid healthcare facilities due to fear of arrest, discrimination and outright denial of care. When they do seek help, many pay out of pocket, often at higher rates than South African citizens.
Scapegoating is not a solution. It's a distraction – and not a new one.
There is a deep irony in a nation forged through the struggle against racial oppression now deploying the same exclusionary logic against 'outsiders'. The parallels with Trump-era politics are disturbing. Just as the US president weaponised the myth of white victimhood to slash aid to South Africa and promote a whites-only refugee policy, local politicians have embraced the same playbook – fear-driven, fact-free and designed to divide.
Figures like Gayton McKenzie and Herman Mashaba, and movements such as Operation Dudula have built platforms on xenophobic conspiracy theories, and revived colonial-era stereotypes. Their messages, amplified through social media, reach millions, spreading fear and misinformation. Trump would be proud. We may not be exporting white refugees, but we are certainly importing white nationalist logic.
'How can we improve access to quality healthcare?' asks ActionSA. Well, take a look: they don't know.
Their solution? ActionSA asserts: ' No South African can enter another country legally without providing proof of medical insurance.'
This statement isn't just factually flawed, it reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of both international mobility and health equity. Many South Africans can and do travel without medical insurance, and many countries do not require it for entry. But more importantly, health access should not be framed as a zero-sum, transactional privilege – it is a human right
Debunking the 'healthcare rescue' myth
South Africa's healthcare system is not collapsing under the weight of so-called medical tourism. It is crumbling under decades of budget cuts, poor planning and political neglect. The South African Human Rights Commission has warned that denying foreign nationals access will not alleviate pressure on the system.
The government's own data shows that migrants constitute just 4% of South Africa's population. They are not responsible for drug shortages, collapsing infrastructure or staff vacancies. Yet, the fearmongering has deeply distorted public perception. The Human Sciences Research Council's South African Social Attitudes Survey found that most South Africans believe there are more than 25 million foreign nationals in the country, with more than 20 million assumed to be 'illegal'. This is not just incorrect, it is the result of sustained political misinformation.
Until evidence replaces ideology, this 'alternative truth' will continue to thrive – and 'trump' truth.
Scapegoating isn't policy, structural reform is
South Africa's crises – whether in healthcare, housing or public safety – are not demographic pressures. They are the result of structural failures. Blaming the marginalised is easier than confronting the uncomfortable truths about misgovernance.
In provinces like the Eastern Cape per capita health spending has declined even as patient numbers continue to grow. Experts have consistently pointed to institutional neglect, not migrants, as the root cause. The Life Esidimeni tragedy, in which 144 mental health patients died due to state negligence, had nothing to do with foreign nationals.
And yet the migrant 'burden' myth endures – because it serves a purpose: it redirects public anger away from those in power and towards those with the least power.
We must hold all political rhetoric to the same standard. Just as we rightly demand evidence when Trump claims white victimhood, we must also demand it when Mashaba, McKenzie or Dudula blame migrants for systemic failures.
We cannot selectively suspend our commitment to truth.
The real crisis is not migration. It is misgovernance. And the sooner we name it, the sooner we can begin to rebuild what has been broken. DM
Associate Professor Jo Vearey is director of the African Centre for Migration & Society at Wits University and vice-chair of the international Migration Health and Development Initiative.
Dr Rebecca Walker is an independent researcher and associate of the African Centre for Migration & Society at Wits University.
Diego Iturralde is chief director for demography and population statistics at Statistics South Africa, co-chair of the South African Migration and Urbanisation Forum and former chair of the UN expert group on international migration statistics.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
13 minutes ago
- IOL News
Does the BRICS currency threaten the dollar?
According to economists and political analysts, one of the main reasons for Trump's economic rhetoric has to do with US fears that BRICS countries are embarking on a strategic plan to dethrone the dollar, or de-dollarise the world, as some observers put it. Some people may be wondering why the US President has been acting out in recent months, threatening to impose tariffs, at times in a seemingly excessive manner. Economists and political analysts suggest that one of the main reasons for Trump's economic rhetoric is the United States' concern that BRICS countries are initiating a strategic plan to undermine the dollar, a process some observers refer to as "de-dollarisation''. The BRICS grouping includes Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa and a few other countries that joined in the past couple of years. It all started in Kazan, Russia, during the 16th BRICS summit last year when these countries unveiled a symbolic BRICS banknote, unleashing hot debate regarding the US dollar's dominance. At the time, Russian President Vladimir Putin emphasised that the dollar is being used as a ''weapon.'' A year before, meanwhile, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva proposed creating a new, common currency in South America to reduce its reliance on the dollar in international trade. India has also been advocating for local currency settlements among BRICS nations. The unveiling of the BRICS currency bill, featuring the Taj Mahal, added controversy, as the bloc explores challenging the US dollar's global financial power. Despite research showing that the US dollar remains the primary reserve currency, Trump would take none of that as he continued his criticism of BRICS. "We are going to require a commitment from these seemingly hostile countries that they will neither create a new BRICS currency, nor back any other currency to replace the mighty US dollar or, they will face 100% Tariffs,'' he wrote in his Social Truth platform in January. The statement was similar to the one he posted last November. According to Bloomberg, Brazil and South Africa have criticised Trump separately for his anti-BRICS comments, while India has refrained from responding publicly, signalling that it is walking a fine line in maintaining its relationship with Washington. Would a BRICS currency threaten the dollar? Political analyst Anda Mbikwana offers his insights on the issue. 'The unveiling of a symbolic BRICS banknote at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum represents far more than ceremonial posturing — it signals a deliberate escalation in the bloc's strategy to construct alternative financial architectures that could fundamentally reshape global monetary dynamics. ''While critics may dismiss this $200 denomination note as mere symbolism, the careful design choices reveal sophisticated strategic thinking. The front's display of founding member flags alongside the reverse featuring partner nations creates a visual narrative of expanding multipolarity that directly challenges the hierarchical nature of the dollar-dominated system. ''This imagery reinforces BRICS' positioning as what President Putin has characterised as 'non-western' rather than 'anti-western' — a crucial distinction that broadens its appeal across the Global South.'' The Technological Infrastructure Behind De-dollarisation ''The symbolic banknote masks more substantive developments in BRICS' financial infrastructure. Russia's emphasis on blockchain-based payment systems and central bank digital currencies represents a technologically sophisticated approach to circumventing traditional dollar-denominated channels. ''These systems offer practical alternatives to SWIFT and correspondent banking relationships that have become increasingly weaponised through sanctions regimes.'' And how does this directly affect South Africa, one might ask. Said Mbikwana: ''For South Africa, this development presents both opportunities and challenges. Greater financial integration within BRICS could reduce transaction costs and currency exposure risks in trade with major partners. ''However, it also requires careful navigation of relationships with Western economies that remain crucial for South African exports and investment. The Reserve Bank's approach to central bank digital currency development will become increasingly strategic as these alternative payment systems mature.'' According to Mbikwana, despite BRICS' banknote symbolic significance, fundamental economic realities limit BRICS' ability to quickly displace dollar dominance. ''The United States retains unparalleled capital market depth, institutional credibility, and network effects that have historically proven resilient to challengers. Moreover, internal coordination challenges within BRICS — particularly between China and India — limit the bloc's ability to present a unified monetary alternative.'' The BRICS symbolic banknote, added Mbikwana, should be understood not as an immediate threat to dollar hegemony, but as a manifestation of longer-term structural shifts in global economic governance. ''Its significance lies not in its current form, but in its representation of institutional momentum toward financial multipolarity. ''American opposition to these developments may paradoxically accelerate their adoption by reinforcing perceptions of dollar weaponisation among emerging economies. ''The ultimate question is not whether BRICS can immediately supplant the dollar, but whether it can create sufficient institutional alternatives to reduce the international community's dependence on dollar-denominated systems. In this context, symbolic gestures serve as important markers of political will and institutional capacity — prerequisites for any serious challenge to existing monetary hierarchies.'' The purpose of the banknote will serve as a payment system designed to facilitate transactions within the BRICS bloc using local currencies and potentially central bank digital currencies. While a BRICS currency could potentially challenge the US dollar's dominance, it's unlikely to replace it entirely soon. There is ongoing development and testing, with a pilot programme potentially appearing before the end of 2026. Some economists are criticising Trump for threatening the BRICS, according to a CBS News report, saying it makes the US look weak. "It isn't a good look, as it indirectly elevates the stature of a non-threat and suggests a lack of confidence in the dollar," Brad Setser, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and former Treasury Department economist, wrote on X.

IOL News
13 minutes ago
- IOL News
Political parties support increased funding for Border Management Authority
Border Management Authority commissioner Michael Masiapato told MPs that they presence of health officials in 36 out of 71 ports of entry Image: Border Management Authority Political parties have thrown their weight for the Border Management Authority (BMA) to get more funding in order to carry out its mandate. The entity made a case before the parliamentary Committees on Appropriations about its underfunding since its establishment in 2023. Home Affairs portfolio committee chairperson, Mosa Chabane, said they have been grappling with the underfunding of the BMA over the last three financial years. 'We have grappled with calls for more funding given the task the BMA has been given and that it has to respond to the challenges that South Africans and all of us MPs have been raising around porous borders,' he said. 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 Chabane said the entity was saddled with capacity issues in terms of technology and the high vacancy rate. Home Affairs deputy minister, Njabulo Nzuza, said they have prepared business case for more funding to relevant platforms but were struggling with issues of funding. He said the funding to the BMA would yield returns. 'If we fund the BMA sufficiently and have control of the borders that will mean higher returns for SARS in terms of revenue collection and will result in economic growth. It is not just a plea for money, but a plea for resources to turn the situation around,' Nzuza said. BMA commissioner Michael Masiapato painted a picture of BMA in dire need for financial injection if it was to carry out its mandate. Masiapato said their mandate was to deal with border law enforcement and deal with movement of goods and persons. He said there were issues around staffing and financing. 'What is missing is the conventional law enforcement done by SAPS border police.' Masiapato explained that they required a staff complement of 4000 and R2.2 billion to man the borderline but they have only 600 border guards. He said the request for adequate funding has not yielded the result as they received far less than they requested. Masiapato also said they had required R2.9 billion but were promised R250 million which turned out to be for the maintenance of infrastructure when it was allocated. 'We remain grossly underfunded.' He added that although they had asked for R500m from the Criminal Asset Recovery Account, they were allocated R150m for tools of trade. The entity has made another request for R4.3 billion in additional resources and are waiting for a response. Masiapato told the MPs that their approved structure provided for 11 000 posts but only 2600 were filled. 'We say despite people who came from departments, we need some investment to build the baseline for staff,' he said, adding that they needed R500m at least. He told of staff shortages in ICT, finance, specialist in agriculture and health posts. 'We have presence in 36 ports of entry in terms of health officials,' he said. Masiapato also said in terms of law people entering the 71 ports of entry in the country, they should be assessed and screened for diseases. 'People enter without being assessed.' He told the MPs that the BMA has R4.3 billion overdraft. Parties from across the political divide pledged their support to increased funding of the BMA. Chairperson of the Appropriations Standing Committee, Mmusi Maimane, said they were guided by the Money Bills and that they will look at the budget of the Home affairs departments and other departments. He stated that any amendment they make to the budget was to be made on the basis of the fiscal framework that was tabled. Maimane also said since the budget for 2025/26 were due for approval next, the BMA case would be considered in the next Medium Term Expenditure Framework to be tabled later this year. 'The programmes of the BMA can't be understated,' he said, adding that things the BMA required adequate funding. He also said they will request the Parliamentary Budget Office to make a presentation and the National Treasury would be engaged on the matter.


Daily Maverick
44 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
ARTsolar throws in towel in ‘gagging' case against ‘whistle-blowers' and journalist
The solar panel company had wanted to stop three 'whistle-blowers' and a journalist from reporting that it was importing and not locally manufacturing its solar panels. Solar panel manufacturer ARTsolar has thrown in the towel in its controversial battle against three 'whistle-blowers' and a journalist. The company had successfully gagged them by court order from making or reporting on 'defamatory' allegations that ARTsolar was importing and not locally manufacturing its solar panels. The interim gagging order was granted in March by Durban High Court acting Judge Perlene Bramdhew against businessman Brett Latimer, two former employees of ARTsolar and journalist Bongani Hans. The date to determine whether the order should be confirmed or discharged was set for 29 July. But this week, ARTsolar withdrew the application and tendered to pay the costs of Latimer, Hans and former employees Kandace Singh and Shalendra Hansraj. It also tendered to pay the costs of the Industrial Development Corporation, which entered the legal fray because it had provided R90-million funding to ARTsolar to set up its 'proudly South African' factory in New Germany. The IDC wanted to interview Latimer about his claims. The initial court order specifically barred Latimer from communicating with the IDC. The IDC launched its own urgent court application, successfully arguing that it should have been joined in the proceedings, and that the order was stifling an investigation into the matter on the instruction of Minister of Trade, Industry and Competition Parks Tau. The order was amended to exclude reference to the IDC. The shift in ARTsolar's stance came after it appointed new attorneys last month. Mohamed Mota, partner at Cox Yeats, confirmed the withdrawal. He said his client had no comment 'at this stage'. Media freedom Because the case had implications for freedom of expression, the amaBhungane Centre for Investigative Journalism had applied to be admitted as an amicus curiae. Managing partner Sam Sole said the withdrawal was a 'bittersweet victory'. 'The facts of the case make it clear the order should never have been granted and amaBhungane was looking forward to urging the court to give decisive direction to other presiding officers about the very narrow and limited circumstances which could justify such pre-publication censorship,' he said. 'We had also intended to remind the court that an effective press is a 'public sentinel' and is a conduit for the public's right to receive and impart information, meaning curbs on the media effectively limit the rights of the general public. 'This places a duty on the courts to be exceptionally vigilant in ensuring adherence to the legal safeguards of press freedom, especially where the public have no voice in the proceedings – as in this case, where the media house did not initially come to court.' Sole said there were various reasons that a journalist may fail to effectively oppose such an application, especially an extremely urgent one, such as a lack of timely access to adequate (or any) legal representation. 'We hope the publicity engendered by this case will discourage other parties from running to court and will also encourage presiding officers to exercise due care and caution when faced with similar cases,' Sole said. ARTsolar's urgent application was sparked by Hans sending questions, based on Latimer's allegations, to the company. Latimer, a former client of ARTsolar, alleged that he had been duped into believing that the panels were locally manufactured when they were in fact imported from China. He was backed up by Singh and Hansraj, who previously worked for the company. On the back of the gagging order, Latimer obtained a subpoena against Turners Shipping and, in a supplementary affidavit, he said the shipping documents (bills of lading) showed that the company imported 99% of its panels. Latimer's attorney MS Omar said: 'The interim gagging order was a drastic and draconian violation of my client's fundamental rights of freedom of expression as enshrined in section 16 of the Constitution. The overbroad interim order plainly prohibits permissible statements, based on truth and public interest, and failed to take account of the high threshold for a defamation interdict.' The application will be formally withdrawn in court on 29 July. DM