Latest news with #FaiezJacobs
IOL News
11 hours ago
- Politics
- IOL News
From Dialogue to Reckoning: What South Africa Needs Now
Thirty years into South Africa's democracy, we must move beyond superficial dialogue to a reckoning that addresses deep-rooted inequalities and demands real change, writes Faiez Jacobs. Image: IOL / Ron AI 'The People Shall Govern.' Not as metaphor, not as sentiment. As a promise. And a demand. Thirty years into our democracy, South Africa does not need another listening tour, another facilitated workshop, or another high-level roundtable with branded lanyards. We need something deeper. Something braver. Something long overdue. We need a reckoning. The recent announcement by President Ramaphosa that South Africa will convene a National Dialogue, coordinated through NEDLAC and guided by an 'Eminent Persons Group', has stirred predictable fanfare and deep scepticism. It is not the idea of dialogue that alarms us. It is the fact that, for too long, dialogue has been deployed in South Africa not to deliver justice, but to delay it. In place of delivery, we have convened. In place of structural change, we have moderated. In place of urgency, we have performed unity. We have been here before. And we cannot afford to be here again. A country built on dialogue but rarely on equal terms From Kliptown in 1955 to CODESA in 1991, South Africa's path to democracy was shaped by dialogue. But these moments were not equal meetings of minds they were unequal negotiations between a people in struggle and a regime in retreat. We must never forget that our political transition was never designed to dismantle all systems of power. It was a ceasefire, not a complete transformation. The elite pact that underpinned our 1994 breakthrough brought democratic rights but postponed economic redress. Today, those delays have caught up with us. We are the world's most unequal society. Millions of black South Africans still live under conditions that echo the structural geography of apartheid. Youth unemployment hovers above 60%. Public services are failing. State capture hollowed our institutions. Violence, corruption, and despair creep into the marrow of daily life. And in this fragile, fractured context, we are now asked again to talk. But before we do, we must ask: Who is asking for this dialogue? Why now? What for? 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 Dialogue, or Deflection? Let us be honest. Much of the dialogue proposed today risks becoming elite-driven spectaclea performance of inclusivity without power-sharing. A repackaging of reconciliation in times of political turbulence. A soft cushion against the hard edges of growing public rage. This new National Dialogue comes with high-profile names, big halls, logos and language like 'shared vision' and 'renewed compact.' But language is not justice. Logos do not build clinics. And dialogue without delivery breaks trust. The danger is not in talking. The danger is in pretending that talk is enough. Our Constitution already provides for participatory democracy. Parliament's committees, ward committees, SGB's, CPF's, RDP forums, municipal IDPs, Chapter 9 institutions all of these exist to facilitate public voice and state responsiveness. If we are serious about rebuilding national consensus, why not invest in strengthening those platforms rather than creating new ones? The answer is clear: we don't have a participation problem we have a delivery problem. We don't lack dialogue. We lack action. The Real Dialogue Happening Outside Power While government convenes its forums, real dialogue happens daily in the silence of broken clinics. In the queues at SASSA. In the burnt tyres of protest. In the quiet rage of mothers burying sons lost to gang bullets or hunger. That is the unscripted, unmoderated, rawdialogue of a society crying for repair, real hope, real change. To those who say this dialogue is necessary for cohesion: let us be clear. Cohesion cannot be built on inequality. Reconciliation cannot be revived while restitution is denied. Real unity requires more than slogans it requires justice that is seen and felt. And to those who say this dialogue is about the future: we say this the future cannot be imagined until the past is confronted. Until the unfinished business of our transition is faced head-on. That business is redistribution. Dignity. Work. Land. Reform. From National Dialogue to National Reckoning What South Africa needs now is not a dialogue. It is a Reckoning. A National Reckoning Plan time-bound, costed, public, and accountable. Here is what it would look like: 1. Corruption Accountability • Dedicated anti-corruption court. • Public progress dashboard updated quarterly. • No dialogue required. Just prosecutions. 2. Public Service Restoration • Professionalise the civil service. • Forensic audits across departments. Get rid of deed wood. Merit and competence based deployment. • Treasury-approved clean-up plan. No slogans needed. 3. Violence and Safety Compact • Dedicated gender-based violence units in all provinces. • Resourced SAPS precincts in crime hotspots. • Community-policing forums with real authority. • Measurable 3-year targets to reduce violence by 70%. 4. Land and Housing • Release state-owned land for housing and smallholder farming. • Title deeds for informal settlements. • Geospatial planning with public oversight. • Justice, not just consultation. 5. Youth Jobs and Township Economies • R10 billion fund for township infrastructure and small enterprise support. • Remove licensing red tape for spaza shops and street traders. • Localise procurement in municipalities. • Youth opportunity desks in every ward. 6. A Real Platform for the People • Strengthen Parliament's portfolio committees as dialogue forums. • Fund civic education, SGBs, and ward committees. • Turn Parliament into the true arena of people's voice not hotels and ballrooms. Dialogue Must Not Substitute Delivery Dialogue is not inherently dangerous. But dialogue without consequence is corrosive. It drains hope. It teaches citizens that participation is performance. That their voices are heard, but never acted upon. That engagement is a dead-end. The greatest threat to democracy is not apathy. It is the experience of being listened to but ignored. This time, there will be no Mandela to hold us together when we fail. This time, failure will explode. Not into civil war, but into permanent distrust, institutional erosion, and a vacuum that extremists, secessionists, and seditionists are already preparing to fill. What Must Be Done This National Dialogue, must be grounded in three non-negotiables: 1. Equal Participation No one should be asked to "participate" unless they are also being resourced, empowered, and heard. Give logistical and financial support to informal workers, rural voices, and youth collectives. 2. Binding Outcomes Every agreement must be costed, time-bound, and linked to implementation agents. We need deliverables, we need accountability, we need delivery, not declarations and leaders who are not only shocked and surprised. 3. Institutional Anchoring The dialogue must be tied into Parliament and the Executives and all levels, not orbitaround and away from it. All outcomes must flow into keeping elected leaders accountable from the top, our President, Ministers, Premiers, MEC's, Mayors, MMC's to councillors via committee work, legislative reform, and budget planning. Let's make Performance Management work and delivery real. The Real Dialogue is in Delivery Dialogue is not neutral. It either reinforces power or redistributes it. South Africans don't need to be heard again. They need to be answered. The ANC must not lead from caution or convenience. We must lead from courage. From conviction. And from truth. The promise of 1994 has been deferred too long. Now is the time to deliver on it not through words, but through work. Let us move from dialogue to reckoning. From performance to policy. From symbolism to substance. Let this be the generation that made justice real. Let this be the moment that reclaimed delivery as democracy. * Faiez Jacobs is a former Member of Parliament, political organiser, and strategic facilitator committed to inclusive governance, ethical leadership, and the renewal of South Africa's democratic promise. ** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL or Independent Media. IOL Opinion
IOL News
29-05-2025
- Business
- IOL News
Critics slam Cape Town's ‘record-breaking' R36. 8bn budget for deepening inequality
The City of Cape Town unveils its amended 2025/26 budget, promising relief for households while maintaining record infrastructure investments aimed at building a safer, more inclusive, and future-ready city. Image: Unsplash Cape Town's R36.8 billion 2024/25 capital budget has been hailed by the City as a record-breaking investment in infrastructure and future-readiness. But critics argue that beneath the impressive graphics and modern catchphrases lies a deeply unequal plan that entrenches apartheid-era spatial and economic divides. Faiez Jacobs, former MP and local governance and inclusive development advisor, argues that Cape Town's budget is not failing; it is succeeding selectively, serving the affluent while sidelining the poor. Jacobs described the city's strategy as a 'green gentrification' project cloaked in smart city and sustainability language. 'Budgets reveal priorities,' he said, and this one 'reveals a city that is still hostile to the poor, performative to the public, and generous to the privileged.' His sector-by-sector analysis highlights what he calls systemic exclusion: inner-city social housing projects remain unfunded, township electrification is under-resourced, sanitation in informal settlements is largely ignored, and most major transport and ICT upgrades are concentrated in wealthy, already-connected areas. Councillor Siseko Mbandezi, the City's Mayoral Committee Member for Finance, disputes these claims. He said that a full 75% of Cape Town's infrastructure investment directly benefits lower-income households, and calls Jacobs' article 'woefully inaccurate and misleading.' According to Mbandezi, Cape Town's pro-poor portion of the four-year R40 billion budget surpasses the total capital budgets of other South African cities. In response to growing public criticism and pushback, the City amended its 2025/26 capital budget on Wednesday, May 28, introducing what it calls targeted relief without compromising the long-term infrastructure agenda. Mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis described the updated budget as the 'Invested in Hope' budget, reaffirming the City's commitment to long-term infrastructure investment while addressing affordability concerns. The City claims it has listened to Capetonians during the public participation phase and made adjustments that will significantly reduce household bills compared to the March draft. Among the most notable changes are the extension of the rates-free threshold from the first R450,000 of property value to homes valued up to R7 million, an increase in the monthly income threshold for pensioner rebates from R22,000 to R27,000, and reduced fixed water charges for homes valued between R1 million and R25 million. The City has also reduced its new City-Wide Cleaning charge for residential properties below R20 million and introduced a full rebate on this charge for pensioners. At the same time, the per-unit electricity price will decrease starting in July, as the City removes a 10% cost previously embedded in electricity tariffs to fund cleaning services. The result, the City claims, is that monthly bills will be meaningfully lower for the majority of ratepayers than initially proposed. A home valued at R1.2 million could see bills reduced by up to 15%, while a R5 to R7 million property might experience reductions of up to 40%. According to Hill-Lewis, these changes mean that 97% of ratepayers will not see increases exceeding 20%, and very few will experience anything close to the 30% or 40% spikes cited in some recent reports. The mayor framed the changes as not just financially pragmatic, but morally necessary, saying, 'If anyone here is interested only in kicking the can down the road, the exits are clearly marked.' On the controversial absence of major inner-city social housing projects over R50 million, Mbandezi reiterated that these are not typically funded through the City's main capital plan. Instead, they rely on a combination of subsidies from the Social Housing Regulatory Authority, private developer investments, and new incentive schemes. He highlighted that the City has released more land for affordable housing in the past two years than in the entire previous decade and has introduced by-law reforms to support micro-developers. Yet critics remain unconvinced. Brent Herron, secretary general of the GOOD Party, argued that only two of the city's sixteen major energy projects directly affect Cape Flats communities, and even those are merely replacing aging transformers in Mitchell's Plain and Gugulethu. He accused the City of failing to address spatial inequality in any meaningful way and points to the long-delayed MyCiTi Phase 2 rollout as further evidence. Originally promised in 2016, the network's expansion has been so slow that, in Herron's words, 'the MyCiTi network will not be completed in our lifetimes.' Fadiel Adams, a former MP and member of the National Coloured Congress, said: 'It's not a tale of two cities. It's a tale of two shades of cities.'' Adams claims that residents in working-class areas like Grassy Park pay higher rates than affluent constantia, despite receiving worse services. He also criticised what he calls 'poor planning' in roadworks and upgrades that are hurting small businesses by increasing congestion during peak hours. In his view, high-end suburbs continue to be 'heavily subsidised by the state and the poor.' Jacobs draws sharp comparisons between infrastructure allocations, asking, 'Why do Camps Bay's sewers get R427 million, but Gugulethu's sewer backlog only R154 million?' Mbandezi has directly challenged this, stating that the R4.25 billion has been earmarked for pro-poor water and sanitation projects, with major upgrades recently completed in low-income areas like Gugulethu and Masiphumelele. GOOD Party councilor, Anton Louw, recognised that the amendments offer some meaningful relief. He welcomed the expanded pensioner rebates and the restructured property tax thresholds, but noted that these measures are only a partial fix. 'This is a textbook case of people power in action,' Louw said. He praised the role of public participation. However, he cautioned that 'modest relief for some ratepayers' still does not resolve what he describes as the City's habit of shifting funds between tariff structures while extracting large surpluses from electricity and levies. 'Cape Town can be both world-class and inclusive. 'But it must place the poor and working majority at the centre of capital planning,not on the outskirts, or at the bottom of funding tables,'' said Jacobs. The City's amended 2025/26 budget is now open for a new round of public participation until June 13. [email protected] Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel. IOL Politics
IOL News
27-05-2025
- Business
- IOL News
A City Split in Two: How Cape Town's 2024/5 Budget Betrays Its Poor
Faiez Jacobs explores how Cape Town's 2024/5 budget, while marketed as a record investment, perpetuates spatial and economic apartheid, leaving the city's poorest communities behind. Image: Tracey Adams / IOL This article draws directly from the official City of Cape Town budget document: Annexure 21 – Projects Over R50 Million: 2024/25. A full sector-by-sector analysis covering Housing, Water and Sanitation, Energy, Transport, and Digital Infrastructure including all Top 20 projects in each category. Cape Town's 2024/25 budget is being marketed as a record investment in infrastructure, growth, and future-readiness. Glossy graphics showcase R36.8 billion in capital projects from smart city operations and solar grids to road upgrades and wastewater treatment plants. The DA-led City Council proclaims progress. But beneath this polished façade lies a deeper, more uncomfortable truth: this budget reinforces the city's spatial and economic apartheid, entrenching exclusion while branding it as modernisation. The Myth of Equal Development Across five sectors Housing, Water and Sanitation, Energy, Transport, and Digital Infrastructure a clear pattern emerges. While poor and working-class communities receive rhetorical inclusion and a few tactical investments, the lion's share of funding is absorbed by already well-serviced, wealthier areas. We are not witnessing pro-poor development. We are watching the deepening of a Tale of Two Cities. 1. Human Settlements: Perpetuating Spatial Apartheid Of the Top 20 Housing Projects, valued at R2.55 billion, the city directs funding mostly toward peripheral townships: Blue Downs, Gugulethu, Mfuleni, and Atlantis. On the surface, this seems just. But scratch deeper and a disturbing omission appears: there is no major inner-city social housing project funded over R50 million. Not in Salt River. Not in Woodstock. Not in the Foreshore. This is despite: Court orders compelling the city to act, available well-located public land and a backlog of over 400,000 families on the waiting list. Projects like the Airport Industria housing development remain in limbo, delayed by bureaucratic inertia and political resistance. In contrast, R247 million is earmarked to build mixed-use housing further away from the CBD entrenching commuting costs, congestion, and carbon footprints. Apartheid's logic lives on, not by law, but by land use and budget choices. 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 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. Next Stay Close ✕ 2. Water and Sanitation: Cape Flats Neglected While Camps Bay Thrives Cape Town faces a sanitation crisis. Raw sewage runs through informal settlements. Toilets overflow in Gugulethu. Khayelitsha's ageing pipelines collapse under strain. Yet the city's R9.25 billion water and sanitation budget prioritises mega-projects that bypass the poorest. Yes, the Cape Flats Wastewater Works upgrade (R1.35 billion) is commendable. So is the Zandvliet expansion. But consider this: the Camps Bay Pump Station serving one of the wealthiest suburbs receives R427 million, nearly three times more than the entire sanitation budget for Masiphumelele. No funding is allocated for dry sanitation pilots, community-managed ablution blocks, or decentralised waste treatment in informal settlements. No urgency exists to address Philippi's groundwater contamination or the sanitation gap in "Covid" informal settlements. The rhetoric says 'inclusive growth.' The numbers say 'privilege protection.' 3. Energy Transition: A Future for the Few The DA administration is proud of its green energy agenda. In this budget, it allocates R8.27 billion to energy and electricity, with projects like: Atlantis Solar PV + Battery Plant (R621 million), Smart Grid Automation (R964 million), Steenbras Hydroelectric Station Rehab (R1.27 billion). Yet township residents, who experience the worst of load-shedding, are left in the dark literally and figuratively. The Informal Settlement Electrification Program, targeting Crossroads and Nyanga, receives just R254 million a meagre 3% of the energy budget. Why no investment in: Microgrids for backyarders? Rooftop PV pilots in Khayelitsha? Solar training for youth in Mitchells Plain? This is not an energy transition. It is a green gentrification strategy dressed in climate language, engineered to benefit commercial zones, CBD towers, and smart offices while the Cape Flats remain energy-insecure. 4. Transport: Roads to Nowhere for the Poor Transport receives the largest capital allocation R11.5 billion. The DA calls it a 'mobility revolution.' Yet 67% of this goes to: Foreshore Freeway redevelopment (R940 million), N1/N7 and N2 Interchanges (R1.96 billion), CBD nodal upgrades (R663 million) and Airport Link reconfiguration (R463 million). Meanwhile, Khayelitsha, Gugulethu, Bonteheuwel, and Nyanga remain traffic-choked, underserved, and dangerous for pedestrians. Yes, there is R588 million for Spine Road and R501 million for Nyanga road rehab but these are a fraction of what is needed. The Bonteheuwel Active Mobility Project, a rare pro-poor investment in walking and cycling, is only R275 million less than a third of the Foreshore flyover upgrade. Where is the funding for: Safe school zones in Bishop Lavis? Accessible taxis for the elderly in Manenberg? Flood-proof roads in Philippi? Public transport reform is sorely needed. Yet the MyCiTi expansion continues to exclude most black working-class commuters, while taxis used by 70% of residents are still criminalised, not subsidised. 5. Digital Infrastructure: WiFi in Theory, Disconnection in Reality The DA touts its 'Smart City vision', with R7.8 billion in ICT and data infrastructure. Projects like the: Smart City Ops Platform (R712 million), ERP Cloud Upgrade (R648 million) and IoT Sensor Network (R314 million), ...are futuristic and seductive. But for whom? Yes, R184 million goes to Cape Flats Smart Poles and R288 million to school WiFi but many township youth still lack devices. Fibre to Langa and Manenberg libraries means little without laptops, stable power, and tech support. An AI chatbot to help pay rates does not help a backyarder whose shack has no electricity. Open Data and Digital Inclusion mean nothing without co-design, digital literacy, and community ownership. The DA's Double Game: Performative Efficiency, Structural Exclusion The DA often says: 'we get the basics right.' But budgeting is not neutral. Every project chose nor not chosen reveals values. Why do Camps Bay's sewers get R427 million, but Gugulethu's sewer backlog R154 million? Why is Foreshore's freeway prioritised over Masiphumelele's flood-proof roads? Why is there no social housing in Sea Point, but R247 million for a distant project in Airport Industria? These are not accidents. They are ideological expressions of a vision: one where the city is clean, digital, solar-powered, and efficient for those who already have. A Progressive Vision Reimagined We are not calling for no development. We are calling for just development. A budget that: Prioritises sanitation where dignity is denied, not where beaches must be clean. Electrifies informal homes before expanding CBD offices. Delivers social housing where jobs are, not where land is cheap. Funds youth tech skills before smart surveillance. Cape Town can be both world-class and inclusive. But it must break with its colonial urban design, apartheid-era zoning, and neoliberal budget logic. It must place the poor and working majority at the centre of capital planning not on the outskirts, or at the bottom of funding tables.
