Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
29 June 2020 | Story Edward Kagiso Molefe and Dr Nico Keyser
Edward Kagiso Molefe, left, and Dr Nico Keyser.

The 2020 supplementary budget comes at a time when the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic is causing widespread disruption in the world’s economy and continues to affect it negatively. Even though the precise economic and social consequences of the pandemic still remain uncertain, there is prevalent agreement between economists and policy makers that it will leave the world overwrought with the uncertainties of the future. According to the International Monetary Fund, the world economy is expected to contract sharply by 5,2% this year, due to the huge lockdown to curtail the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. The South African economy is also expected to contract by 7,2% in 2020, and according to the Minister of Finance, Tito Mboweni, this is the largest contraction in almost 90 years. Therefore, the South African government currently finds itself in an unfortunate and restricted fiscal position. Minister Mboweni does not have much room to move within his emergency budget and therefore calls for a pragmatic approach, the reprioritisation of expenditure, and the implementation of austerity measures within the public sector and its state-owned enterprises (SOE).

Zero-based budgeting
However, the country should be applauded for responding to this economic shock with a set of unmatched measures. The Minister further highlighted that, for the first time in history, all stakeholders – including the private sector, labour, communities, and the central bank – participated in responding to the storm that came without an early warning system. This has proven the validity of the long-sung gospel that by working together, we can do more. R500 billion of government’s COVID‐19 economic support package was directed straight at the problem. Against the background of ongoing measures to address the pandemic in South Africa, the Minister’s supplementary budget of 2020 stressed several key aspects:

The first burning issue addressed in the supplementary budget was the mounting debt-to-GDP ratio, which is envisaged to reach 80,5% in this fiscal year, as compared to a projection of 65,6% in February. Although the Minister has confirmed strategies to curtail the debt and widening deficit, no sign of stabilisation was presented. South Africa continues to experience contracting revenue and is relying extensively on loans from international sources, since savings is a non-starter. The Minister has also called for zero-based budgeting as one of the strategies in building a bridge to recover, and to close the mouth of the ‘hippopotamus’, which is eating our children’s inheritance. The zero-based budgeting is a big step in the right direction; it will make all role players in government understand the economic crisis we are facing. 

Prioritising infrastructure development
The other positive part of the supplementary budget was the prioritisation of infrastructure development. The South African government has already considered almost 177 infrastructure projects that will assist in boosting the economy and curtailing unemployment. The Sustainable Infrastructure Symposium, hosted by President Cyril Ramaphosa, announced 55 projects that are ready to be rolled out in due course. Government needs to further stimulate its partnership with the private sector to ensure more infrastructure development and job creation. Infrastructure development will also ensure jobs for the unskilled labour force, which makes up the largest part of our unemployment. 
In terms of job creation, an economic support package of R100 billion has been set aside for a multi-year, comprehensive response to our job emergency. Moreover, the President’s job creation and protection initiative will be rolled out over the medium term. This will include a repurposed public employment programme and a Presidential Youth Employment Intervention. The country is looking forward to further details regarding this presidential initiative, particularly with regard to the Presidential Youth Employment Intervention, as the youth is the future of this country.
Despite the envisaged revenue adjustment of R1,43 trillion to R1,12 trillion, the country is expected to continue spending. An additional R21 billion is allocated for COVID‐19‐related health-care spending. The supplementary budget has also proposed a R12,6 billion allocation to front-line services. An additional R11 billion is set aside towards improved water and sanitation, and an additional R6,1 billion for youth employment ensures that the most vulnerable are supported. However, the effectiveness of this allocation in the supplementary budget is sorely dependent on the ability of our government apparatus to spend the money.   

Opening the economy
The only worrying issue that the minister did not dwell on much, was the public sector wage bill, which still remains a challenge. According to the Minister, nearly half of the consolidated revenue will go towards the compensation of public service employees. The compensation of employees continues to put much pressure on service delivery and is pushing government in the direction of borrowing. On the other hand, the government of South Africa is still under pressure to implement the 2020 salary adjustments. However, the question still remains why the South African government is not considering the same process as the private sector or finding an alternative way of setting salaries at an appropriate, affordable, and fair level. This could save government money to focus on other areas that require financing, such as debt-service costs.

What remains evident and feasible is that South Africa should continue opening the economy to revive sectors hit hard by the great lockdown. Allowing trade to take place, doing business, and markets to function would provide the ultimate boost to a struggling economy. A reduced role by government could pave the way for the private sector to play a larger role in the economy. Moreover, structural reforms are required to create a favourable environment for growth and to restore South African fiscal credibility. 

Opinion article by Edward Kagiso Molefe, Lecturer: Department of Economics and Finance, and Dr Nico Keyser, Head of Department:  Economics and Finance

News Archive

Council on Higher Education LLB qualification review not yet complete
2017-05-16

The reaction from various stakeholders following the ‘Outcomes of the National Review of the LLB Qualification’ by the Council on Higher Education (CHE) on 12 April 2017 requires the CHE to clarify that the national review process has not been completed and is ongoing.

The peer-review process conducted under the auspices of the CHE is based on the LLB Standards Document which was developed in 2014-2015 with input from higher-education institutions and the organised legal profession. Following self-review and site visits by peers, the process is now at the point where commendations and shortcomings have been identified, and the statement of 12 April reflects those findings. All law faculties and schools have been asked to improve their LLB programmes to meet the LLB Standard, and no LLB programme has been de-accredited. All institutions retain the accreditation they had before the Review process began and all institutions are working towards retaining their accreditation and improving their LLB programmes.

The South African Law Deans’ Association (SALDA) has issued a set of responses regarding the LLB programme review. The following questions and answers were published to give more clarity on the questions raised.

1.    What is the effect of a finding of conditional accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.

(“Accreditation refers to a recognition status granted to a programme for a stipulated period of time after an HEQC evaluation indicates that it meets minimum standards of quality.”)

The institution must submit a progress report by 6 October 2017 that indicates how short-term aspects raised in the HEQC reports have been addressed and an improvement plan to indicate how longer-term aspects will be addressed.

2.    What is the effect of a finding of notice of withdrawal of accreditation?
The programme remains accredited.

The institution must submit an improvement plan by 6 October 2017 to indicate how the issues raised in the HEQC report will be addressed, including time frames.

3.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect current students?
Students currently enrolled for the LLB programme at any institution are not affected at all. They will graduate with an accredited qualification.

4.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect new applicants?
The programmes remain accredited and institutions may enrol new students as usual. This also includes students completing BA/BCom (Law) programmes who wish to continue with the LLB programme.

5.    How does the finding of notice of withdrawal affect prior graduates?
Degrees previously conferred are not affected.

6.    What happens when the improvement plans are submitted in October 2017?
The CHE will evaluate the plans when they are submitted, and the programmes remain accredited until a decision is taken whether the improvement plan is sufficient and has been fully given effect to or not. The institutions will have to submit progress reports to the CHE indicating implementation of measures contained in the improvement plan.

Should a decision at some stage be taken that a programme’s accreditation must be withdrawn, a teaching-out plan would be implemented so that all enrolled students would have the opportunity to graduate with an accredited degree.

For more information on the CHE’s pronouncement please contact Moleboheng Moshe-Bereng on MosheBerengMF@ufs.ac.za.

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept