
Fact-checking the inaccuracies, half-truths and duplicity in the latest presidential newsletter
In the newsletter, the President refers to a statement made by the US State Department last year, in the context of a climate summit, and quotes the glowing terms from it:
'Last year's country Investment Climate Summit published by the US State Department highlights South Africa being an attractive investment hub, citing key factors such as deep and well-regulated capital markets, strengths in manufacturing stable institutions, an independent judiciary and robust legal sector, respect for the rule of law, a mature financial and services sector, and experienced local partners.'
The President does not mention that these words are the work of the Biden administration, since replaced, in January 2025, by the Trump administration. Worse still, he leaves out the following portion of the State Department report for obvious reasons not unrelated to its gloomy and critical content:
'However, South Africa continues to suffer the effects from a 'lost decade' in which economic growth stagnated, hovering at zero percent pre-Covid, largely due to corruption and economic mismanagement, and a slow economic rebound post-Covid amid endemic logistics and energy crises. One of the biggest challenges to investment is persistent 'load shedding', South Africa's term for nationwide scheduled rolling blackouts.
'Other challenges include policy uncertainty, lack of regulatory oversight and enforcement, state-owned enterprise (SOE) drain on the fiscus, corruption, violent crime, labor unrest, lack of basic infrastructure and government service delivery, and lack of skilled labor.
'Moody's, Fitch, and S&P have affirmed South Africa's credit rating as stable but rate South Africa's sovereign debt as sub-investment grade. In February 2023, the Financial Action Task Force listed South Africa as a jurisdiction under increased monitoring, known as the 'grey list', to address deficiencies in its regime to counter money laundering and terrorist financing (AML/CFT). South Africa will remain under increased monitoring until it completes its action plan to strengthen its AML/CFT regime.'
SA remains on that grey list and will likely languish there until necessary reforms to the criminal justice administration, needed to capacitate it to counter money laundering and terrorist financing, are effected.
The Ramaphosa administration shows no urgency in this regard, despite the fact that while SA is on the grey list, borrowing (currently at an all-time high) will remain prohibitively expensive. SA services its debt at present at a cost of R1.2-billion a week, an amount the taxpayers can ill afford.
Rule of law
Ramaphosa suggests that his government shows fealty to the rule of law. He does not mention the recent trenchant criticism by Bonang Mohale, chancellor of the University of the Free State:
'The great problem for South Africa is rampant greed. [It] is essentially a problem for the once glorious African National Congress that has morphed into an organised crime syndicate, primarily because for a solid 30 years of our democracy, they held the absolute majority power in everything that matters.'
'Organised crime syndicates' by definition show no discernible regard for the rule of law. Fealty to the rule of law implies respect for property rights; indeed, that respect is built into the definition of the rule of law favoured by the World Justice Project. At the most basic level, it entails that:
' The rule of law ensures property rights by providing a framework of laws, institutions, and community commitment that protects those rights. It guarantees that everyone has the right to own property, both individually and collectively, and that no one can be arbitrarily deprived of their property. This framework also ensures that if property is taken, it is done in accordance with the law and with just compensation.'
The abomination that is the new Expropriation Act envisages expropriation with nil compensation. The Constitution envisages 'just and equitable compensation' upon expropriation in section 25 of the Bill of Rights.
The nil compensation does not have to be just and equitable on any reasonable interpretation of the new law. This renders it unconstitutional. It also exposes the government's lack of appreciation of the meaning of the rule of law.
The Constitution itself regards the rule of law as supreme. Any attempt to dilute the rule of law has to have a 75% majority vote in Parliament, not the simple majority that passed the Expropriation Act.
Independent judiciary
Ramaphosa claims that there is an independent judiciary in SA. Has he forgotten the evidence he gave before the Zondo Commission of Inquiry into State Capture? There he revealed that the Bench in SA is regarded by the ANC as a site of cadre deployment. There is no better way to capture a judiciary than to deploy loyal cadres to serve on it. That is the death knell of independence.
This ambiguous passage appears in the newsletter:
'President Trump agreed that the US should continue playing a key role in the G20, including attending the G20 Leaders' Summit in Johannesburg later this year, where South Africa will hand over the presidency of the G20 to the US.'
Does Ramaphosa mean that Donald Trump is coming to the wreckage of Johannesburg later this year, or merely that the US will continue playing its key role in the G20 by sending a representative to Johannesburg? The answer is anyone's guess. Time will tell.
There is more Orwellian doublespeak in this presidential observation:
'We were able to update US officials on the ongoing structural reform process underway to improve the ease of doing business and facilitate a favourable investment climate.'
Every cautious would-be investor is acutely aware of the high violent crime levels in SA and also regards the rampant corruption, about which Bonang Mohale waxes so eloquent, as reasons to avoid making new investments in SA.
Crime and corruption remain at unacceptably high levels and not enough is being done to address these barriers to new investment from which new jobs will flow.
As long ago as 2011 the Constitutional Court ordered that a single body outside of the control of the executive (which Ramaphosa now heads) should be established to deal with corruption. No such body has been set up 14 years later.
The binding nature of the court findings and the legal need to implement the criteria it set are ignored by a government that is content to allow State Capture, tenderpreneurism and the cosy type of comprador-capitalism that BEE laws and regulations have created (this despite recent polling that indicates that more than four in five of the SA population favour merit appointments over race quotas.)
There is simply no political will to implement the 2011 judgment properly. This attitude is not indicative of fealty to the rule of law, nor of any real desire to create an investor friendly climate in SA.
A great deal of new investment is necessary to attain secure peace, sustainable development on the embattled economic front and shared prosperity in which those genuinely previously disadvantaged enjoy the fruits of their currently hollow liberation.
Progress bedevilled
Before the formation of the Government of National Unity (GNU), the ANC and its tripartite alliance partners, the SACP and Cosatu, ruled the roost and created the BEE architecture that has so bedevilled progress in SA. The laws and policies in place have been trenchantly criticised by Professor William Gumede, but they are persisted in by the ANC element of the GNU.
By now it ought to be screamingly apparent to any sentient observer that the BEE system has not served the constitutional purpose for which it was intended.
The provisions of section 9 of the Bill of Rights contemplate redress via legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons or categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination. All that BEE has in fact achieved is the enrichment of ANC cadres and their friends in business.
Those genuinely disadvantaged continue to languish in poverty. This fact is illustrated by the increase in the Gini Index, which is now the highest in the world among the 130 countries that produce a Gini Index and considerably higher than it was in SA when democracy dawned.
The BEE system does not properly serve the purpose for which it was created. It should be scrapped in favour of the economic empowerment for the disadvantaged — the EED system proposed by the SA Institute of Race Relations.
Whether the GNU will be able to break the shackles on progress that is in place due to the ANC fealty to its National Democratic Revolution (NDR) remains to be seen. The NDR is deeply and darkly inconsistent with constitutional principles, but the abandonment of the NDR would not suit that 'organised crime syndicate' to which Mohale refers.
The private member's Bills introduced by the co-chair of the Justice Portfolio Committee, Glynnis Breytenbach, envisaging a new Chapter Nine Anti-Corruption Commission that will be set up in a constitutionally compliant way to deal with corruption, are currently undergoing processing in the parliamentary back office.
Before the GNU dawned, Breytenbach was the DA's shadow minister of justice. Before that, she was a senior prosecutor, and she knows the National Prosecuting Authority inside out. Her suggested reforms deserve accelerated parliamentary debate and consideration.
The DA and AfriForum have separately challenged the constitutionality of the Expropriation Act in litigation currently pending. New BEE regulations are similarly being challenged for want of constitutionality, also by the DA. There is furthermore a plethora of constitutional litigation around the National Health Insurance legislation.
If the government that Ramaphosa leads was true to the clear intentions of the Constitution and showed greater fealty to the rule of law, these litigious efforts would be unnecessary, the criticisms would be taken to heart, the State Department's reservations recorded above, but omitted from his latest newsletter, would be taken more seriously and would be acted upon rather than omitted from the newsletter. DM
Hashtags

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


Daily Maverick
3 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Lack of political chemistry between SA leaders spells big problems for the GNU
The spat over whether the DA is disobeying the President by refusing to join the National Dialogue is indicative of a major problem within SA's national coalition. There is no chemistry between the leaders of the DA and the ANC, which threatens to poison the entire arrangement. On Friday, President Cyril Ramaphosa said the DA's refusal to join the National Dialogue was the 'worst form of hypocrisy'. Others in the ANC have said that if DA leader John Steenhuisen refused to join the interministerial committee driving the process, it would be an act of defiance against the President. This shows that while the DA's announcement that it would not join the dialogue was initially viewed as a weak response to the sacking of the DA's deputy minister Andrew Whitfield, it has hit home with Ramaphosa and the ANC. It is more proof that, after the coalition has been in office for more than a year, personal relationships between the leaders of its two main parties have not improved. Both the ANC and the DA can point to incidents for which they can blame the other. The DA could say it started when Ramaphosa signed controversial Acts, including the Basic Education Laws Amendment Act and the Expropriation Act, into law. They can claim this was deliberately provocative, designed to weaken them. The ANC can argue that the DA's ministers have defied or contradicted policies adopted by previous governments, such as Minister of Communications and Digital Technologies Solly Malatsi's decision to withdraw the SABC Bill. While the ANC can argue that the DA should never have said it would vote against the Budget, the DA can respond that the ANC should have consulted with it on the two percentage point VAT increase beforehand. Within this are incidents that appear to be deliberately disrespectful. Basic Education Minister Siviwe Gwarube would have been expected to attend the signing ceremony of the Bela Bill. However, politically, this was impossible as she had promised her DA constituency that she would oppose the Bill. ANC supporters might well feel she was wrong not to attend the ceremony; DA supporters will believe Ramaphosa deliberately put her in this awkward position. To go any further down the rabbit hole of who is to blame for what will solve nothing. Lack of trust What is clear is that there is a complete lack of trust between the two parties — and, without trust, it may be impossible for them to agree on anything. The importance of a personal relationship can be underestimated in difficult political times. An authoritative account of South Africa's negotiations towards democracy during the 1990s focused on an incident that helped engender trust between the ANC's chief negotiator, Ramaphosa, and the apartheid government's negotiator, Roelf Meyer: when a fishhook got caught in Meyer's hand, he asked Ramaphosa to remove it. At the time, all of those involved in the negotiations had a huge incentive to engender trust. All sides claimed to want a democratic solution and to avoid violence. Also, most of those involved knew very little about each other. When the process started, many of them had never met. Even then, there were angry words between Nelson Mandela and FW de Klerk, and moments of great tension. The situation now is very different. It is not just that the politicians know one another; it's that they all have long histories of shouting and screaming at each other. The ANC was in power for so long by itself, and the DA in opposition for so many years, that it is easy for members of both parties to fall back on what they know. It can almost seem as if their leaders are most comfortable when fighting each other. Another factor is that there was virtually no preparation for the leaders before they had to work together. Before the election, when the DA was trying to form the Moonshot Pact — a group of parties that could, together, beat the ANC — leaders understood how much work had to be done beforehand. Workshops The founder of the Democracy Works Foundation, Professor William Gumede, ended up running workshops between the leaders of the parties involved in that pact, trying to engender trust between them. There was none of that in this national coalition government. Another factor is the sheer social distance between the leaders of the parties in the coalition. They have grown up in such different circumstances that it may be difficult for them to understand each other. This might seem strange when there is plenty of evidence that millions of South Africans from very different communities interact productively every hour of every day. But in our politics, the more a leader can attack other groups, the more they are rewarded. While the ANC and the DA are in SA's political centre, their leaders have very strong views on issues, which makes it harder for them to work together. And it should not be forgotten just how tough our society is, how raw the disputes are. When the PAC recently brokered a meeting between the ANC and Afrikaner groups (in another indication of how interesting and complex our society is), it described the discussions as having 'blood on the floor, blood on the wall'. This is because of how far apart these groups are, and how their leaders have to manage difficult dynamics. Of course, one hopes that our leaders can rise above all of this.


Daily Maverick
3 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
‘Progress' lands on the doorstep of rural communities as residents blast lithium mine
'Mining activity will certainly have an impact on an otherwise tranquil farming environment, but such impacts are a consequence of progress,' SA Lithium consultant Thys Blom remarked rather glibly last year, when several residents and landowners objected to the establishment of a new lithium mine near Umzumbe on the KwaZulu-Natal South Coast. 'Tranquillity' and 'progress' are both loaded, relative terms, shaped by the perceptions of the various parties who stand to win or lose from a particular situation. For Thys Blom, a Port Shepstone development planning consultant hired by the new SA Lithium group, the benefits of the new Highbury mine at Umzumbe are numerous and manifest, including a R2.4-billion capital investment into the local economy; the creation of hundreds of new jobs in an impoverished rural area; mining royalties for the fiscus; the upgrading of district road networks and the production of lithium-ion batteries as part of the global transition towards electric vehicles and renewable energy. SA Lithium director Ian Harebottle asserts that the company has already created more than 800 direct or indirect jobs for local residents (though Blom presented a significantly lower estimate in his official development motivation to the Ray Nkonyeni Municipality last year: stating that the project would lead to an estimated 100 new jobs in the first year, rising to just over 300 jobs by the 20th year of mining). Yet, whatever the numbers turn out to be, unemployment rates in the surrounding rural area are undoubtedly high, creating the ingredients for potential division and conflict as residents compete for jobs, haulage contracts and other opportunities: while also contemplating who really benefits and loses from living in the shadow of an open-cast mining pit and crushing plant for the next 25 years. Evacuations, blasting and dust For the residents of eChibini, Magog and Umsinsini, 'progress' is likely to include regular blasting noise and clouds of dust, while those living closest to the mine are also required to evacuate their homes periodically during blasting operations. (Satellite images show several homes less than 300m from the mine) There are also fears that scores of families may lose their current homes and land as mining expands further over the 1,200ha mining site. However, SA Lithium director Harebottle denies that any residents will lose land. According to community sources, directly affected families were previously supplied with fruit and fried chicken takeaway meals by mine management during such blast evacuations. Now they get an 'inconvenience allowance' for having to shelter periodically at a local crèche during these operations. Several residents contacted by Daily Maverick were reluctant to discuss their concerns on the record, citing concerns about increased tension and uncertainty in a rural community with a high rate of unemployment. A 42-year-old resident of eChibini (name withheld) said she and several neighbours renting homes in the area were living in a state of uncertainty. 'I have no idea what is going to happen because some people have gone and others are staying. I know of four families who are moving out, but there is no clear communication, at least with me. 'So, with all that is happening around us, I think that moving out is best, because we don't own this land. It has come to the point where some of us don't seem to have a choice. 'It's not like we want to leave our homes or the graves of our families behind – but no one is coming to help us. There may be minerals here that can be used, but we would also just like to be treated as human beings.' In the interim, she said, her family and several neighbours were required to evacuate their homes and move to a shelter point roughly once a week due to blasting. 'In the beginning, people stayed there for two to three hours at a time, but now that has reduced to about an hour.' Initially, evacuated residents were also supplied with KFC meals and other snacks, she said, but this had changed more recently, with affected families now receiving a R1,200 monthly payment. Harebottle reiterates his position that no one will lose land, stating: 'Regular formal interactions with all affected communities in the area of the project are ongoing and in full compliance with all legal requirements and all national guidelines. Claims to the contrary are outlandish and defamatory,' he said in response to questions from Daily Maverick. However, a copy of the company's social and labour plan has not been published and was not included in the voluminous bundle of public documents provided by SA Lithium during a municipal zoning application last year. Heavy truck traffic Aside from the impacts of blasting operations, noise, dust or rock-crushing, the influence of the mine also extends eastwards to the Fairview Mission area due to the projected increase in heavy truck traffic along a densely populated district road. According to a traffic impact assessment commissioned by SA Lithium consultants, an average of 222 trucks will travel between Fairview and Durban's export harbour daily once the mine is fully developed. That equates to roughly one truck every seven minutes. In a written objection sent to the Ray Nkonyeni Municipality last July, a resident summed up her concerns like this: 'We value our homes, we come back to them for peace and relaxation, which has been taken away from us. (At) 2am in the morning trucks drive over our heads while we are sleeping at night, shine their thousand lights in your window 7 days a week. 'In terms of the license, we must endure this for the next 20 years. The volume (of trucks) we see now is nothing compared to what is still to come. … Is this fair to us?' Gcwensa Attorneys wrote to the Department of Mineral Resources on 20 July 2023 to record that members of the Fairview Economic Development Committee objected to the mining and prospecting operations by SA Lithium/Afli Exploration, which they claimed had begun without consultation or consent. 'The continued operation of this mine presents a myriad of problems for the Fairview community in terms of safety, environmental and health issues of this community.' At two subsequent meetings of the Fairview Landowners Association in September 2023, residents also raised concerns about the safety of children walking to school, with so many heavy trucks on the road. In response, Harebottle said haulage trucks contracted to SA Lithium were restricted to a speed limit of 30km/h on this section of road and any exceedances should be reported. The landowners reiterated that they had neither been consulted nor given an opportunity to engage with SA Lithium before mining operations began, further emphasising that Fairview did not fall under the authority of the KwaMadlala traditional authority. Rezoning, public consultation issues On June 25 last year, another Fairview resident complained to the municipality that proposals to rezone farming land to mining had not been advertised properly. She became aware of the proposal by accident, noting that it had not been advertised at local community halls or tuck shops. Nor did it refer to the proximity of Fairview to the new mine. This gave her the impression that the municipality was 'not aware of the existence of Fairview Mission, or it was a deliberate attempt to completely disregard the residents'. A letter from a Fairview family on the same date raised similar concerns about the apparent failure to consult residents of this area about the impact of a new mine on their doorsteps. 'This leaves us as the community exposed and oblivious to the social, financial, environmental, as well as the health impact this mining activity will have on us and our children… This mining activity just keeps edging closer and closer to the occupied land, where there are schools, homes and graveyards, which has resulted in several people being put in a position where they have to leave their homes and where some are now living in houses that have structural … damage due to blasting that is taking place on their back doors.' Linda Cele, a Durban electrical engineer who grew up near Fairview Mission and still owns a family farm close to the Highbury mine, told Daily Maverick that residents found it difficult to engage in public participation meetings or to access information they needed to protect their interests. Noting that several residents in the area grew sugar cane and other crops, along with rearing livestock, Cele said one of his main objectives was to ensure that mining did not lead to long-term environmental pollution or degradation of the land and water around Fairview. 'Sometimes it feels like we are totally on our own. At the end of the day, we don't want to be left with a wasteland when the mining ends.' Closer to the coastline, there are concerns about impacts on the Umzumbe River estuary and local beaches due to water extraction and potential pollution from the mine. Paddy Norman, a resident of Sea Park and representative of the Wildlife and Environment Society of South Africa, believes the society's objection to the municipal rezoning of the Highbury land was disregarded entirely. 'Woefully inadequate' boxes ticked 'As far as I can see, they (SA Lithium/Afli) ticked all the official boxes, but the boxes were woefully inadequate,' argues Norman, a retired geologist and mining engineer. Norman wrote to the municipality, suggesting that SA Lithium had adopted a 'foot in the door' approach, with the intention of subsequently extending the affected area with greatly increased negative impacts on the local communities. Because the rezoning application had been submitted after mining operations began on a large scale, the mine appeared to be operating illegally, he alleged in a submission last year. Geremy Cliff, chair of the Umzumbe Beach Ratepayers Association, said a public meeting on July 5 last year was the first opportunity for many interested and affected parties to discuss the operation, 'long after SA Lithium was granted a licence to mine'. 'This is a serious flaw in the public consultation process. At the meeting, and in subsequent email correspondence, the neighbouring Fairview community clearly has some major issues to deal with, in the form of the noise and dust disturbance by the heavy vehicles transporting the lithium extract, seemingly at all hours of the day (not just Monday to Friday 08.00-17.00), as well as the impact of the detonations on their homes. 'Ian Harebottle from SA Lithium stated that there had been extensive consultation with the community but this was strongly disputed by those from the community present at the meeting. This issue cannot be swept aside, as a mere technicality, especially given the fact that SA Lithium does not have a website to share information with the public on a regular basis.' River water pollution and extraction fears His association was also concerned about the potential impact on the Umzumbe River and estuary from pollution or the extraction of river water for mining operations. According to Cliff, Harebottle told the meeting that Ugu municipality water was too expensive to be used by the mine and that borehole volumes were limited, so most of the water would come from the river. 'This may be acceptable when there is lots of rain, but in times of drought I fear the mine will not reduce its uptake and the ecological viability of the estuary will suffer greatly.' Cliff also raised concern about apparent discrepancies between the mine water use figures supplied by Harebottle at the public meeting (initially 5m3 daily, rising to 15m3 daily) and the volumes provided in the company's water use licence application (around 1,000m3 per day). Traffic impact reaction In response to the concerns of objectors, the Ray Nkonyeni Municipality has stated that a traffic impact study had recommended that the mining company should build new 'internal service roads' to accommodate additional heavy vehicle traffic and that it should also spray roads with water to reduce dust levels. The municipality's law enforcement superintendent further stated that 'everything is under control' and there was no objection to the mine from a traffic perspective. Regarding criticism of the public consultation process, the municipality said: 'Due to the overwhelming amount of objections received during public participation, a public hearing was held on 5 July 2024 with all the interested parties where an engagement with (Harebottle) was conducted.' It further said that: 'The application was duly advertised (South Coast Herald on 24 May 2024) and copies of notices forwarded to adjacent landowners, and persons who may in the opinion of the Municipality have an interest in the application, as prescribed by the Ray Nkonyeni Municipal Planning and Land Use Management Bylaw.' Regarding concerns about water use and potential pollution, the municipality said it had been assured by the mining company that 'No harmful chemicals will be used, no slimes dams will be created and no potable water will be required, with maximum reticulation and minimal water losses.' *** SA Lithium responds SA Lithium spokesperson Ian Harebottle has rejected suggestions that the company took any 'short cuts' or acted illegally in developing the mine. 'All key departments were kept fully updated and informed throughout the extremely long and arduous (approval) process.' Asked to explain why the company began to develop the mine before a water use licence application (Wula) and the municipal rezoning were approved, he said: 'While some duplicity (sic) exists between government departments – in this instance Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources, the Department of Agriculture, Land Reform and Rural Development and local municipalities) who were engaged simultaneously, absolutely no short cuts were taken.' (However, during the rezoning application, Plankonsult's Thys Blom acknowledged that mine development began before the rezoning approval, stating that: 'The applicant (SA Lithium) was under the impression that obtaining environmental authorisation and issuing of a mining licence provided sufficient authorisation for commencement of the mining operation. As soon as the applicant became aware that authorisation for rezoning of the land was also required, it appointed Plankonsult to prepare and lodge the appropriate application.' Blom further argued that water use licence application approval was not required for a rezoning application.) Asked to confirm the date on which the water licence was issued, Harebottle said: 'A Wula for the project was accepted in 2024 and an approved Water Use Licence was subsequently granted, remains valid and is fully complied with.' Asked to confirm the date when mining commenced at Highbury, Harebottle said: 'Project development under the terms of the prospecting right commenced mid-2023. Development completion and commencement of operations is targeted for end 2025.' Asked how many tons of lithium ore had been extracted at Highbury so far, Harebottle did not provide any figures, stating: 'Project development has allowed low grade spodumene ore to be extracted. A processing plant is still under construction.' On how neighbouring communities might benefit from lithium mining at Highbury, he said: 'Unemployment in the region of the project was estimated at 50%. The project has created more than 800 direct and indirect jobs. There are no known job losses in any sectors. Local businesses, including; transport, logistics, civil engineering, building, catering, hospitality and tourist services report increased activity. Preference is given to local contractors for all project services. Direct and indirect training and employment of community members is always prioritised.' Asked whether some residents had been advised that they had to move out, he said: 'Under no circumstances have any households been '… notified this week that they will shortly be required to move out of their homes …' and no community land or resources has been or will be 'lost'.' On why some residents had to vacate their homes during blasting, he said 'Standard practice and national guidelines require evacuation of certain neighboring communities during blasting for safety purposes. Evacuations are occasional and usually last for no more than one hour. Timing is usually decided in consultation with our neighbours who then receive proper notifications in advance of blasting, and they are appropriately compensated for any inconvenience. Affected neighbours have always been both supportive and cooperative. 'The project team maintains excellent relations with all adjoining communities and their elected leaders. Formal and informal interactions across all spectrums of the community are attended regularly.' Asked whether SA Lithium had a financial relationship with the Atlas Lithium Corporation in the United States, he said: 'There is no relationship.' On Cliff's concerns around the volumes of water required by the mine, Blom told the Ray Nkonyeni municipality that the volumes applied for in the water use licence application referred to maximum volumes, rather the actual volume likely to be used. He said SA Lithium hoped to minimise river water abstraction and the company was now 'reasonably confident that its targeted volumes provided during the meeting will be correct'. Commenting on the impacts of blasting on neighbouring residents, Blom said the company was required by national guidelines to take responsibility for any potential damage to homes within a 500m blast radius. Two local contractors had been employed to repair any damage within this zone. Regarding potential pollution from the mine, Blom said that no harmful chemicals were used in the lithium separation process at Highbury. DM


eNCA
5 hours ago
- eNCA
Durban business rises after 40m loss
DURBAN - It's been four years since KwaZulu-Natal was set alight while lives and livelihoods were snatched away during the July 2021 riots. In July 2021, violent protesters set fire to the country's economy. R50-billion worth of goods went up in flames, thousands of jobs disintegrated and over 350 people were killed. Four years later, the scars – on the economy, the landscape and the hearts of the victim's loved ones – are healing. Although slowly, it's a testament to the resilience of KwaZulu-Natal citizens and a 2019 BMW M4 Competition – like a Phoenix that rose from the ashes - stands proud as a shiny symbol of hope. Taren Ramsaroop, the owner of Deutsche Auto, tells us why.