Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items

South Africa’s budget conundrum: The link between coalition politics and the budget crisis?

11 March 2025 Photo Supplied

Budget Speech Opinion 2025 — Dr Ambrosé du Plessis and Terrance Molobela, Lecturers in the Department of Public Administration and Management, University of the Free State.

Opinion article by Dr Ambrosé du Plessis and Terrance Molobela, lecturers from the Department of Public Administration and Management, University of the Free State.

The mechanistic administrative cog stemming from the sixth administration, through which policy development and implementation took place, has created a false sense of reality regarding the African National Congress (ANC)’s authoritative position in South Africa’s political landscape. The notion that the ANC remains the central political force in the country is increasingly proving to be a fallacy, especially in the face of the changing dynamics within the so-called Government of National Unity (GNU). Even though President Cyril Ramaphosa dutifully signed off on key legislative acts such as the National Health Insurance (NHI), the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA), and the Expropriation acts, the ANC, and indeed the broader GNU, have grossly underestimated the complexities of coalition politics.

One of the clearest illustrations of this miscalculation was the latest budget ‘negotiations’, which exposed the growing fractures within the governing coalition. With the budget tabled just two hours before presentation, it became evident that the coalition parties – especially the ANC – are facing a harsh political reality. In a move that has shocked GNU parties, the decision to raise value-added tax (VAT) by 2% has turned into a bone of contention. This cutthroat measure, aimed at generating an additional R58 billion, has sparked fierce opposition from within the very government it seeks to support. The bitter VAT debate has led to a near standstill in the budget process, with some GNU parties staunchly opposing it, while others view it as a necessary evil.

New can of worms

The proposal to raise VAT is indicative of a deeper issue. It is, quite frankly, a regressive measure in an economy already battling a cost-of-living crisis. Raising VAT disproportionately impacts the lower and middle classes, who spend a higher percentage of their income on consumption. This move is naïve at best. VAT might raise substantial sums, but it does little to stimulate the economy or promote productivity, both of which are sorely needed to grow South Africa’s GDP and reverse the country’s economic downturn. At this moment in time, the country cannot afford to further burden a shrinking tax base.

In addition, the VAT conundrum has opened a new can of worms. The Democratic Alliance’s (DA) publicly proposed budget goes beyond the initial 2% VAT increase, challenging the secrecy with which the failed budget was concluded. More importantly, it questions the political and financial ideological foundation on which the initial budget was compiled by the ANC, led by Minister of Finance Enoch Godongwana. There can be no doubt that the DA’s shadow budget, particularly its cost-containment measures, has thrown a spanner in the works of a deep administrative state. At this juncture, the lingering question is – can the true Minister of Finance please step forward? With various proposed budgets from the GNU parties, one can only wonder if the GNU is now officially facing a Pinocchio dilemma. This identity crisis emerged when the ANC indicated that it would now turn to the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) – who also opposes the 2% VAT increase – to approve the budget, although the EFF recently rejected the call for negotiations with the ANC and considered it a general discussion. From this stance, it is clear that the coalition game will be played both within and outside the borders of the GNU.

One cannot help but ponder how divergent political ideologies and principles are affecting government expenditure and revenue collection. Gone are the days when the ANC held a dominant, almost unquestionable position in government, able to dictate the terms of the national budget. Today, the ANC's reduced majority has forced it into an awkward position of compromise and negotiation, with the Minister of Finance increasingly serving as a ceremonial figure rather than an authoritative decision-maker. In years past, the State of the Nation Address (SONA) and the subsequent budget speech were seamless events under ANC leadership. But now the budget process has become an all-consuming political battleground, with ideological differences and party interests shaping every decision.

GNU a ‘death sentence’

The ANC's once-solidified grasp on the country's governance is now being tested in ways the party never anticipated. The ruling coalition is no longer a harmonious entity, but a group of political adversaries forced into uneasy alliances for the sake of governance. The impact of this fractured cooperation is glaringly evident in the stalling of critical national decisions such as the budget. What was once a party-centred process where consensus was driven by a unified political party, has now become a multi-party endeavour marked by negotiation, delay, and endless political wrangling.

Reflecting on the experience of the 1996 Government of National Unity led by Nelson Mandela, one sees a stark contrast. Despite hostilities within the tripartite alliance, that government was still able to implement policies and drive the country forward. However, the current GNU coalition partners have yet to demonstrate a similar level of cooperation and trust. In fact, the words of former Deputy President FW de Klerk seem eerily prophetic today. In his 1996 resignation statement, De Klerk described the GNU as a ‘death sentence’ for a meaningful government consensus. He feared that continued participation in the coalition would weaken the National Party’s influence and undermine democratic governance.

In many ways, these words echo the current state of the GNU. The budget process has become a metaphor for a government on the brink of collapse. Consultation among the political parties within the GNU has become a source of paralysis rather than progress. The government’s inability to align itself on critical issues such as the national budget, which totals more than R2 trillion, raises serious questions about its ability to move forward.

The so-called marriage of inconvenience between the coalition partners appears increasingly centred on securing positions rather than creating policies to address the pressing needs of South Africa’s citizens. The budget, a document that should have been a focal point of discussion since the formation of the coalition, has been delayed until the 11th hour. This delay in addressing the country’s fiscal needs points to a broader failure within the GNU. The South African economy, already battered by years of stagnation and underperformance, cannot afford further dithering.

The contemporary GNU, much like the former one in 1996, may have reached its breaking point. The promise of multi-party democracy and consensus-based governance is being undermined by the very factions that have come together in the name of unity. It is hard to escape the conclusion that the continued negotiations around the budget have become a form of political ‘death row’ for the current administration, with no clear path forward. As South Africa teeters on the edge of a political and economic crisis, the time for a new direction, grounded in pragmatism and focused on national interests, has never been more urgent. As South Africa stands at a critical juncture, with the deadline of 12 March 2025 rapidly approaching, the political landscape is poised for a moment of truth. Reports have indicated that the cabinet has reached an agreement on the finality of the budget, but conflicting statements from political leaders, particularly from the DA, suggest that this agreement is not yet a certainty. DA leader John Steenhuisen has publicly declared that no final agreement has been reached and that the parties are still working towards a resolution. For the country, the stakes could not be higher.

This raises significant questions about the future of coalition governance and the state of South Africa's fragile political economy. Several plausible scenarios could unfold, each with distinct consequences for the political stability and economic viability of the nation.

Scenario 1: A unified agreement – A lifeline for the political economy

In the first scenario, we imagine that the cabinet's agreement is genuine, aimed at averting risks to public confidence and the broader market. If the market-driven partners within the GNU recognise the overwhelming importance of a stable budget, they may choose to align their interests. With political stability hanging in the balance, the realisation may set in that South Africa is simply ‘too big to fail.’ This would, in theory, prevent a collapse into chaos, as the GNU partners, acknowledging the nation's susceptibility to political upheaval, would avoid creating conditions for widespread instability.

While this scenario seems like the ideal outcome, history suggests that political cooperation within the GNU has often been fraught with difficulty. The question is whether these partners can truly put national interests before political rivalries.

Scenario 2: The ANC’s secret deal – A recipe for distrust?

Alternatively, there is the possibility that the African National Congress (ANC) has reached a clandestine agreement with the EFF behind the backs of their coalition partners. This scenario would fracture the GNU, erode trust, and create a toxic environment of distrust in coalition governance. If the ANC manages to secure its hold on power, it risks alienating the markets, which would likely lead to a downward economic spiral. The longer this instability persists, the more vulnerable the country will become to a potentially catastrophic collapse in investor confidence.

Scenario 3: DA’s contradiction – The death of coalition unity

In a third possible scenario, the DA contradicts the agreement reached by the cabinet, exposing the extent of disunity within the GNU. This situation would further highlight the lack of trust among coalition partners, and the DA might find itself either paralysed within the coalition, or removed entirely, or even decide to withdraw from the GNU. This shift would trigger an intense debate about South Africa’s continued political economic stability.

South Africa’s economy, already vulnerable to shocks, would find itself in even deeper turmoil if this scenario were to play out. The markets would respond negatively, and the ripple effect would undoubtedly extend to the lives of everyday South Africans.

The real impact on South Africans

Regardless of which scenario unfolds, one thing is certain: the consequences for South Africa’s citizens will be profound. The allocation of funds to government institutions, provinces, and municipalities is likely to be severely affected by any political instability. Without a clear and stable budget, public services will suffer, leading to disruption in the functioning of provincial governments and municipalities. This, in turn, would delay public spending, putting vital services at risk and exacerbating the inequalities, poverty, and unemployment that already plague the country.

News Archive

Former top politician talks at UFS School of Management

2007-04-25

Dr Matthews Phosa, the non-executive chairman of EOH and former politician, presented a guest lecture to a group of MBA students at the University of the Free State's (UFS) School of Management. At the lecture were from the left: Mr Tate Makgoe (Free State MEC for Finance), Ms Nontobeko Scheppers (MBA student), Dr Phosa, Prof. Helena van Zyl (Director: UFS School of Management) and Mr Setjhaba Tlhatlogi (MBA student).
Photo: Stephen Collett

Exploring some of the myths and opportunities cyber space offers

Mathews Phosa

Introduction

It is no longer business as usual. Globalisation poses new challenges as well as opportunities to business, education and society in general. Many of these new opportunities are alive with paradoxes and tensions between local sustainability and global market opportunities. The growth in new communication technologies challenges us to critically explore some popular myths, opportunities and define possible responses.

Cyberspace is often described as the new frontier – not only in the race for newer and faster technologies, but also in education. Any user or provider of services who does not explore this new frontier will soon be considered using “outdated” and will be accused of using obsolete methodologies. Cyberspace, like the spaces embodied in continents, is something that should be claimed and conquered.

Cyberspace and specifically access to information, including online education is hailed as the great equaliser. It is now claimed that everyone will have equal access to “Knowledge”. Cyber education for example is celebrated as “education-without-borders”, but as Bauman states, while it does change borders and access, it creates new “haves” and “have-nots”.

To put it in a nutshell: rather than homogenizing the human condition, the technological annulment of temporal/spatial distance tends to polarize it. It emancipates certain humans from territorial constraints and renders certain community-generating meanings exterritorial – while denuding the territory, to which other people go on being confined, of its meaning and its identity-endowing capacity.
(Bauman 1989:18; emphasis mine).

Virtual environments and the possibilities offered by the World Wide Web are new spaces that are being colonised and occupied by those who have capital (whether economic or academic) and who are looking for new labour or markets. While the new mediums include and conquer new spaces, it also excludes and “otherises” communities and segments of society (Prinsloo 2005). Cyberspace provides institutions and corporations with a space to operate without the responsibilities and obligations of locality – as long as you can afford the privilege of operating in cyberspace.

Cyberspace is therefore not neutral. Spaces are occupied, reoccupied, abandoned, claimed, fortified, secured – contested. Those with mobility define and map spaces continuously according to their claims. Those without capital and the mobility it brings, contest these claims, contest the spaces and hack into the space. Reclaim it. Recolonise it.

Re-Appropriating Cyberspace

A number of authors explores such a re-appropriation of cyberspace. Instead of seeing the Internet and related functions like online teaching as just accessing and transferring information, cyberspace is explored as political, social, personal and economic space. Institutions across the spectrum including higher education institutions venturing into cyberspace often think that it offers them a space without the usual socio-cultural complexities. Gunn, McSporran, Macleod and French (2003:14) however indicate that online “interactions that take place through electronic channels lose none of the socio-cultural complexity or gender imbalance that exists within society”.

Instead of cyberspace being a new space where the differences and disparities of non-virtual life on earth cease to exist, “cyberspace is an imagined network layer sitting on top of the physical infrastructure of cities. Cyberspace is an imagined, continuous, worldwide, networked city; the global city that never sleeps, always experienced in real time” (Irvine 1999, Online). Cyberspace therefore not only sits on top of the physical infrastructure, but is also a mirror image of the power structures and disparities of non-virtual life on earth.

Cyberspace is also much more than just a replication of non-virtual reality. New subcultures and new self-defined communities are coming into existence (Irvine 1999, Online). These new communities in cyberspace resemble communities in non-virtual format, but they are also vastly different. For example, Grierson (Online) explores the similarities between cemeteries and the communities in cyberspace. She finds that, although both “communities” are constituted in space, it is a “placeless place” which “links and mirrors society, with all its alter-egos and hidden desires … a virtual site holding up a mirror to physical reality where subjective presence is delineated in imaginary absence”.

The Internet as “sites for power and knowledge” is further explored by a number of authors, amongst othersNewman and Johnson (1999), Usher (2002), Walmsley (2000) and Borer (Online). Jordan (1999, Online) investigates culture and politics in cyberspace. He explores three “intertwined levels”, namely cyberspace as “playground of the individual”, as “social space, a place where communities exist” and as “being a society or even a digital nation”. In each of these three levels, power is played out and claimed in a “sociological, cultural, economic and political battle between the individual and a technopower elite”.

The so-called impact of the Internet on society is discounted by Bennet (2001:197). He suggests rather that the Internet “should be regarded as a “form of life – whose evolving structure becomes embedded in human consciousness and social practice, and whose architecture embodies an inherent valence that is gradually shifting away from the assumptions of anonymity upon which the Internet was originally designed” (2001:197).

We started by stating that it is no longer business as usual. We can no longer afford epistemologies of ignorance and politeness. Cyberspace and the opportunities it offers for business, society and education in particular need to be interrogated using a hermeneutics of suspicion, confronting certain myths, exploring opportunities and defining appropriate responses.

It is evident that the impact of the cyberspace stretches across the total spectrum of the human experience and condition. Due to the complexity of discussing the total spectrum of options this discussion focuses on Higher Education as one entity to demonstrate the implications and level of reflection required.
To come to terms with some of theses realities it is necessary to address some of the typical myths. The following aspects provide an indication of some of the myths:

Myth 1 - Access. The Internet and online education is not the great equaliser. Access to the Internet on a sustainable and affordable basis is still for the rich and the privileged. There is good reason to celebrate the widening access citizens have to the Internet. In the last number of years the so-called “digital-divide” has indeed decreased. It is however still disputable that having access to the World Wide Web changes lives for the better. For the World Wide Web to deliver on its promise of changing society into more just and compassionate communities, the other divides in society have to be addressed as well.
Myth 2 - Quality of information available. Even when/if sustainable and affordable access to the Internet would be available to all; the overwhelming quantity of information on the Internet would require participants to have critical information literacies. Such literacies will be crucial in allowing the “having access to more information” to really allow participants to live differently. Bauman (1989) and others warn of the increasing commodification and consumerisation of knowledge; the immense amounts of information available on the Web, results in information and knowledge becoming “cheap”, and un-validated.
Myth 3 – The role of race and gender. Current research indicates that the unequal socio-economic gender relations are perpetuated in cyberspace. Females have less access and often less frequent access due to prescribed and patriarchally perpetuated life-roles. Research also indicates that males frequently dominate online discussions, often relegating female participants to roles of quiet observer. In this “neutrality” of cyberspace the assumption often is that gender should not matter in a space where identity is often just a name and a short introduction. There is however enough research to validate the role identity and specifically race and gender play in online learning environments.
Myth 4 – Guaranteed success as learning platform. International research indicates that very few students opt for fully online learning. Even in countries where access to online environments are either state-sponsored or very cheap, learners do not prefer online learning to more face-to-face learning environments. Students seem to prefer a range of blended learning experiences, rather than fully online. This has impacted on several world-class universities forcing them to cancel fully online offerings. Fully online learning and interaction require specific literacies and personality traits of participants. Online learning is not a “one size fits all”.

Research in South Africa indicates that many learners use computers at work to access their learning environments. Not only does this impact on productivity, but learners therefore do not have access to their online learning environments over weekends and when they prepare for the examination. Employers also increasingly block mass-generated electronic correspondence from universities and limit learners’ access to the Internet. This results in learners experiencing growing frustrations with “fire-walls” that do not allow an effective learning environment.

Very few learners are sufficiently prepared to engage and sustain their own learning in a fully online environment. Institutions offering online learning are often inundated with requests for more support, often face-to-face.

Myth 5 - Quality in an online learning environment. At present there are no quality indicators specifically focused on online learning environments in higher education. The quality of the current offerings range from “drop-off and go” experiences where students carry the cost of printing materials with very little continued support and interaction from the side of the institution, to very intensive online teaching which overestimates the time and resources that students have for such learning.
Myth 6 - Accountability. Many overseas institutions offer online qualifications in other countries without any guarantee that the qualifications will be accredited by local institutions of learning or employers. Many students wrongfully belief that because it is offered by an international provider using online, that the learning experience will be of a high quality and that it will be accredited by local education institutions and employers.
Myth 7 - Global is better. Though there is a legitimate trend to ensure internationalisation in education, the need for contextual, local and authentic learning remains equally important. The challenges learners face are often context-specific and international tutors in online environments often have very little understanding for the cultural and socio-economic specificities of local contexts. Some metaphors and examples often used in online environments exclude participants from non –western cultures to fully comprehend and apply the learning to their own contexts.
Myth 8 - Online teaching and learning is ideologically neutral. All curricula arise from context specific ideological and socio-economic relations and epistemologies. Very few institutions foreground their specific beliefs and assumptions about knowledge and learning. This is even more so applicable in online learning environments where the “designers” of the learning are often even more hidden than in face-to-face contexts.

Opportunities

The Internet does however offer scores of opportunities for institutions of higher learning to seriously consider. The following is but a few of the opportunities that await careful and critical consideration.

Opportunity 1 - Reaching the un-reached. Yes, online teaching and learning bring opportunities to many learners who have been previously excluded from training, development and higher education. The reach of higher education does not only entail those who were previously excluded, but also brings into reach qualifications at internationally renowned institutions.
Opportunity 2 - Access to information. With the Internet, students have access to the most recent, cutting-edge information. Students will increasingly be able to compile their own curricula and have it validated by institutions of higher learning. Students now have access to the international discourses in the different disciplines at the click of a mouse. While there is a real danger that not all students have (yet) the critical literacies required by the Information age and secondly that they may be overwhelmed and become lost in cyberspace.
Opportunity 3 - Communication. With the Internet and other mobile communication technologies, learners can increasingly be in touch with institutions of learning and educators and peers. Learning experiences can be enriched by synchronous and asynchronous communication, between the institution and tutors, tutors among themselves, between tutors and learners and among learners themselves. Online learning really open up a Habermasian “public sphere” for “communicative action”.
Opportunity 4 - Mode 3 knowledge-production. Traditionally knowledge production in higher education focused on discipline specific transfer of knowledge, called mode 1 knowledge production. Paulo Freire called this “banking education” (1989). Recent years saw the development of Mode 2 knowledge production where knowledge was applied and arose from practical application to appropriate problem-spaces. Online learning environments make it increasingly possible to move to Mode 3 knowledge production where learners address problem-space from the foundations of a specific discipline but then continue to explore contributions from a range of other disciplines Knowledge production has moved form “knowing-how” to “knowing-in-the-world”. Barnett refers to this change as an “ontological turn” (2005).

The changing role of higher education

It will be naïve and irresponsible for higher education not to interrogate popular notions and epistemologies of online education and the role of the Internet. We have explored a number of myths and (hopefully) created sufficient suspicion to invite further discourse. We have also explored a number of opportunities an online environment offers to business, higher education and society in general.

Higher education has to indeed decrease the “digital divide” not only in the form of broadening access, but also by seriously interrogating the accompanying epistemologies. From the above it would seem as if a responsible and robust response would entail the following:

Response 1 - Empower learners with critical literacies for the information age. having access to the information the Internet offers will challenge higher education institutions and learners alike to be able to critically evaluate information and its sources. While addressing access may in fact decrease the digital divide but it is worthless if the decrease in the digital divide does not and cannot result in students’ critical engagement with information and with one-another.
Response 2 - Increase access to the Internet through collaborative agreements. Higher education institutions have much more bargaining power than individual learners. It is almost unbelievable that with the “captive audiences” higher education institutions have, that they have not been successful to negotiate more affordable and sustainable access to online environments.
Response 3 – Develop quality online learning. Higher education should be very clear about the minimum standards for learning platforms, opportunities for peer and tutor interaction and the sustaining of a teacher presence in Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs).
Response 4 – Maintain scholarly online teaching. Higher education should encourage research, individual and collaborative projects to determine the indicators of success of online learning in specific contexts for specific audiences.
Response 5 – Higher education as critical praxis. Higher education traditionally has validated all claims to knowledge and expertise. As Barnett (2000, 2005) has indicated, higher education is no longer the only “producers of knowledge”. However, higher education still has the mandate to validate knowledge, whether claimed or made available in cyberspace. Higher education has the unique opportunity to rise to the occasion and to interrogate knowledge claims. The opportunities should be considered in the context of the realities of cyberspace as discussed. Fundamental to this is the fact that it requires higher education to increase the capacity of students for critical and compassionate action to assist in the formation and utilisation of the challenges and new opportunities. Essentially the challenge is to create opportunities and empower students and the broader society to utilise the potential cyberspace towards a more just and equitable society.

In Conclusion

There are a number of myths surrounding online education and the impact of the Internet on business, education and development. Only once cyber space has been demythologised, it is then that our eyes open to the opportunities that it offers. Higher education is therefore called upon to reflexively exploit the opportunities online learning and the Internet offer to engaging one another in learning experiences. Higher education will do well to take both the myths and the opportunities seriously and courageously.

Cyberspace is a new frontier. As previously done with colonial frontiers, this frontier can be exploited ruthlessly. There is however also an opportunity for business and higher education to engage with cyberspace – and use cyberspace to create hospitable, nourishing environments for active learning and a more just and equitable society for all.

References

Barnett, R. 2000. University knowledge in an age of supercomplexity. Higher Education 40:409-422.
Barnett, R. 2005. Recapturing the universal in the university. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 37(6):785-797.
Bauman, Z.1998. Globalization. The human consequences. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Bennet, CJ. 2001. Cookies, web bugs, webcams and cue cats: patterns of surveillance on the World Wide Web. Ethics and Information Technology 3:197-210.
Borer, MI. The Cyborgian self: toward a critical social theory of cyberspace. Available URL:
http://reconstruction.eserver.org/023/borer.htm (accessed on 10/04/2007).
Freire, P. 1989. Learning to question: a pedagogy of liberation. Geneva: World Council of Churches.
Gunn, C, McSporran, M, Macleod, H & French, S. 2003. Dominant or different? Gender issues in computer support learning. JALN 7(1):14-30.
Grierson, EM. From cemeteries to cyberspace: identity and a globally technologised age. Available URL: Click here!
(accessed on 10/04/2007).
Irvine, M. 1999. Global cyber culture reconsidered: cyberspace, identity and the global informational city. Available URL: http://www.georgetown.edu/faculty/irvinem/articles/globalculture.html
(accessed on 10/04/2007).
Jordan, T. 1999. Cyberpower: the culture and politics of cyberspace. Available URL:
http://www.isoc.org/inet99/proceedings/3i/3i_1.htm (accessed on 10/04/2007).
Newman, R & Johnson, F. 1999. Sites of power and knowledge? Towards a critique of the virtual university. British Journal of Sociology of Education 20(1):79-88.
Prinsloo, P. 2005. Don Quixote in cyberspace – charging at the invisible. Open and Distance learning in Africa Number 1, 2006: 78-94.
Usher, R. 2002. Putting space back on the map: globalisation, place and identity. Educational Philosophy and Theory 43(1):2002.
Walmsley, DJ. 2000. Community, place and cyberspace. Australian Geographer 31(1):5-19.

Back

Economic and Management Sciences

Education

Health Sciences

The Humanities

Law

Natural and Agricultural Sciences

Theology and Religion

Open Distance Learning

Business School

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