Latest news with #GATS
IOL News
a day ago
- Business
- IOL News
Will South Africa's 2025 Employment Equity targets disrupt international trade?
Minister of Employment and Labour, Nomakhosazana Meth. Image: GCIS South Africa's newly gazetted sectoral employment equity targets could place the country in breach of several international trade agreements – including the World Trade Organization's General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), as well as regional protocols under the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA). This is according to Clive Vinti, Head of Research at XA Global Trade Advisors, who says the targets – set to come into effect from September 1 – appear to impose discriminatory limitations on who can be employed in specific sectors, without taking account of the realities of those sectors or the international obligations South Africa has signed up to. The potential trade implications formed part of the legal challenge launched by the National Employers' Association of South Africa (NEASA) and Sakeliga NPC against the Minister of Employment and Labour. The challenge, announced on July 9, was aimed at halting the implementation of the '2025 Targets' and the underlying regulations. Vinti argued that numerical quotas based on national race and gender demographics, if enforced without sector-specific capacity considerations, risk breaching international agreements that explicitly prohibit employment caps in service sectors. Under GATS, for example, member states are barred from placing quantitative limits on the number of people that can be employed in any given service sector. The same provisions are mirrored in AfCFTA and Southern African Development Community protocols, where the focus is on promoting access and non-discrimination in trade in services. In South Africa's case, these equity targets apply to both local and foreign-owned firms operating in the domestic economy. If implemented without regard for the availability of suitably qualified individuals in designated groups, they could act as a barrier to market access, especially for foreign service providers and investors, potentially triggering trade disputes or retaliatory measures. At the heart of the court application filed by NEASA and Sakeliga is the argument that the 2025 targets, which flow from the insertion of section 15A into the Employment Equity Act (EEA), were adopted in breach of procedural and constitutional requirements. The amendment, which came into effect on 1 January 2025, grants the Minister of Employment and Labour, Nomakhosazana Meth, the power to set sector-specific numerical employment targets in order to ensure equitable representation at all occupational levels. But the law also requires that such targets be preceded by a public consultation process and that affected sectors be properly identified and engaged. 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 According to the applicants, this did not occur. They allege that instead of the minimum 30-day comment period stipulated in the Act, they were given just over a week to respond. Furthermore, while draft targets had been published for public input in 2023 and 2024, this step was skipped entirely for the 2025 targets. NEASA and Sakeliga also argued that the consultation process was neither meaningful nor inclusive. Some sessions were limited to 1 000 virtual attendees and held with little to no advance notice. Employers were allegedly only given access to the proposed targets during or shortly before these meetings. Compounding the procedural issues, the applicants say the Minister used a 'one-size-fits-all' approach in determining the targets – applying blanket increases of 6% to 9% across occupational levels, without regard for each sector's structure, skills availability, growth trajectory, or economic context. This, they argue, rendered the targets arbitrary, irrational and potentially unachievable. The challenge also raised concerns around the impact on women. While women are themselves a designated group under the EEA, the structure of the targets could, paradoxically, disadvantage them by failing to account for intra-group disparities. Crucially, the plaintiffs said that no socio-economic impact assessment had been conducted before gazetting the targets. In their view, this omission made the regulations irrational and placed the policy in conflict with section 9 of the Constitution, which deals with the right to equality and non-discrimination. Beyond constitutional and procedural issues, the applicants highlighted the direct risk to businesses. Companies that fail to meet the new equity targets face penalties of up to R1.5 million or 2% of annual turnover on first offence. Section 53 of the EEA, which is not yet in force, could eventually see non-compliant firms excluded from government procurement processes entirely, with existing state contracts cancelled. 'Since the government is the largest procurer of goods and services in the market, being blocked from trading with it could be fatal to a business,' said Vinti. The equity targets could also affect access to key trade instruments. Duty rebate, increase and reduction applications, often used to support or protect domestic industries, require compliance with labour legislation. Non-compliance may disqualify firms from benefiting from these instruments, weakening their competitiveness both locally and abroad. According to Vinti, these developments have the potential to upend South Africa's trade credibility. The matter is now before the courts, with NEASA and Sakeliga seeking an urgent interim interdict to halt the targets' implementation while the High Court considers the lawfulness and constitutionality of the regulations. 'The ball is now in the court of the Minister,' said Vinti. IOL
Yahoo
14-07-2025
- Automotive
- Yahoo
The Craic with Petesy Carroll Friday 20250718
Seen this car around Ottawa? It's not Google Street View. It's the GATSmobile The City of Ottawa has a new tool to measure and map out the city's roadways, intended to make city planning and design easier. CBC's Robyn Miller rides along with the city's Geospatial Analytics, Technology and Solutions (GATS) branch.
CBC
14-07-2025
- Automotive
- CBC
Seen this car around Ottawa? It's not Google Street View. It's the GATSmobile
The City of Ottawa has a new tool to measure and map out the city's roadways, intended to make city planning and design easier. CBC's Robyn Miller rides along with the city's Geospatial Analytics, Technology and Solutions (GATS) branch.
New Straits Times
12-06-2025
- New Straits Times
Vape ban: Concerns are real but proposed solutions flawed
ACROSS Malaysia, we're witnessing a growing wave of state-led attempts to ban vape products with Perlis, Terengganu and Kedah announcing prohibitions, with Penang, Selangor and Negri Sembilan reportedly considering the same. Publicly, leaders and MPs are now echoing calls for a nationwide ban, citing concerns over vape products laced with drugs and growing concern over youth vaping. Let us be clear: these concerns are real, but the proposed solutions are dangerously flawed. The reason we are seeing issues like underage use and contaminated products is not because of the legal vape industry. It is because irresponsible, illegal retailers and criminal syndicates continue to operate without fear of consequences. These bad actors have no regard for regulations, age restrictions or product safety. They are the ones supplying unregistered products, selling to minors and introducing dangerous substances into the supply chain. Banning vape will not stop these criminals. It will only penalise legitimate, regulated businesses, while empowering the black market. The leaders now calling for a ban are reacting to the harm caused by illegal and unregulated players. But instead of focusing efforts on enforcement to eliminate these elements, they propose a blanket ban that would wipe out responsible retailers, many of whom are registered and comply with all current regulations. If we take the easy way out and ban vape outright, we risk creating an entirely unregulated underground market. Everything will be black market. No age checks, no quality control, no accountability. This is the worst possible outcome for public health. We must remember that the Control of Smoking Products for Public Health Act 2024 (Act 852), has now been introduced. This is the very tool meant to bring vape into a regulated space, to ensure product safety, protect youth, and allow only legal players to operate. Why are we not concentrating our energy on implementing this law effectively, with robust enforcement to weed out the bad actors? According to Global Adult Tobacco Survey (GATS) Malaysia 2023 survey by the Institute for Public Health under the Ministry of Health, the majority of vape users are aged 15 to 24 years. These numbers did not emerge under a regulated environment. They grew due the absence of a clear regulatory framework. This proves that prohibition does not work. What works is regulations, oversight and the political will to enforce the law. Malaysia Retail Electronic Cigarette Association fully supports regulations. We support clear rules that keep products out of the hands of minors and ensure safety for adult consumers. But we cannot support a system where the actions of criminal syndicates are used to justify blanket bans that harm legitimate businesses. With Act 852 already in place, the focus must be on moving forward: implementing it with urgency, investing in enforcement and strengthening the regulatory framework so that only responsible, compliant players remain in the market. Banning regulated products is not a solution, it is an abdication of responsibility that hands the market over to criminals. If we want to protect public health and consumer safety, we must stay the course, enforce the law decisively, and commit to building a legal, transparent vape industry that operates within clear and accountable boundaries.
Mint
11-06-2025
- Business
- Mint
Manoj Pant: Let's prepare well for negotiations on trade in services
Here are some facts. Today, the share of services in global trade stands at about 25%. More importantly, it is the only category of trade that has expanded at a rapid pace since the financial crisis year of 2008. In recent years, the share of goods in trade has fallen by about 5 percentage points and there has been a corresponding increase in the case of services. This pattern is mirrored in India's case. According to the Economic Survey 2024-25, the share of services in terms of export gross value added (GVA) has increased from around 51% in 2014-15 to around 55% now. Further, it is growth in services trade which has kept India's current account deficit (CAD) at a manageable 2% of GDP. It was the General Agreement of Tariffs and Trade (GATT) that led to a decline in global tariffs. Till recently, except some countries in South Asia, import tariffs were in single digits (before Donald Trump took office in the US). And today, international arguments increasingly revolve around non-tariff barriers (NTBs). Also Read: Services led exports are a mixed blessing for the Indian economy It was a stalemate over NTBs at the World Trade Organization (WTO) that led many countries to take recourse to regional trading arrangements to expand their trade over the last two decades. This has the advantage of going beyond the WTO in new areas. One of these is trade in services. The General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS) was based on a 'positive list' approach, where countries only need to make offers when they want to. But this has meant very little forward movement here along the lines of commodity trade negotiations under GATT. Another critical hold-back is the lack of reliable data. Unlike commodities, services have no border restrictions like tariffs, but are constrained by internal regulation that can be complex. For example, trade in infotech services is hampered not only by visa systems (as in the US), but also by other regulatory constraints like data adequacy rules, FDI norms and totalization agreements (to avoid double taxation via social security payments). Nor are these regulatory constraints the same across countries. Also Read: Ajit Ranade: India must diversify its exports of manufactured goods Under the WTO, there was an attempt to create a template for international comparison by clubbing services trade under four heads—or so-called 'modes.' Unfortunately, the 'positive list' approach has meant that GATS has been a non-starter. To cut a long story short, as services trade has increased globally by leaps and bounds, countries are increasingly grappling with the issue of codifying trade in services. As the above discussion indicates, the process will have to begin by recognizing the comparability of services across countries. For example, in educational services, we would need mutual recognition agreements (MRAs) to define comparability of degrees. This is easier said than done. In India, education is on the concurrent list for the Centre and states to legislate on, and regional regulations would also have to be considered. An effort to achieve a degree of international comparability has started with the WTO's classification of services into 12 main sectors and 160 sub-sectors. This was mainly done to allow member countries to categorize their services into four 'modes' under the GATS. However, since these multilateral negotiations have ground to a halt, it is now for countries to take this forward under various free trade agreements (FTAs). The difficulty lies in establishing a single measure (like tariffs in the case of commodities) that could establish restrictiveness of services across countries after MRAs are signed. Also Read: Special trade ties with America aren't India's only export game This is particularly important for India, whose global strength seems to lie in trade in services. Yet, due to all the difficulties listed above for codifying trade in services, India's experience has been unsatisfactory. In 2005, such an attempt was made in the India-Singapore Comprehensive Economic Cooperation Agreement, but there was little progress as the issue of MRAs moved nowhere either in banking or in education. Similarly, in the case of India's trade relations with Asean, it was agreed in 2005 that an agreement on trade in services would follow the deal struck on goods, but so far no discussions have been held with Asean countries on this. Also Read: Will the WTO get crushed under an avalanche of bilateral trade deals? As mentioned earlier, the issue is how to generate a single number to define restrictiveness in services that can form a benchmark for further negotiations on trade in services. There have some attempts by both the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development and World Bank to create a Services Trade Restrictiveness Index (STRI), but as shown in 'Quantification of Services Trade Restrictions: Some New Results' (Pant and Sugandha, March 2022) published in the Economic and Political Weekly, these indices have serious statistical shortfalls that can lead to a complete reversal of sectoral rankings by trade restrictiveness. Yet, this STRI approach seems to offer a way forward for India to hold talks on market access for services. It could feature in talks underway with the US and EU. The STRI can help begin negotiations on broad sectoral lines before proceeding to granular talks on specific regulatory issues. So far, India has focused on Mode 4 (the movement of natural persons) to enhance trade in services. This effort, however, has largely been a failure. As I have argued before, such a narrow approach seems like too weak an attempt at exploiting India's comparative advantage in services. We need a better researched approach. The author is visiting professor, Shiv Nadar University.
