South Africa's markets gain momentum as rand strengthens and trade surges
Image: Pixabay
South Africa's financial markets began the week on a cheerfully optimistic note, buoyed by a weakening US dollar and a fresh wave of stability within the Government of National Unity (GNU).
In early Monday trading, the rand strengthened by 0.5%, recovering to R17.70 against the US dollar, reversing some of the pressure it faced last week.
This upward momentum comes as the greenback continues to lose ground, spurred by an easing of tensions in the Middle East, leading investors to take on more risks rather than retreating to safer havens.
Economic data from the South African Reserve Bank unveiled promising figures: money supply growth rose to 6.86% in May, up from 6.12% in April, along with a modest increase in credit growth to 4.98% from 4.60%. Such indicators provide essential insights into consumer demand, suggesting strengthened economic activity.
Moreover, South Africa's trade performance in May has presented promising figures, with a widening trade surplus of R21.7 billion—up substantially from a revised R13bn in April.
This significant increase was driven by a robust export performance, which saw a 6.3% rise, culminating in a six-month high of R176bn.
Shipments comprising precious metals, particularly gold and platinum, along with a variety of agricultural products such as citrus fruits, have contributed significantly to this positive trend.
On the flip side, imports experienced a more subdued increase of 1.2%, amounting to R154bn. The demand was predominantly for mineral products, including crude oil and base metals. Notably, declines in certain categories, such as vegetable products and machinery, offset some of these gains.
Despite the rand's recovery, Investec's chief economist, Annabel Bishop, pointed out that the currency remained under pressure against the euro and the pound.
Currently, the rand trades at R20.83 to the euro against an average of R20.11 year-to-date, and R24.33 to the pound, as compared to a year-to-date average of R23.87.
'The rand is likely to average near R18.00/$1 in the third quarter of 25, if not stronger, but much depends on the policies from the Trump government, and in particular the reactivation of many of the Liberation day US trade tariffs in early July,' Bishop said.
'The Democratic Alliance (DA) has said it will remain in the GNU, while polls have shown loss of President [Cyril] Ramaphosa as ANC president sees the party fall towards 20% voter support. The rand has ignored the latest political spat, following global market movements.'
Political dynamics also play a role in shaping market sentiments, particularly following a weekend of intense negotiations surrounding the GNU.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) has opted to remain part of the coalition despite expressing dissatisfaction with President Cyril Ramaphosa's Cabinet decisions, notably the dismissal of Andrew Whitfield as deputy minister of trade, industry, and competition.
Although the DA has pledged to abstain from certain budget votes, their choice to stay within the coalition has helped stabilise the rand, which has seemingly remained insulated from political turbulence.
Andre Cilliers, currency strategist at TreasuryONE,remarked on the DA's recent actions, stating that their frustrations have had minimal impact on the rand's performance.
'The DA is so frustrated that it won't support parts of the government budget and says talking more is pointless. The rand opened this morning back in the mid-R17.70s, stronger than it closed on Friday. The currency will await international data this week to get some impetus,' Cilliers said.
Meanwhile, the JSE All Share Index surged 0.9% to 96 706 points during early trade on Monday, bouyed by investments, logistics, healthcare, and manufacturing stocks.
BUSINESS REPORT
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
14 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Regional trade could focus South Africa's muddled foreign policy
Coalition governance is messy, but parties should be able to agree on prioritising economic growth and trade into Africa. South Africa's government of national unity (GNU) has just staggered past the one-year mark. Its foreign policy reflects continuity, some change, a steady mismatch between ambition and resources and little focus on national growth priorities. Disagreements on foreign policy and strained relations, particularly regarding Western partners, highlight the challenges when the two largest GNU parties – the ANC and the DA – come from such different backgrounds. The 2024 GNU statement of intent includes only one catch-all sentence on foreign policy among its basic minimum priorities: the country will pursue 'human rights, constitutionalism, the national interest, solidarity, peaceful resolution of conflicts, to achieve the African Agenda 2063, South-South, North-South and African cooperation, multilateralism and a just, peaceful and equitable world'. Everything and therefore nothing. The sum effect is a foreign policy adrift. The International Relations and Cooperation Department rarely pursues the country's developmental priorities (growth, poverty reduction and equity). It also has a selective approach to democracy and human rights issues in the region. The defence force's humiliation in eastern Democratic Republic of Congo also shows that South Africa does not have the military means to support its peacemaking ambitions in Africa. Foreign policy largely takes the form of a commitment by the ANC to its traditional partners and issues such as Palestine, Cuba, Western Sahara, China and Russia. Regarding Russia, it's ironic that US President Donald Trump's tilt towards that country has reduced European (and US) criticisms of the ANC's tacit support of Russia. Some fresh air came into a stale debate when the uMkhonto Wesizwe (MK) party stood back from the ANC's commitment to the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic's independence from Morocco. The DA hasn't taken a formal position, but is less passionate about Western Sahara than the ANC, and would probably agree with MK. South Africa's active role in international forums and advocacy for human rights on Israel's genocide in Gaza has been commendable. However, Pretoria seems to take a principled stance only when it has no real influence on an issue that is suitably far away (such as Western Sahara) – shrinking back on matters in its own neighbourhood. The ANC's hostility towards Western partners is readily evident to anyone on the diplomatic circuit in Pretoria and Cape Town. BRICS partner events attract many government officials, whereas high-level events such as the European Union's (EU) Europe Day struggle to attract even one, despite EU trade being more important. The future of South Africa's trade and manufacturing growth doesn't lie in Europe, China or the US, it lies in Africa. South Africa is particularly enthusiastic about BRICS' expansion, emerging as a leader of the Global South – although without any substantially associated trade benefits. Unlike trade with China, where South Africa exports commodities and imports manufactured goods, EU-South Africa export values roughly match imports, and have higher-value content. EU countries also have much larger investments in South Africa, and many European companies have long-standing domestic operations. Between 1,000 and 2,000 EU companies are active in South Africa, collectively holding almost half of the total foreign direct investment (FDI) into the country and supporting more than 500,000 jobs. South Africa has a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with China (as do many other African countries), and the number of Chinese-invested companies in South Africa has increased. And while the stock of Chinese FDI has grown, it is still below 4% of China's total stock, compared with 48% in the EU 's case. China presents South Africa with two existential challenges. The first is the imbalance created by South Africa largely exporting commodities and importing manufactured and other higher-value items from China. Second, China is South Africa's largest regional competitor, and the flood of Chinese goods has been key to South African and regional deindustrialisation. The Institute for Security Studies' African Futures and Innovation has modelled the comparative contribution that growth in different sectors could make to increasing incomes and reducing poverty in South Africa. The forecasts find that manufacturing has the largest potential impact on these two crucial indicators of progress. Yet, after peaking at 25%, manufacturers' contribution to gross domestic product has declined to below 13%. South Africa is deindustrialising. Reversing that trend requires a hard-nosed assessment of partners and future markets. However, the future of South Africa's trade and manufacturing growth doesn't lie in Europe, China or the US – which the American Chamber of Commerce says accounts for about 5.3% of South Africa's FDI stock. Rather, it lies in Africa. Intra-African trade strategically aligns with South Africa's industrial and geopolitical goals. Already, trade with African nations accounts for much of South Africa's exports, emphasising the country's role in regional commerce. With the African Continental Free Trade Area, there's potential for growth. During the most recent budget vote, Trade, Industry and Competition Minister Parks Tau made the appropriate noises, but still referred to the tired butterfly strategy of the 1990s – with a wing each in Asia and the Americas. Instead, the vision should be of South Africa's own Belt and Road Initiative into Africa. The country should build the infrastructure to benefit from the regional market. Regional trade must be the pillar of South Africa's trade strategy, especially in promoting value-added exports and expanding its influence across Africa. While not as large in absolute terms as trade with Asia or Europe, intra-African trade strategically aligns with South Africa's industrial and geopolitical goals. The Southern African Development Community region accounts for about 20% to 25% of South Africa's total exports, and South Africa enjoys a significant trade surplus with most African countries. Regional trade is also heavily weighted towards value-added exports, such that vehicles, machinery, processed foods, construction materials and petrochemicals dominate exports to African countries. Trade into Africa helps support local South African manufacturing and industrial employment. Meanwhile, the end of the African Growth and Opportunity Act and Trump's punitive approach to trade with South Africa (and other countries), will inevitably galvanise the search for alternative markets, particularly in Africa. That is good news. Under the GNU, South Africa's foreign policy operates within a more complex domestic political landscape. But the one thing parties should agree on is to prioritise South Africa's economic growth and trade into Africa. DM
The Star
a day ago
- The Star
GLB commission of inquiry into corruption is just for show, while solutions are readily available
Mike Moriarty | Published 56 minutes ago The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Gauteng is not fooled by the Committee of Inquiry set up by the Gauteng MEC for Economic Development, Lebogang Maile, into the affairs of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB). Maile established this committee to obscure evident corruption that has escalated within the GLB for many years. The sins of the GLB are obvious, and the solution is readily available. GLB's incompetence can be addressed through retooling its business processes. Its corruption can be purged through forensic investigation and ruthless prosecution of those guilty. On Sunday, 15 June 2025, MEC Maile announced the appointment of a 15-member committee of inquiry to investigate the affairs of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB). This committee has been tasked with probing allegations of corruption, bribery, and the long processing times for liquor licenses within the board. He also announced the dismissal of five GLB personnel. However, it is understood that these dismissals took place long before the announcement was made. In truth, the GLB is a small portion of what the Gauteng Provincial Government does. Its budget of R80 million is tiny compared to the overall budget of R1.6 billion in Maile's Department of Economic Development. This represents 5% of the department and is a minuscule portion, 0.046%, of the total provincial budget. Maile's actions are like trying to fasten a button with a sledgehammer. These committees are expensive, and previous ones have taken an unreasonably long time to achieve anything. Just like Makhura's e-tolls committee, and the committee that was headed by Trevor Fowler to look into the state of municipalities. These inquiries have a tendency of essentially achieve nothing at all. This committee is likely to take 10 months to do its work at an estimated cost of R6 million. If the solution is so simple, why has Maile set up this committee? He is merely trying to have the appearance of acting decisively. The MEC's move is fatally flawed for four reasons: Firstly, during the length of time it takes to do its work, the stealing within GLB will continue. Secondly, the exercise will cost a lot of money. Thirdly, the committee will be buried in an avalanche of complaints, allegations, and documents, while the real nuggets are hidden. Perhaps this is what Maile wants. Not all the perpetrators are his enemies. Any friends that he exposes could turn on him and his allies. Finally, the eventual report will cover so much ground that the real priorities will be difficult to identify. No sooner had the committee been identified than allegations emerged that various committee members are tainted in one way or another. One may validly query whether it is wise to appoint previous employees of the GLB, such as Mpho Mosing and Jennifer Rankeng. Fhedzisani Pandelani was a previous board chairperson. Ms Nalini Maharaj is a board member at the Gauteng Gambling Board (GGB), which is now also under scrutiny. If members of the committee were part of the problem, can they be part of the solution? But Maile already has information on the failings of the GLB. He has received adequate correspondence, a series of court actions, responded to various questions in the House, and hosted meetings where complainants and staff tabled grievances. Is he unable to comprehend the issues with the information he has? When the committee does get down to business, it will inevitably conclude the following: The application process is far from transparent. The much-vaunted online system is useless and costly. Once an application has been made on the system, the entire process thereafter is a manual one. The administration of the GLB is poorly managed. The process from beginning to end should take no longer than three months. However, most applications take longer than six months, while some have been outstanding for years. No one knows the actual size of the backlog. The board says one thing. The administration says another, and the applicants will tell you the full story. Objectors will advise that the Board does not make it easy to remain vigilant against undesirable liquor outlets. The GLB has a habit of bringing in arbitrary and unannounced changes. The GLB has been taken to court more often and has lost almost all the cases. The policy and legislation are overdue for review as they currently have major loopholes, permit unnecessary obstructions, and create a huge opportunity for bribery. as they currently have major loopholes, permit unnecessary obstructions, and create a huge opportunity for bribery. Restaurants get licenses, and the owners then sell to others who convert the restaurant into a place of entertainment. These become incredible nuisances. The GLB website is a joke. Other provinces have websites that are far more informative about applications in process, hearing dates, and approved licenses. When the committee finalises its report, it will recommend the following actions: Forensic investigations should be conducted in various areas of the GLB's operations and the transactions that arose from these in the past seven years. The recommendations of the investigators should be implemented. Management and various members of the board should be replaced. Business process analysts should be brought in to recommend changes. There should be immediate changes to the tracking and reporting of GLB work, and these reports should be available publicly in a suitably summarised form. IT experts should be asked to make recommendations to overhaul the GLB website and the online system. Various policy amendments should be effected and implemented. Legislative processes should be initiated to amend the Gauteng Liquor Act and its regulations. The irony is that all of the above can be kick-started with immediate effect. If this were done, 10 months and R6 million could be saved. There is no logical reason to appoint this committee. Consequence management doesn't happen often enough. Apart from Maile's need to be seen to be taking action, the only explanation that makes sense is that various connected people, currently profiting from a corrupted system, will be shielded. Mike Moriarty MPL, DA Gauteng Shadow MEC for Economic Development
IOL News
a day ago
- IOL News
GLB commission of inquiry into corruption is just for show, while solutions are readily available
The sins of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB) are obvious, and the solution is readily available, says the writer. Image: Supplied The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Gauteng is not fooled by the Committee of Inquiry set up by the Gauteng MEC for Economic Development, Lebogang Maile, into the affairs of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB). Maile established this committee to obscure evident corruption that has escalated within the GLB for many years. The sins of the GLB are obvious, and the solution is readily available. GLB's incompetence can be addressed through retooling its business processes. Its corruption can be purged through forensic investigation and ruthless prosecution of those guilty. On Sunday, 15 June 2025, MEC Maile announced the appointment of a 15-member committee of inquiry to investigate the affairs of the Gauteng Liquor Board (GLB). This committee has been tasked with probing allegations of corruption, bribery, and the long processing times for liquor licenses within the board. He also announced the dismissal of five GLB personnel. However, it is understood that these dismissals took place long before the announcement was made. In truth, the GLB is a small portion of what the Gauteng Provincial Government does. Its budget of R80 million is tiny compared to the overall budget of R1.6 billion in Maile's Department of Economic Development. This represents 5% of the department and is a minuscule portion, 0.046%, of the total provincial budget. Maile's actions are like trying to fasten a button with a sledgehammer. These committees are expensive, and previous ones have taken an unreasonably long time to achieve anything. Just like Makhura's e-tolls committee, and the committee that was headed by Trevor Fowler to look into the state of municipalities. These inquiries have a tendency of essentially achieve nothing at all. This committee is likely to take 10 months to do its work at an estimated cost of R6 million. If the solution is so simple, why has Maile set up this committee? He is merely trying to have the appearance of acting decisively. The MEC's move is fatally flawed for four reasons: Firstly, during the length of time it takes to do its work, the stealing within GLB will continue. Secondly, the exercise will cost a lot of money. Thirdly, the committee will be buried in an avalanche of complaints, allegations, and documents, while the real nuggets are hidden. Perhaps this is what Maile wants. Not all the perpetrators are his enemies. Any friends that he exposes could turn on him and his allies. Finally, the eventual report will cover so much ground that the real priorities will be difficult to identify. No sooner had the committee been identified than allegations emerged that various committee members are tainted in one way or another. One may validly query whether it is wise to appoint previous employees of the GLB, such as Mpho Mosing and Jennifer Rankeng. Fhedzisani Pandelani was a previous board chairperson. 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 Ms Nalini Maharaj is a board member at the Gauteng Gambling Board (GGB), which is now also under scrutiny. If members of the committee were part of the problem, can they be part of the solution? But Maile already has information on the failings of the GLB. He has received adequate correspondence, a series of court actions, responded to various questions in the House, and hosted meetings where complainants and staff tabled grievances. Is he unable to comprehend the issues with the information he has? When the committee does get down to business, it will inevitably conclude the following: The application process is far from transparent. The much-vaunted online system is useless and costly. Once an application has been made on the system, the entire process thereafter is a manual one. The administration of the GLB is poorly managed. The process from beginning to end should take no longer than three months. However, most applications take longer than six months, while some have been outstanding for years. No one knows the actual size of the backlog. The board says one thing. The administration says another, and the applicants will tell you the full story. Objectors will advise that the Board does not make it easy to remain vigilant against undesirable liquor outlets. The GLB has a habit of bringing in arbitrary and unannounced changes. The GLB has been taken to court more often and has lost almost all the cases. The policy and legislation are overdue for review as they currently have major loopholes, permit unnecessary obstructions, and create a huge opportunity for bribery. as they currently have major loopholes, permit unnecessary obstructions, and create a huge opportunity for bribery. Restaurants get licenses, and the owners then sell to others who convert the restaurant into a place of entertainment. These become incredible nuisances. The GLB website is a joke. Other provinces have websites that are far more informative about applications in process, hearing dates, and approved licenses. When the committee finalises its report, it will recommend the following actions: Forensic investigations should be conducted in various areas of the GLB's operations and the transactions that arose from these in the past seven years. The recommendations of the investigators should be implemented. Management and various members of the board should be replaced. Business process analysts should be brought in to recommend changes. There should be immediate changes to the tracking and reporting of GLB work, and these reports should be available publicly in a suitably summarised form. IT experts should be asked to make recommendations to overhaul the GLB website and the online system. Various policy amendments should be effected and implemented. Legislative processes should be initiated to amend the Gauteng Liquor Act and its regulations. The irony is that all of the above can be kick-started with immediate effect. If this were done, 10 months and R6 million could be saved. There is no logical reason to appoint this committee. Consequence management doesn't happen often enough. Apart from Maile's need to be seen to be taking action, the only explanation that makes sense is that various connected people, currently profiting from a corrupted system, will be shielded. Mike Moriarty MPL, DA Gauteng Shadow MEC for Economic Development
