Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
04 March 2020 | Story Jean-Pierre Geldenhuys | Photo Supplied
geldenhuysJP
Jean-Pierre Geldenhuys.

As has been the case for the past five years, the latest (2020) budget paints another sobering picture of South Africa’s public finances and short-term economic outlook. Of particular concern is that this budget does not project that the government debt ratio will stabilise in the medium term (by 2022/23), which means that the current fiscal policy trajectory is unsustainable (which National Treasury acknowledges in the Budget Review). This makes a rating downgrade by Moody’s in March all but inevitable. 

In the budget that was tabled on Wednesday, the budget deficit is projected to be 6,3% in 2019/2020, while increasing to 6,8% the following year, before gradually declining to a still unsustainable 5,7% of the GDP by 2022/23. These large budget deficits contributed to large projected increases in the government debt-to-GDP ratio: this ratio is projected to increase from about 62% in 2019/20 to about 72% by 2022/23. To understand the extent of the deterioration of South Africa’s public finances over the past 12 months, it should be noted that this ratio was projected in the 2019 budget to increase to about 60% by 2022/23.

Burger and Calitz (2020) show that the government debt-to-GDP ratio can be stabilised (and fiscal sustainability can be restored) if: the gap between real interest rates and real GDP growth is reduced, and/or if the primary balance (government revenues minus non-interest government spending) is adequate to avoid an increase in the debt ratio. They then show that the debt ratio has increased over the past decade because the (implied) real interest rate on government debt has increased and the real growth rate has decreased and government ran large primary deficits, at a time when large primary surpluses were required to avoid increases in the debt ratio. 

Between 1998 and 2007, the debt ratio was reduced from just under 50% to just under 30%. This period (especially from 2002 onwards) was characterised by (relatively) high economic growth. Fast economic growth is crucial to stabilising the debt ratio and restoring fiscal sustainability. National Treasury (NT) has proposed structural reforms (aimed at reducing regulatory burdens and backlogs and increasing competitiveness in the economy) to stimulate private sector investment and growth. Given the constraints that continued load shedding will put on South African growth in the near future, as well as projected slower growth in the economies of our main trading partners, and the uncertainties associated with disruptions wrought by the coronavirus outbreak, it remains to be seen if private sector investment will increase and stimulate growth (available evidence in any event suggests that private sector investment tends to follow, not lead, economic growth). 

With growth likely to remain slow, lower real interest rates and lower budget deficits are required to reduce the debt ratio and restore fiscal sustainability. These interest rates will more than likely increase if Moody’s decides to (finally) downgrade its rating of South African government debt.

With low economic growth and high real interest rates, stabilisation of the public debt ratio means that the budget deficit must be reduced. To reduce the budget deficit, government can: (i) increase taxes, (ii) decrease spending and (iii) increase taxes and reduce spending. Given that fiscal policy is unsustainable in South Africa, it is surprising that NT decided against increasing taxes (other than customary annual increases in the fuel levy and excise taxes) in this budget – many analysts were expecting some combination of higher personal income tax, VAT, and company taxes. As reasons for not raising taxes, it cites low expected economic growth, and that most of the efforts to reduce the budget deficit in the past five years have been centred on using tax increases. Even more puzzling, the budget granted real tax relief to taxpayers, as income tax scales were adjusted by more than expected inflation. 

All efforts to rein in the budget deficit therefore rely on government spending reductions. To this end, NT is proposing to reduce government spending by about R260 billion over the next three years. This reduction in spending is comprised of a R160 billion reduction in the wage bill, and a further R100 billion reduction in programme baseline reductions. At the same time, as a proposal for wage cuts, government is allocating even more money to prop up the balance sheets of many SoCs, with R60 billion allocated to Eskom and SAA (while the Minister referred to the Sword of Damocles when referring to SAA in his speech, a more apt analogy for government’s response to the financial crises facing many of its SoCs might rather be the paradox of Buridan’s ass). While government has announced plans for the restructuring of Eskom and has placed SAA in business rescue, so far there is no feasible consensus plan to address Eskom’s mounting debts and dire financial situation, which poses a systemic risk to the South African economy. 

Regarding the proposed reductions to the wage bill, NT believes that its target can be achieved through downward adjustments to cost-of-living adjustments, pay progression and other benefits. Furthermore, the Budget Review also states that pay scales at public entities and state-owned companies (SOCs) will be aligned with those in the public service to curtail wage bill growth and ‘excessive’ salaries at these entities. We are also told that government will discuss the options for achieving its desired wage bill reduction with unions. Given the precariousness of the public finances, and the understandable objections of workers and unions, one must ask why these discussions were not already in full swing by the time that the budget was tabled? 

Regarding the proposed cuts to government programmes, NT notes that it tried to limit these to underperforming or underspending programmes, and that the largest cuts will be in the human settlement and transport sectors. But, as NT acknowledges, any cuts to government programmes will negatively affect the economy and social services; the budget speech also states that the number of government employees has declined since 2011/12, which also affects the provision of public and social services adversely (the Minister explicitly mentioned increased classroom sizes, full hospitals, and too few police officers during his speech). 

Apart from the proposed spending cuts, the proposed allocation of spending is unsurprising and reflects long-standing government priorities: spending on basic education, post-school education and training, health and social protection takes up 13,6%, 6,7%, 11,8% and 11,3%, respectively. Increases in social grants range between 4 and 4,7%, which means small real increases in most social grants (only if inflation remains subdued). Worryingly, debt service costs are expected to take up more than 11% of total government spending (and is projected to exceed health spending by 2022/23). These costs are projected to grow by more than 12% by 2022/23 (almost double the growth in the fastest growing non-interest expenditure category). These figures vividly illustrate how a high and increasing debt-to-GDP ratio limits the scope for increased spending on important public and social services. 

Unless fiscal sustainability and the  balance sheets of SoCs are restored, the scope for the government to increase spending to combat poverty, rising inequality, and unemployment will be severely limited – as would the scope for countercyclical fiscal policy, should the local economy again slide into recession. The stakes are high, and the cost of indecisiveness is increasing.

This article was written by Jean-Pierre Geldenhuys, lecturer in the Department of Economics and Finance in the Faculty of Economic and Management Sciences 

News Archive

Association of Former SRC Presidents – first of its kind
2013-08-19

 

Some of the former SRC presidents who attended the inaugural dinner were, from the left: Roelf Meyer, Bloemfontein Campus 1970; Dr More Chakane, Qwaqwa Campus 1990; vice-chairperson of the AFSP; Dr Anchen Laubscher, first woman president of the Bloemfontein Campus 2003; and Prof Voet du Plessis, Bloemfontein Campus 1967/8.
Photo: Stephen Collett
19 August 2013

The University of the Free State (UFS) made history this weekend with the establishment of its Association of Former SRC Presidents (AFSP) – the first association of its kind after the merging and incorporation of public institutions in 2003–2004.

Twenty-two former SRC presidents attended the inaugural dinner to launch the association on Women's Day, Friday 9 August 2013, and recognised especially the attendance of all four female presidents that previously chaired the SRC. Other guests included former rectors and chairpersons of the UFS Council, as well as chairpersons of the Alumni.

The attending presidents served during the period 1967–2012, either at the former University of the Orange Free State (UOFS), the Qwaqwa Campus of the former University of the North, South Campus of the former Vista University and the University of the Free State.

“Your very personal narratives as former student leaders during the troubled past of our history in South Africa matter most as you design the questions for and purpose of an authentic conversation with student leaders today – this will set your association apart from others," said Rudi Buys, Dean of Student Affairs.

Former SRC president of 1975/6 and now founding member and chairperson of the association, Dr Michiel Strauss, said that this is the opportunity for former student leaders to give back to the younger generation.

“It is true that many middle-aged white South Africans have a deep sense of debt and obligation towards the youth of our country. We owe them an apology for the discrepancies of the past. This apology should be more than just words. Deeds of reconciliation and restitution must be seen.

“As for myself; I was president of the SRC of the then UOFS in the same period in which the biggest part of the youth of South Africa suffered so much in their struggle for freedom in our country.

“In my personal capacity, as well as in my official capacity as SRC president, I did nothing to try and understand and/or co-operate in the struggle of my peers. This fact haunts me until this day.

“The question then for people like me and so many others, is: Where do I invest my time and energy and passion for this country? Where will my contribution make a real difference? There is no better answer to this burning question than to invest in the human resources in our beloved South Africa, and more focused – to invest in the young people.

“There is something meaningful and beautiful happening at the UFS and it is now a leader in academic standards, reconciliation, leadership formation and nation building. I can think of no better place to make my small contribution,” Dr Strauss said.

“As former student leaders, we have a sense of purpose to contribute to the university and there is no better time to start than now. It is my privilege to be part of this great initiative and I look forward to what will be achieved,” said Dr More Chakane, deputy chairperson of AFSP and former SRC president of the Uniqwa Campus of the University of the North in 1990 (now the Qwaqwa Campus of the UFS).

Roelf Meyer, known for the prominent role he played in the negotiations to end apartheid in South Africa and chairperson of the Civil Society Initiative (CSI) of South Africa, said his time as a leader at the university has given him the opportunity to apply and use his skills and experience and share it with the new leaders of the institution. "The UFS is highly regarded because of the exceptional standards and excellence portrayed by its senior leadership. Where I can make a difference, I'll do it with pleasure and pride," he said. Meyer served as SRC president in 1970.

The association met on Saturday 10 August 2013 to adopt its interim constitution and consider operational matters, while also reaching agreement on its core functions in support of its purpose to transfer change leadership skills to incumbent student leaders and mediate meaningful contributions of Alumni to the growth of the university.

“We greatly value the declared intention of AFSP to work with the university to design meaningful and sustainable mentorship programmes to support and guide student leaders on campus, and have pledged our support in this regard,” said Buys.

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