DA rejects Simelane, Nkabane departmental budgets
This after the party this week voted against budgets of the departments of human settlements and higher education led by Thembi Simelane-Nkadimeng and Nobuhle Nkabane respectively.
This decision was taken as a direct response to President Cyril Ramaphosa axing trade and industry deputy minister Andrew Whitfield, of the DA, last week for defying his order that none of the members of his executive were allowed to go to the US at the height of the diplomatic tensions between the two countries.
The DA in response argued that Ramaphosa had been harsh on Whitfield and that it was not acceptable that he fired him for such a minor transgression while he still kept Simelane and Nkabane in his cabinet.
Unlike Whitfield, the DA argued, Simelane was accused of corruption and Nkabane stood accused of lying to parliament. Instead of dealing with the two ministers who were facing serious allegations, Ramaphosa decided to axe Whitfield for going on a trip without getting permission, the DA argued.
DA MP Luyolo Mphithi on Wednesday said his party was voting against Simelane's budget vote because of the corruption allegations she was facing.
Mphithi said the DA was concerned that instead of firing Simelane, Ramaphosa had moved her from the department of justice to human settlements.
'You'd think that the response to this that the president would have shown minister Simelane the door, he did not. He asked for the report that he stayed with for three months,' said Mphithi. 'And even though the DA sustained pressure asking the president to act, he lacked courage to act and instead decided to dump minister Simelane at human settlements, one of the most important departments for South Africans.'
'It seems that this president does not take an issue with the fact that a person accused of corruption sits in his cabinet and will have to look after a budget of R30bn that is set aside for South Africans,' he said.
Ideally, Mphithi said, the DA would not have a problem with voting for the department of human settlements' budget as it relates to people's housing and security but they could not do it because of the allegations faced by Simelane.
'The DA will always support the granting of funds to house the vulnerable at the same time fast-tracking jobs and growth to give many more South Africans the dignity of being able to buy and own their own houses,' he said. 'And though this budget and the department have many challenges under normal circumstances it would be supported. However, we sit with a minister who faces corruption allegations who has not been accountable to the South African public. And it is because of this we struggle support this particular budget.'
Mphithi and the MK Party's Thulani Gumede raised several issues with the human settlements budget presented by Simelane, saying it was not dealing with some of the key issues faced by South Africans in the sector.
'A critical examination reveals a fundamental flaw, an overall real decline in the department's budget. None of its five main programmes demonstrates above-inflation increases,' said Gumede.
'This systemic underfunding of human settlements initiatives will inevitably worsen existing backlogs and impair the progressive realisation of adequate housing.'
He said his party could not vote for as it would mean they accepted the decrease in allocation.
'I asserted during the committee meeting last week and I reiterate now that this draft budget must be rejected. It's real term decline across key programmes particularly in integrated human settlements and informal settlements upgrading directly contradicts the constitutional obligation to provide adequate housing and the strategic goals of the national development plans,' he said.
'Accepting this budget will constitute a retreat from addressing deeply entrenched structural inequalities and the pressing needs of the vulnerable communities for basic services and dignified living conditions.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Eyewitness News
42 minutes ago
- Eyewitness News
There's no link between the name ‘Azania' and the indigenous people of South Africa
Kenneth Mokgatlhe 1 July 2025 | 9:59 The proposal of constitutional amendment by the African Transformation Movement (ATM) to change the name of South Africa to the 'Republic of Azania' is nonsensical, unnecessary, and irrelevant to the inhabitants of this place. We should be asking ourselves where the word 'Azania' originates from, which language, and how it is related to the people of South Africa. There are no cultural, historical, linguistic, or political connections to the name. It was during my time as a young and vibrant activist within the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) that I was firmly convinced that South Africa should be renamed "Azania". I had been persuaded by the existing argument that South was merely a geographical direction and, therefore, did not have substantive cultural and historical connections befitting a nation's identity. However, I later realised that my comprehension of the term "Azania" was very limited to its use within Pan Africanist and Black Consciousness discourses. Never mind my strong ideological conviction and commitment, I was unable to intellectually express a clear historical or cultural justification for the adoption of the name, nor could I trace its relevance in juxtaposition to the people, history, and identity of the country. It is important to note that the name 'Azania' has no historical or cultural connection to my people. It was never part of our vocabulary or identity. The term did not exist in our oral traditions or historical records, and my community had never encountered it before modern political movements began to invoke it. It is important to note that the pre-colonial South African society was home to various independent kingdoms and queendoms, each governed by its rulers. I descend from the Bahurutshe, one of the largest sub-groups of the Batswana people, who previously occupied the area now known as the Marico region or Zeerust. Our ancestors referred to their kingdom as Kaditshwene (a place of baboons) and Tshwenyane (a little baboon), an ancient twin-city settlement that thrived between 1300 to 1884. Like many other indigenous polities, it functioned as a sovereign polity, free from foreign or external domination. There was a dramatic shift in the geopolitical landscape after the Berlin Conference of 1884, where European powers gathered to partition Africa among themselves, which laid the foundation for the modern nation-states we recognise today. As a result, we, descendants of various kingdoms, were forced to adapt to these new political realities and form countries under Western-imposed frameworks. A country known as the Union of South Africa was established in 1910, led and governed by white minority rule. A referendum was held in 1960, where white South Africans decided to leave the Commonwealth, became independent, and referred to themselves as the Republic of South Africa on 31 May 1961. While the name 'South Africa' is descriptive of a geographic location, the name gives a strong cultural, political, and historical connection. It reminds us of different epochs in our history and how we interacted with other countries. The name South Africa is not unique in the world, as other countries have historically adopted names which are geographically descriptive of their land, such as South Sudan, Central African Republic (CAR), North and South Korea, North Macedonia, and East Timor. My discomfort at the term Azania was vindicated after I came across one of the compelling writings of South African freedom fighter and journalist Paul Trewhela, who is now based in the United Kingdom. Through his sharp historical analysis, he provides a well-substantiated account of the origins of the name 'Azania', demonstrating that it was a term imposed by slave traders/masters to demean the Black Africans in some parts of East Africa. Trewhela contends that the name 'Azania' does not bear any link to the indigenous peoples of South Africa and carries connotations or implications of oppression rather than liberation. His esteemed scholarship helped clarify that the name 'Azania' lacks authentic historical, cultural, political, or linguistic connections to South Africa and its people, reinforcing my earlier doubts about its relevance and appropriateness as a national name. 'The name 'Azania' celebrates the centuries of enslavement of black Africans by Islamist Arab imperialism down the east coast of Africa. It is a disgrace for reactionary ideologists to be using this concocted name to replace the name South Africa,' he remarked. This name, 'Azania,' is primarily used by individuals who identify themselves as revolutionaries or radicals within South Africa's academic, political, and social spheres. It is largely preferred by black radicals in academia and by political formations considered to be on the far left, such as the PAC, the Azanian People's Organisation (AZAPO), the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), and trade unions affiliated with the National Council of Trade Union (NACTU), among others. Like I once did in the past, many of these individuals adopt the term 'Azania' as a symbolic rejection of apartheid and white supremacy. Their chief motivation emanates from a desire to eliminate any association with the apartheid regime, including the name 'South Africa', which they regard as a legacy of colonialism and racial oppression. Mokgatlhe is a political analyst and consultant.
Eyewitness News
an hour ago
- Eyewitness News
Lamola denies ANC is imposing its own foreign policy on the GNU
CAPE TOWN - The foreign policy of the Government of National Unity (GNU) continues to be a thorny matter, with parties like the Democratic Alliance (DA) and Freedom Front (FF) Plus accusing the African National Congress (ANC) of foisting its own policy on the coalition government. When he delivered the budget for the Department of International Relations in the National Assembly on Thursday, Minister Ronald Lamola denied that this is the case. He added that the GNU stance was shaped by key national documents and the Statement of Intent of the coalition partners. Lamola said while the DA is free to travel abroad on independent international missions, it can only represent itself and not the country. ALSO READ | Lamola: Political parties have a duty not to distort govt policy when they're abroad The MK Party, Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), ActionSA and the African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) are among the opposition parties that have called out government for what they view as hypocrisy in its foreign policy. The DA's Emma Powell said the country did not have a foreign policy that represents all South Africans. 'It is a foreign policy for the ANC's friends, and the ANC now need to make peace with the fact that their time is up.' But Lamola hit back, saying the DA cannot decide whether it wants to be part of the GNU and prefers being in opposition or somewhere in between. 'We are not doing anything that you did not sign for in the Statement of Intent, where we deal with our human rights outlook, whether it's in Gaza, it is part of the Statement of Intent. Whether it's in relation to Ukraine and Russia, where we have played a role to bring back the children.' Powell said the DA would continue on its missions abroad to shore up trust in the government, while Build One South Africa (BOSA) leader Mmusi Maimane said it was high time an ambassador to the United States was appointed.
IOL News
an hour ago
- IOL News
SAFA KZN President defends sponsorship secrecy amid financial scrutiny
EVEN with all the debacles at Safa, Danny Jordaan's position remains safe with regions like Safa KZN standing by the current leadership. | Itumeleng English / Independent Newspapers Image: Itumeleng English / Independent Newspapers SAFA KZN President Mazwi Mkhize has defended Danny Jordaan's decision not to disclose sponsorship figures, saying revealing them would only expose how little South African football is actually receiving. The comments come a month after SAFA's appearance before Parliament, where the governing body faced tough questions about its finances and overall administration. Jordaan also hinted he may run for a fourth term in 2026. The most heated moment during the session came when Rise Mzansi MP Makashule Gana demanded SAFA reveal how much it receives from headline sponsors Hollywoodbets and 10Bet — both betting companies with a visible footprint in local football. SAFA Chief Financial Officer Gronie Hluyo responded by saying the association could not reveal the details due to confidentiality clauses in the contracts it signed with the sponsors. He maintained that disclosing the amounts would violate legal agreements. 'In terms of our sponsorship contracts, we've got confidentiality clauses. We'll be in breach of those contracts if we disclose sponsorship agreements and their value,' Hluyo told the committee. Several MPs, however, were unimpressed by the explanation. They said SAFA's lack of transparency made it difficult for them to recommend that the Ministry of Sports allocate further funding to the organisation. The association's latest financial report showed only R356 million in sponsorship revenue. Broadcast income from the SABC, which is itself under financial strain, remains minimal. Now Mkhize has come out in support of Jordaan and Hluyo, arguing that hiding the figures is actually in football's best interest. Speaking to Ukhozi FM, Mkhize said the numbers would shock the public and attract criticism that could damage the sport. 'I think it was the right decision not to reveal the amounts sponsored to the association because it's embarrassing if we're to hear the amount football gets sponsored,' said Mkhize. 'If people and the media knew the figures, there would be no questions of where the money is going — because it is so little.' 'We've asked these questions before, but we wanted to hide under tables when we heard the numbers,' he added.
