
Government still has no plan to replace US HIV funding, Health organisations are demanding action
'We are determined not to let people die,' reads a letter from the Global HIV Treatment Coalition and civil society organisations sent to the presidency and health minister Aaron Motsoaledi. The letter demands that the government gets its act together on a fully costed emergency plan to deal with the loss of HIV funding.
This follows billions of rand for HIV and TB programmes being withdrawn after the Trump administration cut funding for USAID and the US President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR) in January. In 2024, PEPFAR provided about R7.5 billion to South Africa.
Vulnerable people, known as 'key populations ', such as sex workers have lost access to vital HIV programmes that delivered ARVs, USAID-funded clinics have closed down, and health workers have been retrenched.
HIV activists say the health department has 'not taken concerted action' to address these funding cuts, and that 'Parliament, the National and Provincial AIDS Councils, and everyone else in the country are in the dark regarding the emergency plan and action required'.
The letter is signed by Zackie Achmat and Anneke Meerkotter on behalf of the Global HIV Treatment Coalition. About 200 people, including leading activists, doctors and public health advocates, as well as over 70 organisations have endorsed it.
The country's HIV programmes are also facing a further blow to funding after The Global Fund announced that its allocations would be reduced.
The letter demands that the health minister provides information on the impact of US funding cuts and details of the national and provincial government's emergency plans. It calls for the government to meet with civil society and health sector leaders to review the plan.
A month ago, activists warned Parliament's health portfolio committee about the looming health crisis and that people were struggling to access antiretrovirals.
The letter refers to a study which estimates that from 2025 to 2028, the discontinuation of PEPFAR could result in a 29% to 56% increase in new HIV infections, and 56,000 to 65,000 additional AIDS-related deaths.
Neither the presidency nor national health department responded to a request for comment.
In his budget speech in May, the finance minister, Enoch Godongwana, stated that no new allocations are being made to deal with the withdrawal of US funding for HIV-related services. But he stated that such funding may be issued later in the year. We reported at the time:
Officials from the National Health Department have been in negotiations with Treasury over the last few months about securing emergency funding in order to cover the PEPFAR cuts.
The emergency funds could come from Treasury's contingency reserve, which exists partially in order to cover unexpected funding shortfalls. It may also be financed through borrowing.
The health department's proposal for emergency funding had apparently been insufficiently detailed. It needed to provide more information about how the money would actually be spent.
We understand that the health department has also put in a separate application to the National Treasury to cover the cuts to research funding by the US. This follows a decision by the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) to effectively cancel grants to researchers in South Africa (see a detailed explanation here). Two large private donors have offered to assist with this if the government puts up a certain amount.
To understand the effects of the US funding cuts, GroundUp and Spotlight made a request on 25 June to the National Health Laboratory Service under the Promotion of Access to Information Act for data going back to 2015, including the monthly number of HIV viral load, CD4, TB and syphilis tests.
This article first appeared on GroundUp. Read the original article here.
Hashtags

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

TimesLIVE
an hour ago
- TimesLIVE
Trump wins as Supreme Court curbs judges, but may lose on birthright citizenship
The US Supreme Court's landmark ruling blunting a potent weapon that federal judges have used to block government policies nationwide during legal challenges was in many ways a victory for President Donald Trump — except perhaps on the very policy he is seeking to enforce. An executive order that the Republican president signed on his first day back in office in January would restrict birthright citizenship, a far-reaching plan that three federal judges, questioning its constitutionality, quickly halted nationwide through so-called 'universal' injunctions. But the Supreme Court's ruling on Friday — while announcing a dramatic shift in how judges have operated for years deploying such relief — left enough room for the challengers to Trump's directive to try to prevent it from taking effect while litigation over its legality plays out. 'I do not expect the president's executive order on birthright citizenship will ever go into effect,' said Samuel Bray, a Notre Dame Law School professor and a prominent critic of universal injunctions, whose work the court's majority cited extensively in Friday's ruling. Trump's executive order directs federal agencies to refuse to recognise the citizenship of children born in the US who do not have at least one parent who is a US citizen or lawful permanent resident. The three judges found that the order likely violates citizenship language in the US constitution's 14th amendment. The directive remains blocked while lower courts reconsider the scope of their injunctions, and the Supreme Court said it cannot take effect for 30 days — a window that gives the challengers time to seek further protection from those courts.

IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
What the proposed changes to the South African Reserve Bank mean for South Africa
The nationalisation of the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) will come up for discussion in Parliament this week Image: Pixabay The nationalisation of the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) will come up for discussion in Parliament this week when the finance standing committee holds a public hearing to amend the law governing the central bank. The bill, a private member's first introduced in Parliament by EFF leader Julius Malema, seeks to amend the SARB Act to make the State the sole shareholder of the shares in the bank. The Parliament programme shows that the Standing Committee on Finance will hold public hearings on the South African Reserve Bank Amendment Bill in a virtual meeting platform on Wednesday. The hearing comes after members of the public, stakeholders and stakeholders were given an opportunity to comment on the SARB amendment bill until June 30. 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 ✕ Those still wishing to make written submissions and indications to make oral submission have until Monday at 12 midday to do so. The bill was first introduced in Parliament in August 2018, but it lapsed in May 2019 during the end of the sixth Parliament only to be revived in October the same year. In 2020, the EFF and the parliamentary legal services had briefed the standing committee on finance on the bill and conducted a first round of public hearings, which were held in November 2018. But, the bill lapsed four years later in May 2024 in the sixth Parliament and then got revived again in July 2024. After the Red Berets pushed for the bill to be on the parliamentary programme for consideration in the new administration, the standing committee on finance resolved in September last year to conduct a second round of public hearings after it was briefed by the Parliamentary Budget Office on its analysis and assessment of the bill's socio-economic impact. When there was no progress in processing of the South African Reserve Bank Bill, EFF MP Hlengiwe Mkhaliphi took up the matter with the National Assembly Programme Committee towards the end of March and was promised a response at the next meeting. Whereas House Chairperson Cedric Frolick had indicated in April that the Standing Committees had been prioritising the processing of the report on fiscal framework and revenue proposals, an advertisement was placed for public comments from June 3 ahead of the public hearing this Wednesday. The bill, in its current form, seeks to delete certain definitions in SARB Act and provide for the appointment of certain board of directors rectors by the Minister of Finance. "A current director of the bank or any member of the general public may nominate persons to serve as appointed directors of the bank in the manner as may be prescribed," reads the bill, adding that appointed board directors shall hold office for three years. The bill proposes that the State should be sole shareholder of shares in the SARB. 'The rights attached to the shares in the bank must be exercised by the Minister on behalf of the State." The SARB's shareholders were 650 when the bill was introduced in Parliament. The bill also provides that the Minister shall appoint two firms of public accounts to act as auditors of the SARB for every financial year.


Eyewitness News
2 hours ago
- Eyewitness News
Deputy minister Andrew Whitfield possibly axed for defying travel protocol
Tshidi Madia and Mbali Dhlamini 26 June 2025 | 13:00 Andrew Whitfield Cyril Ramaphosa FILE: Andrew Whitfield during his time as deputy minister of trade, industry and competition. Picture: @the_dtic/X JOHANNESBURG - President Cyril Ramaphosa's office has remained silent on the sudden removal of DA politician Andrew Whitfield from his role as one of the deputy ministers at Trade, Industry and Competition. Eyewitness News understands that Whitfield's dismissal may be linked to insubordination over a DA-led trip to Washington undertaken without the President's approval. Earlier, Ramaphosa's office confirmed the removal, saying this was not an indication of a wholesale cabinet reshuffle. History of similar dismissals Winnie Madikizela-Mandela was fired by South Africa's founding president, Nelson Mandela, in 1995, one of the reasons was that she took an unauthorised personal trip abroad. In 2007, President Thabo Mbeki, Mandela's successor, also dismissed then Deputy Health Minister Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge after she attended an HIV/Aids conference in Madrid without his permission. Fast forward to 2025, and the DA's Andrew Whitfield suffers the same fate. On his part, it's a trip to the US in March without President Cyril Ramaphosa's authorisation that did him in. Several government insiders have told Eyewitness News that even when travel is in one's private capacity, permission must be sought As the DA enters an emergency federal council meeting, some of its Cabinet members are fuming, accusing the president and his party of abuse. DA leader John Steenhuisen has lashed out at Ramaphosa for firing Whitfield. Steenhuisen was in Parliament on Thursday afternoon, where the Revenue Bill is under discussion. He used his time in parliament to address the developments of this afternoon, which saw a DA member axed from a top post. Steenhuisen says Whitfield was dismissed for a very flimsy offence.