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

To tan or not to tan: a burning issue
2009-12-08

 Prof. Werner Sinclair

“Some evidence exists which implies that sunscreens could indeed be responsible for the dramatic rise in the incidence of melanoma over the past three decades, the period during which the use of sunscreens became very popular,” says Prof. Werner Sinclair, Head of the Department of Dermatology at the University of the Free State. His inaugural lecture was on the topic Sunscreens – Curse or Blessing?

Prof. Sinclair says the use of sunscreen preparations is widely advocated as a measure to prevent acute sunburn, chronic sun damage and resultant premature skin aging as well as skin malignancies, including malignant melanoma. There is inconclusive evidence to prove that these preparations do indeed achieve all of these claims. The question is whether these preparations are doing more harm than good?

He says the incidence of skin cancer is rising dramatically and these tumours are induced mostly by the ultra-violet rays.

Of the UV light that reaches the earth 90-95% belongs to the UVA fraction. UVC is normally filtered out by the ozone layer. UVB leads to sunburn while UVA leads to pigmentation (tanning). Because frequent sunburn was often associated with skin cancer, UVB was assumed, naively, to be the culprit, he says.

Exposure to sunlight induces a sense of well-being, increases the libido, reduces appetite and induces the synthesis of large amounts of vitamin D, an essential nutritional factor. The use of sunscreen creams reduces vitamin D levels and low levels of vitamin D have been associated with breast and colon cancer. Prof. Sinclair says the 17% increase in breast cancer from 1981 to 1991 parallels the vigorous use of sunscreens over the same period.

Among the risk factors for the development of tumours are a family history, tendency to freckle, more than three episodes of severe sunburn during childhood, and the use of artificial UV light tanning booths. He says it remains a question whether to tan or not. It was earlier believed that the main carcinogenic rays were UVB and that UVA merely induced a tan. The increase in UVA exposure could have severe consequences.

Prof. Sinclair says the UV light used in artificial tanning booths consists mainly of pure UVA which are highly dangerous rays. It has been estimated that six per cent of all melanoma deaths in the UK can be directly attributed to the use of artificial tanning lights. The use of an artificial tanning booth will double the melanoma risk of a person. “UVA is solely responsible for solar skin aging and it is ironical that tanning addicts, who want to look beautiful, are inflicting accelerated ageing in the process,” he says.

On the use of sunscreens he says it can prevent painful sunburn, but UVA-induced damage continues unnoticed. UVB blockers decrease vitamin D synthesis, which is a particular problem in the elderly. It also prevents the sunburn warning and therefore increases the UVA dosage that an individual receives. It creates a false sense of security which is the biggest problem associated with sunscreens.

Evidence obtained from the state of Queensland in Australia, where the heaviest and longest use of sunscreens occurred, boasted the highest incidence of melanoma in the world. A huge study in Norway has shown a 350% increase in melanoma for men and 440% for women. This paralleled the increase in the use of UVB blocking sunscreens while there was no change in the ozone layer. It did however, occur during that time when tanning became fashionable in Norway and there was an increase especially in artificial tanning.

Prof. Sinclair says: “We believe that sunscreen use does not directly lead to melanoma, but UVA exposure does. The Melanoma Epidemic is a reality. Sunscreen preparations are not the magical answer in the fight against melanoma and the irresponsible use of these preparations can worsen the problem.”

Media Release
Issued by: Mangaliso Radebe
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2828
Cell: 078 460 3320
E-mail: radebemt.stg@ufs.ac.za
7 December 2009

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