Latest news with #Nedlac
Eyewitness News
15-07-2025
- Business
- Eyewitness News
What is Nedlac's role in the National Dialogue?
The National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) is the vehicle by which Government, labour, business and community organisations seek to cooperate, through problem-solving and negotiation, on economic, labour and development issues and related challenges facing the country. The National Dialogue will bring together government, political parties, civil society, business, labour, traditional leaders, women, youth and community voices to find common ground and new solutions for our country. So what is Nedlac's role in government's National Dialogue? Speaking to Stephen Grootes on The Money Show, Makhukhu Mampuru, Nedlac's executive director says Nedlac will play a guiding role in in ensuring the the debates and conversations about South Africa can happen in a constructive manner.
IOL News
01-07-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
Labour Party declares war on Ramaphosa's National Dialogue
THE Labour Party of South Africa has launched a blistering legal and political offensive against President Cyril Ramaphosa's controversial National Dialogue, branding it an unconstitutional, fiscally reckless, and elitist manoeuvre designed to sideline Parliament and the working class. Image: Ron AI THE Labour Party of South Africa has launched a blistering legal and political offensive against President Cyril Ramaphosa's controversial National Dialogue, branding it an unconstitutional, fiscally reckless, and elitist manoeuvre designed to sideline Parliament and the working class. The Party's urgent High Court application, filed on June 18, seeks to interdict the process, citing its estimated R700 million to R800m cost as 'unjustifiable' amid South Africa's deepening crises. Announced by Ramaphosa on June 10, the National Dialogue proposes a two-phase convention — first in August to 'set the agenda', followed by a 2026 summit — to address national challenges. But the Labour Party argues it is a redundant, unlawful parallel to Parliament and institutions such as the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac). 'South Africa doesn't need another elite summit behind closed doors,' said acting Secretary-General Lindi Mkhumbane. 'We already have Parliament, Nedlac, and civil society platforms. What we don't have is political will from the ruling elite to act on the people's demands.' The court papers demand:- A declaratory order that the Dialogue is unconstitutional and irrational.- An interdict blocking public funds for the process, including payments to the appointed 'Eminent Persons Group'.- A review of all executive decisions initiating the Dialogue. The case has escalated into a showdown between the Labour Party and a coalition of high-profile civil society groups aligned with the state. On June 30 the Desmond & Leah Tutu Legacy Foundation, the Strategic Dialogue Group, and the Thabo Mbeki, Steve Biko, and Albert Luthuli Foundations filed to intervene, defending the Dialogue. 'These are not bystanders. These are political actors with deep ties to the post-apartheid ruling class,' fumed interim Labour Party President Joseph Mathunjwa. 'Their role isn't to unite the nation, it's to preserve an elite consensus forged behind closed doors.' The Foundations submitted answering affidavits before being granted leave to intervene, a move Mathunjwa described as 'arrogance, plain and simple'. He accused them of betraying their legacies: 'The same communities (these leaders) stood for are ravaged by gender-based violence (GBV), unemployment, and poverty. Now these elites want a 'dialogue' instead of action.' The Labour Party claims that the dialogue is a smokescreen for IMF-driven austerity, including Eskom's privatisation and neoliberal reforms. 'This is a rubber stamp for IMF instructions, nothing more,' Mathunjwa said. 'If Parliament is functional, why create a new platform? This isn't inclusion, it's circumvention.' The state's late filing of answering papers — missed deadlines and procedural delays — has further fueled suspicions. 'They missed the deadline, and now they're bringing in reinforcements to stall,' Mathunjwa said. The case, initially set for July 1, was postponed to July 4. At its core, the Labour Party's challenge questions whether South Africa's democracy can withstand executive overreach and elite capture. 'The President cannot wake up and decide to allocate R800m without parliamentary scrutiny,' Mkhumbane argued. 'This is executive overreach masquerading as participation.' With the hearing imminent, the Labour Party has called for public support, urging South Africans to reject what it described as a 'PR stunt' while the country burns. 'Rape, violence, and poverty don't need a dialogue, they need action,' Mathunjwa said. 'We're ready to meet them in court.'
Mail & Guardian
04-06-2025
- Business
- Mail & Guardian
Profits before people: How the liquor industry undermines reforms
Alcohol causes many social problems, requiring the revival of the Liquor Amendment Bill. The liquor industry's resistance to reforms and public health measures aimed at curbing South Africa's high alcohol consumption reveals a deep divide between corporate interests and the public good. A new study published in Globalisation and Health sheds fresh light on how the industry flexed its financial and political muscle at the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) to protect its profits with little regard for the devastating effect of alcohol on society. First released for public comment in 2016, the Liquor Amendment Bill proposed several changes: raising the legal drinking age from 18 to 21, comprehensive restrictions on alcohol advertising, sponsorships and promotions, as well as limiting sales within 500 metres of schools and places of worship. Researchers analysing Nedlac's meeting records on the Bill found that the industry exercised 'regulatory capture' by flooding committees with representatives, punting self-regulation over public policy interventions and using financial leverage to keep the Bill from reaching parliament. Community representation at these meetings was woefully low or absent compared with that of business, government and labour. As part of these stalling tactics, industry giants such as Heineken and AB InBev commissioned two socio-economic impact studies of the Bill. One of these assessments discredited the conclusions of the government-initiated study that showed clear public health benefits from tighter regulation. While Nedlac concluded discussions on the Bill some years ago, it still hasn't reached parliament, and there is no indication by the department of trade, industry and competition of when this will happen. These revelations about the alcohol industry's strong objections to some of the proposed changes in the bill are sobering. South Africa has among the highest rates of alcohol consumption in the world. A 2019 Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) study, based on a sample of 3500 adolescents, found that nearly 70% of young people between the ages of 11 and 18 had already consumed alcohol. Most had tasted their first drink at the ages of 13 and 14. The Soul City Institute's 2017 study found that school-aged youths were bombarded with alcohol advertising from billboards and TV. Outlet density is also a major concern. In the same study, Atteridgeville, home to 60,000 according to the 2011 census, had no less than 147 taverns. Evidence suggests a direct link: the more alcohol outlets in an area, the greater the risk of early initiation to alcohol. This is especially true for poor communities with limited social infrastructure to keep young people engaged and connected. Sobering as they are, the industry's actions are hardly surprising. These tactics are part of the industry's playbook globally. According to a report called From Sports to Screens – Exposing Big Alcohol's Predatory Practices in 2024, the industry employs strategies such as targeted adverts for people seeking online help with alcohol dependence; marketing 0% alcohol drinks to gain a foothold in spaces where alcohol consumption is not the norm; sponsoring major sporting events; and courting politicians to enact laws in the industry's interests. Despite the World Health Organisation's (WHO) efforts to promote evidence-based policies to reduce alcohol harms, the industry often disregards its recommendations. A striking example is the growing trend of alcohol sold in larger containers, like the one-litre beer, despite the WHO's explicit warnings against this. These predatory practices are not new. In our country, alcohol has long been entangled with racist oppression and economic dispossession. Black women who flocked to the cities searching for independent incomes after mining and manufacturing uprooted men from all over Southern Africa established independent livelihoods selling skokiaan or utywala . These activities flourished under the watchful eye of a state that criminalised black people for consuming the 'white man's liquor'. But this independence was short-lived. The state soon clamped down, creating a municipal monopoly on the sale of sorghum beer. Municipal beer halls — perched conveniently along major train stations — became symbols of control and exploitation. It was no accident that the municipal beer halls became targets of the wrath of the 1976 youth. The wine industry, too, carries this bitter legacy. The notorious dop system — a labour regime that compensated workers with cheap wine — directly contributed to alcoholism in farming communities across the Western and Northern Capes. This imbrication of alcohol and racial domination is also a global story. A recent book by political scientist Mark Lawrence Schrad, Smashing the Liquor Machine: A Global History of Prohibitio n, contests the idea that the prohibition movements of 19th and 20th century America were exclusive domains of white supremacists. At the forefront of these movements, he argues, were those who bore the brunt of ordinary people's subservience to a lethal substance — women, native Americans and black people. Far from being moral crusades against sin, these movements emerged as a response to predatory capitalism. Yet these revelations of regulatory capture barely caused a public storm. Why? One possibility is that there is political fatigue around the issue. The Young Communist League, which earned the ire of liquor traders in the 2000s by calling for the closure of shebeens near schools, has long abandoned the issue. The ANC Youth League no longer campaigns against glamourising alcohol through deceptive adverts. And although the Economic Freedom Fighters' early legislative efforts included a private member's Bill to ban alcohol advertising, some of its provincial structures are now cosying up to the liquor industry. The second possibility is that there is no cohesion in government about what needs to be done to address alcohol harms, with fierce contestation over concerns about jobs and trade versus public health and broader social impacts. The third could be the industry's success in framing excessive alcohol consumption as a personal issue, solved by 'responsible drinking', rather than a clash between public good and global corporate power. Even so, encouraging efforts are taking shape to challenge the status quo. Among those pushing back against the power of the predatory industry is the jazz collective iPhupho L'Ka Biko, whose Amanzi Sessions create space to challenge ritualised alcohol consumption. Sonke Gender Justice's work highlights the link between alcohol and domestic violence, while DG Murray Trust's 'rethink your drink' campaign continues to call for a shift in national policy. To succeed in reining in the alcohol industry, membership-based organisations with a nationwide presence, such as trade unions and political parties, must step up to loosen the industry's grip on policy. A good step forward would be to pressure the government to revive the Liquor Amendment Bill. Phindile Kunene is an activist, political educator and head of democracy and political culture at the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. She writes in her personal capacity.
TimesLIVE
29-05-2025
- Health
- TimesLIVE
Tobacco control bill: a weapon against smokers
A responsible government creates safe spaces for smokers, spaces that do not affect non-smokers, but it cannot legislate them out of existence. When Nedlac made a presentation on the Tobacco Products and Electronic Delivery Systems Control Bill to parliament's health portfolio committee last week, scientific input was notably absent. There was no panel, no robust exchange of evidence from both sides, no effort to seek the truth. Just the same flawed logic repeated: harm is harm. The greatest harm from tobacco comes from combustion. We've always known that. The health risks are not simply from tobacco, but from how it's consumed. Patterns of use matter; take cigars, for example. Their impact is different and historically even tax policy reflected that distinction. Today's conversation about tobacco regulation is being driven by a dangerous, unscientific mantra: harm is harm. This phrase is not grounded in science. I will not support a document built on hatred for smokers. Yes, hatred. That's what this feels like. A continuation of the same oppressive mentality, now executed by a black government, to isolate and vilify people who smoke. It treats them as though they are incapable of making informed choices, as if they must be saved from themselves by a nanny state. We are being fed misinformation. Whether it is deliberate or not, it remains misinformation.
The Star
21-05-2025
- Business
- The Star
BUDGET: SA Canegrowers welcomes no increase in sugar tax
SA Canegrowers on Wendesday said that it welcomes the decision by Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana not to enact any further increases in the Health Promotion Levy (or sugar tax) in his Budget 3.0. "Introduced in 2018, the sugar tax cost 16 000 jobs and R2 billion in revenue in the first year of implementation alone, according to independent research by Nedlac. Any increase would risk the livelihoods of growers and increase unemployment in many parts KwaZulu Natal and Mpumalanga, where there are few other job opportunities," SA Canegrowers said. " The sugar tax has been nothing but destructive for South Africa. While the Nedlac study demonstrated concrete proof of job losses, no evidence has been provided to show the tax has reduced obesity or improved the health of South Africans in any way," it further stated. The association said it believes that Treasury should scrap the tax, to help ensure that government drives job creation and economic growth, as per its commitments outlined in the Sugarcane Value Chain Master Plan 2030. "This social compact between industry and government to revitalise the industry also has the potential to create new markets for sugarcane growers and kickstart new industrialisation projects in Mpumalanga and KwaZulu-Natal," Canegrowers said in a statement. "Agricultural jobs are critically important to the stability of South Africa and to making sure that we reduce rural poverty and hunger. SA Canegrowers will continue to strive for an end to this job-killing tax, calling on the government to prioritise desperately needed economic growth and jobs instead," it further said.
