Thulani Dasa | 18 January 2026 The minister of labour must introduce clear, strategic interventions to decisively reduce South Africa’s unacceptably high unemployment. This cannot remain a discussion exercise while millions of citizens are locked out of economic participation. We must urgently identify basic and entry-level jobs that should be prioritised for only South African citizens. Fuel station attendants are often foreign nationals. On farms, in restaurants and in other low skill sectors, the pattern repeats itself. There is something fundamentally wrong when work that requires basic skills, jobs that should serve as an entry point into the economy for our youth, are largely performed by foreign nationals while South Africans remain unemployed and wallow in poverty. This is not xenophobia. It is patriotism. Every responsible state prioritises and protects its citizens in its labour market while managing migration lawfully and humanely. South Africa must do the same. Economic inclusion of citizens is not negotiable. Without it, social cohesion, dignity and national stability will continue to erode. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.businessday.co.za/opinion/2026-01-18-letter-prioritise-jobs-for-sa-citizens/

Lindsey Schutters | 18 January 2026 To quote The Cardigans: “Dear, I fear we’re facing a problem.” Right now, the Electronic Communications Act (ECA) treats all networks that serve internet connectivity the same, but the regulations assume terrestrial infrastructure. So, when trying to apply it to an internet service provider that operates via low-Earth orbit (LEO) satellites and may never touch the internet infrastructure on South African territory, you have an inherent problem. The citizens do not own the sky, but we should (through our democratically elected representatives) have some say on what data moves across our radio spectrum. And there should also be a local presence to help with customer complaints, and with national security concerns. To that end, Communications Minister Solly Malatsi is correct in his assertion that the country needs reform. But to be fair to the laws as they stand, choosing the path of circumventing ownership regulations around the country’s scarce national resources might not be the best option. Yes, there is an anti-BEE agenda Whe n Dion George sat down with Heidi Giokos to read his party resignation letter to the nation, his answers to the subsequent questions were coded with all the same language of the IRR and DA’s crusade. George suddenly had much to say about “race laws” and the need for “equivalence” – a clear wink to equity equivalent investment programmes (EEIPs) as an alternative to direct black ownership. In turn, by directing the regulator to align strictly with the B-BBEE ICT Sector Code (which allows for EEIPs for service companies like Microsoft and IBM) he is effectively creating a path for multinationals like SpaceX to bypass the strict 30% historically disadvantaged group equity requirement that Icasa has clung to with regards to dishing out licenses. However, the department insists this is standard practice rather than a political crusade. Malatsi’s spokesperson, Kwena Moloto, responding to questions from Daily Maverick, argued that “EEIPs are not new. They are an established mechanism that has been used to unlock investment and deliver practical empowerment outcomes... Since 2007, there have been 23 international companies that have utilised EEIPs.” He was also careful to clarify that this doesn’t exempt companies from the law: “Scarce natural resources owned by the state are typically made available for use through usage licences. Section 10 of the B-BBEE Act requires that where a licence is granted, the licensee must comply with the B-BBEE Act. This does not change.” An alternative direction When pressed to list other possible market entrants who would benefit from EEIPs, Moloto said that “it is not for the minister to pre-announce which companies may be considering an EEIP application”, aiming to depoliticise the specific Starlink connection. But practically, the political football about ownership should actually be a technical discussion about sovereignty and safety. Malatsi doesn’t need to fight the ownership battle to get Starlink into the country. He could simply look up. The current ECA was written for towers, fibre and copper. Things that are physically planted in South African soil. This creates a massive regulatory loophole that should be closed by enforcing some kind of local presence to comply with enforcement of consumer protection laws. Satellite operators like Intelsat and Eutelsat have been serving South African users without owning significant local infrastructure because the spectrum access is managed by the UN’s International Telecommunication Union. If their data traffic never touches a local gateway (thanks to inter-satellite links), Icasa’s traditional enforcement tools become toothless. Eating humble pie It’s on this technicality that Malatsi is very much justified in his pursuit of an EEIP directive. Starlink needs to obtain an Electronic Communications Network Service licence – permission to operate a network – and an ECS (Electronic Communications Service) licence – permission to provide connectivity to end‑users. Mobile virtual network operators have historically operated under ECS licences without facing the same rigid equity ownership requirements as network owners. Then it’s just about applying for landing rights and getting the equipment (terminals and routers) approved by Icasa. This is where the minister’s focus should be. Rather than just finding a workaround for the 30% ownership rule, he should be working with Icasa to expand the scope of the ECA to explicitly include non-geostationary satellite constellation operators. It’s a parity problem, not an equity problem The Association of Communications and Technology (ACT) – which represents mobile network operators like Vodacom, MTN and Rain – has been careful with its words, but the message is clear: “No exceptions.” ACT CEO Nomvuyiso Batyi took this stance when Malatsi’s draft directive was first tabled in May 2025. In a response at the time, she said that ACT constituents support innovation and were not opposed to having a new competitor, but it must be “within the same rules that everyone else follows”. Their concern is about regulatory parity. Local operators spend billions on spectrum licences, universal service obligations and Rica compliance. If a global player is allowed to swoop in, offer services without a local licence and bypass the heavy lifting of national security compliance because the law doesn’t quite know how to categorise them, that is fundamentally unfair competition. And, if Malatsi pushes the EEIP route solely to solve the ownership problem, he risks ignoring the operating problem. Starlink needs to be regulated not just as a company that needs to be owned by locals, but as a unique type of network that requires specific checks and balances. A better route to the stars Malatsi is right: the system is clogged. But the blockage isn’t black ownership. The obstacle is an analogue law trying to regulate a digital space race. Instead of burning political capital, the minister could instruct Icasa to modernise the licensing framework and mandate a local legal presence (not necessarily equity partners) for Rica and consumer disputes. By framing the solution almost exclusively around the DA’s preferred mechanism of equivalence, he might be missing the chance to fix the actual wiring of our telecommunications regulations. We don’t just need a workaround for Elon Musk; we need a modernised ECA that is ready for the future of the internet. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2026-01-18-opinion-mixed-signals-are-muddying-the-starlink-debate-waters/

IOL News - Journal News | 14 January 2026 The Department of Employment and Labour said the submission would mark the first year in the submission of EE Reports since the amendment of the EE Act that now requires designated employers to prepare and implement EE Plans for the period from 1 September 2025 until 31 August 2030. The department explained that the Employment Equity Amendment Act, No. 4 of 2022, became operational from 1 January 2025. Since then, two sets of EE Regulations on EE reporting forms and other EE templates, and the 5-year sector EE targets for the eighteen economic sectors were published on 15 April 2025 to provide guidelines to employers and employees on how to interpret and implement the EE amendments and sector EE targets. In terms of the EE Amendment Act, designated employers will, for compliance purposes, be assessed against their own annual targets set towards meeting the relevant 5-year sectoral numerical targets.  The 5-year sectoral numerical targets are key milestones towards achieving the equitable representation of the different designated groups within the four upper occupational levels in an employer’s workforce in relation to the demographics of the applicable economically active population (EAP), and for persons with disabilities. In terms of the EE Act, it is important that the reports submitted must contain the prescribed information and must be signed by the Chief Executive Officer of the designated employer. The National Employers' Association of South Africa (NEASA) explained that missing the deadline to submit the EE reports may lead to Labour Court action and possible fines. It added that employers should keep evidence of attempts to submit in case there were system glitches or the system crashed. “It is certainly not ideal to miss the deadline, and therefore employers are advised to, should errors occur, continue their efforts to submit and to keep record of their attempts by taking screenshots of the error messages. “Employers should not wait until the last minute on 15 January to submit in order to avoid this pitfall.  Non-submission of EE reports will place designated employers in an extremely difficult position as they will simply be non-compliant. Although there is no guarantee that proof of attempts to submit and the error messages received will be accepted as an excuse, at the very least it may be used to attempt to mitigate the fallout of non-submission.”   *This article was first published by IOL News ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://journalnews.co.za/news/urgent-15-jan-2026-employment-equity-reports-deadline-key-information-for-employers

Creamer Media | 14 January 2026 In response to an increasingly complex regulatory and policy environment, senior leaders across South Africa’s mining and original equipment manufacturing (OEM) sectors are being invited to participate in two focused, outcomes-driven workshops to be held on February 5, 2026, in Johannesburg. Hosted by the industry association OEM Mining Supply Forum in collaboration with the Minerals Council South Africa, the workshops are positioned as strategic platforms for executives and decision-makers responsible for broad-based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE), Mining Charter compliance, skills development, procurement and sustainability. The initiative comes at a time of significant policy and regulatory developments affecting the sector. These include recent changes to employment equity regulations, the proposed Transformation Fund of the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (DTIC), anticipated amendments to the Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development Act (MPRDA), and ongoing alignment challenges between the BBBEE Codes, verification agencies and major mining companies. The February workshops are intended to move the conversation beyond compliance, towards practical strategies that deliver sustainable employment outcomes and broader economic participation. A Mid-Year Platform for Strategic Alignment Following engagements between the Secretariat of the OEM Mining Supply Forum and the Minerals Council, the workshops have been structured as interventions aimed at aligning mines, OEMs and their supply chains around effective skills development and inclusive procurement strategies. The sessions will explore how industry stakeholders can better coordinate internal training, supplier development and procurement spend to deliver demonstrable socio-economic impact, while remaining aligned with regulatory expectations and reporting requirements. Companies are invited to nominate two to three representatives a session, with attendance strongly encouraged from decision-makers responsible for strategic planning, compliance oversight, and the allocation of skills development and procurement budgets. Workshop Structure and Focus Areas The workshops will take place in Johannesburg and will feature a keynote address by attorney and strategic advisor to the mining industry Kevin Lester. The keynote will position current Mining Charter and MPRDA developments as a critical opportunity for suppliers to play a more active role in shaping regulation that is both workable and investable. Grounded in constitutional and administrative-law principles, the address will outline a practical playbook for collective engagement, collaboration with the Minerals Council, and supplier-led models that advance inclusion without undermining competitiveness. The event will be split into two distinct but complementary workshops. The morning session, titled “Skills Development for Meaningful Employment” (08:30 – 12:00), will be led by multiple industry experts and will focus on rethinking how skills development expenditure is directed and measured. Topics include redirecting spend towards programmes that lead to sustainable employability, aligning internal, customer and supplier training needs with credible outcomes-based initiatives, and tracking the long-term impact of training investments. Participants will also explore how skills development initiatives can be better integrated into yearly sustainability and impact reporting. Following a shared lunch break, the afternoon session, “Local Procurement for Economic Growth and Job Retention” (12:45 – 15:30), will address the growing expectation that procurement strategies demonstrate tangible socio-economic outcomes beyond BBBEE scorecard levels alone. Industry experts will cover best practices in local sourcing, inclusive supplier measurement, and the tracking of procurement impact, including job creation, youth and disability inclusion, gender representation and supplier capability development. The session will also examine approaches to mitigating fronting and supplier dependency risks through diversified sourcing strategies. From Compliance to Demonstrable Impact A central objective of the workshops is to help participating companies identify and showcase best practice in skills development and local procurement, while developing measurable indicators of impact that resonate with government, clients, investors and broader society. By creating a shared understanding of what constitutes meaningful impact – and how it can be tracked and communicated – the organisers aim to strengthen the sector’s collective description around transformation, sustainability and economic inclusion. Registration Details OEMs and mining companies are requested to submit their nominees by no later than January 28, 2026. Registration can be completed online at: https://tinyurl.com/4vw7wz4s or by emailing: admin@oemforum.co.za. Although attendance is complimentary, the attendance of each nominee from the mines and OEMs will be confirmed in writing by email from the OEM secretary,  and is subject to seating availability.   With regulatory scrutiny intensifying and expectations around socio-economic impact continuing to evolve, the February workshops offer senior industry leaders a timely opportunity to align strategy, compliance and sustainability objectives – and to contribute to a more coherent and credible transformation narrative for South Africa’s mining and manufacturing sectors.  ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/industry-leaders-to-examine-practical-approaches-to-mining-transformation-2026-01-13

Yuneal Padayachy | 14 January 2026 As we move into the new year, we do so with optimism and energy to deliver impact through Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) legislation. 2025 has seen a number of debates surrounding B-BBEE legislation, some positive, some negative, but nevertheless under the spotlight in various ways. The year of 2025 introduced new concepts such as the Enterprise and Supplier Development Fund by the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition (dtic), the implementation of the Employment Equity Act, Regulations and Numerical Sectoral Targets, debates around the viability of implementation of the Legal B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice, discussions on reviewing B-BBEE legislation to improve its implementation, and the introduction of empowerment models that shift away from race-based policies. While 2025 brought no new B-BBEE legislative changes, clarity was provided. The focus is to drive economic growth and impact through B-BBEE legislation. In 2026, we are looking forward to the introduction of new B-BBEE legislative amendments, updates on B-BBEE Sector Codes of Good Practice as well as the formalised introduction of the Enterprise and Supplier Development Fund. This year, South African businesses face the true test: Can B-BBEE transformation translate into measurable outcomes, not just reports and scorecards? From policy to performance For business leaders, 2026 signals a transition from policy talk to performance proof. The new employment equity framework requires designated employers to align with sectoral targets for representation and inclusivity, or face penalties including disqualification from state contracts. Simultaneously, B-BBEE verification is evolving to link to real impact through initiatives and test substance. The emphasis is shifting from compliance documentation to real, sustainable empowerment. B-BBEE transformation should therefore not be judged by paperwork, but by the impact on Black beneficiaries. Authentic B-BBEE transformation In 2026, the trend we hope to see more frequently is that companies see B-BBEE transformation as a growth strategy that will lead the market rather than a regulatory requirement. Authentic B-BBEE transformation is about building capability, competitiveness and credibility in the marketplace. Key priorities include: Aligning B-BBEE and employment equity strategies so that recruitment, promotion, ownership and preferential procurement work together. Investing in skills development for a future-ready workforce especially in technology, renewable energy and digital industries. Supporting enterprise and supplier development, particularly Black-owned and Black women-owned businesses to grow within major value chains. The broader B-BBEE transformation agenda B-BBEE transformation in 2026 extends beyond legislative compliance into environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance and inclusive capitalism. Inclusive growth through ESG: Investors and global clients now evaluate how companies contribute to equitable opportunity, fair pay and diverse leadership. Just transition opportunities: The green economy opens pathways for new Black industrialists and designated groups, Black youth employment and Black women’s leadership in renewable energy and infrastructure. Digital empowerment: As AI, automation and data redefine business, digital transformation must include Black professionals, SMMEs and innovators to prevent a new digital divide. This integration of economic empowerment, sustainability and digital inclusion is defining a new leadership agenda, one that links profitability and impact with purpose. Accountability, transparency and mindset 2026 will demand visibility. Compliance submissions are no longer enough; companies must provide evidence of outcomes, progress reports, demographic shifts and investment in development pipelines. Boards and leadership teams should be expected to take ownership. The responsibility should not be solely left to managers or employees of the company. B-BBEE transformation key performance indicators (KPIs) should form part of executive scorecards. Transparency with stakeholders such as employees, clients and investors, will become a marker of credibility. The question is changing from “Are we compliant?” to “What sustainable impact are we making?” In order to drive B-BBEE transformation, the correct mindset is needed. Education around why we have B-BBEE legislation in South Africa is critical to its success. The BEE Chamber encourages all individuals to upskill on the details of B-BBEE legislation as more often than not, the lack of understanding and knowledge is where incorrect implementation emanates. B-BBEE transformation as growth Many may disagree, but B-BBEE transformation is not about politics, tenders or corruption, it is about performance, productivity, impact, growth, sustainability and potential. Companies that integrate empowerment into their strategy, unlock access to new markets, talent and innovation. Those that delay will face competitive and reputational risk. The future of business in South Africa depends on inclusive participation. B-BBEE transformation is not a cost, it is the most powerful investment we can make in sustainable growth. 2026 will not be the year South Africa debates B-BBEE transformation again, it will be the year business proves its commitment through action, transparency and measurable progress, as well as government providing a conducive environment and policy clarity and innovation. When B-BBEE transformation delivers, South Africa wins. https://www.bizcommunity.com/article/the-year-b-bbee-transformation-must-deliver-not-just-report-394418a

Duma Gqubule | 13 January 2026 Flawed methodologies behind mining’s empowerment claims. In his 2024 state of the nation address President Cyril Ramaphosa said the participation of black people in the mining industry was increasing. “Black ownership stands at approximately 39% ... compared with 2% in 2004,” he said. Last month, during a discussion about Anglo American’s merger with Canadian company Teck Resources, which I opposed and he supported, mining minister Gwede Mantashe repeated the fake 39% statistic. The measurement of black ownership has lost all credibility, and this should be the first priority during trade, industry & competition minister Parks Tau’s review of broad-based BEE (BBBEE) policies. This is due to fatal policy mistakes the government made when drafting the BEE codes and sector charters, especially in mining and finance. There has also been a proliferation of fake statistics about black ownership, which have polluted public discourse. The maze of conflicting statistics has confused the public. The measurement of black ownership has lost all credibility, and this should be the first priority during trade, industry & competition minister Parks Tau’s review of broad-based BEE policies. In 2022 the BBBEE Commission said JSE companies had an average black ownership of 39% in 2021. At the end of December 2021, the JSE had a market capitalisation of R20.5-trillion. The 39% finding implied that black people owned assets worth R8-trillion, which was obviously impossible and should not even be debated. The commission must tell the public that it is not measuring actual black ownership but something else. We have a serious problem if the government cannot measure black ownership or if the rules allow it to make such bizarre findings. Last year Wits University professor William Gumede said R1-trillion had been transferred to about 100 politically connected people by 2008. Yet my analysis of three excellent databases that have tracked such information shows that there were BEE transactions worth R345bn between 1994 and 2008. Anyone with an elementary knowledge of such things knows that most transactions during the first wave of BEE unravelled during the late 1990s in the wake of an emerging market crisis. Many other BEE transactions did not transfer ownership to black people, and most beneficiaries were not politically connected. Ramaphosa took the 39% statistic from a Minerals Council report that did not explain the methodologies it used to make the finding or publish information for each company. This is not surprising because the Mining Charter is a shambles of a document that betrays from start to finish every principle of empowerment that the country has developed over many years. The “once empowered, always empowered” principle makes a mockery of empowerment. The charter has no rules or scorecard with definitions on how to measure ownership. It has no mechanism to independently verify the BEE contributions of companies. Mining is the only sector where companies do not have to produce a BEE certificate from an independent verification agency. The “once empowered, always empowered” principle makes a mockery of empowerment. An analogy to explain this absurd principle is that companies can continue to recognise black directors in perpetuity after they have left a board. A “whites only” board can therefore count as empowered. The charter has no rules on how to measure or monitor net value that accrues to black shareholders after they have settled their debt. The industry believes in a voetstoots sale of production to black shareholders with no obligations to ensure they transfer net value. It considers the signing of a transaction as the achievement of the target. But under the BEE codes the achievement of the target is a 10-year process, not an event. Full compliance can be achieved only when net value has been transferred. Any measurement of black ownership that uses the charter is not credible. Tau’s review of BEE must abolish this sham of a charter and align it with national policies. • Gqubule is an adviser on economic development and transformation. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.businessday.co.za/opinion/2026-01-13-duma-gqubule-bee-statistics-lack-credibility-by-any-measure/

Marcus Moloko | 12 January 2026 SpaceX founder and chief executive Elon Musk has renewed his criticism of South Africa’s telecommunications rules, claiming his satellite internet service Starlink is being kept out of the country because he is “not black”. In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Musk said: “Starlink is not allowed to have an internet provider license in South Africa for the sole reason that I am not black. This is not OK.” Musk’s comments followed his appearance at the Qatar Economic Forum in 2025, where he condemned laws that give preferential treatment based on race. Musk, who has the largest stake in SpaceX, said that South Africa’s Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) rules, which require 30% equity ownership by historically disadvantaged groups, have prevented Starlink from launching. The billionaire said he is “extremely opposed to any anti-black and anti-white laws,” insisting that South Africa now has “more anti-white laws than there were anti-black laws under Apartheid”. He maintains that Starlink supports equity equivalents, pointing to a R500 million pledge to provide free internet to 5,000 rural schools as part of its commitment to social upliftment. In December 2025, Communications Minister Solly Malatsi issued a policy directive that formally recognised Equity Equivalent Investment Programmes (EEIPs) as valid alternatives to the rigid 30% direct ownership requirements under South Africa’s Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) framework. The directive was designed to attract multinational investment in the ICT sector by allowing companies to contribute through large-scale social and infrastructure projects rather than ceding equity. Malatsi emphasised that EEIPs could accelerate broadband access and digital inclusion, noting that over 90% of public submissions supported the reform. For Starlink, which has pledged R500 million to provide free internet to 5,000 rural schools, the directive appeared to create a pathway to compliance without restructuring SpaceX’s ownership model. Despite this policy, the Independent Communications Authority of South Africa (ICASA) has yet to implement the directive, leaving Starlink’s licensing prospects in limbo. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://insidepolitic.co.za/watch-elon-musk-slams-sa-laws-as-starlink-still-grounded-over-not-black-hurdle/

Although entering into an Enterprise or Supplier Development loan contract is generally done with the best intentions, some loans issued will inevitably be defaulted on or, in the worst case, a Beneficiary will refuse to repay it. When giving a loan, an organisation has the full rights of recovery; however, this has to be clear in the terms and conditions. First and foremost, a loan must take the form of a debt instrument; thus, it must never be a grant disguised as a loan.   Any loan made with the intention of not receiving repayment of the capital amount is not a loan but a grant and must be claimed as such. Consequently, claiming a loan under Enterprise or Supplier Development instead of a grant is Fronting Practice.   However, if a beneficiary fails to repay a bona fide loan, an organisation may offer a Beneficiary a grant which will allow them to repay the loan. Otherwise, an organisation can write off the loan or follow the legal route based on the terms and conditions of a particular loan.   Enterprise & Supplier Development Services are available to guide Members to ensure their contracts align with the requirements of the relevant B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice.

A B-BBEE Code of Good Practice is a framework of measurement on a Measured Entity scores points to achieve a specific B-BBEE Status Level. It consists of all principles, calculations, and methodologies on how this is executed.   As per Clause 3 of Statement 000 of the Amended General B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice , the following is stated:   3.      APPLICATION OF THE CODES 3.1    The   following Entities are measurable under the Codes:   3.1.1       all Organs of State and Public Entities; 3.1.2       all Measured Entities that undertake any economic activity with all Organs of State and Public Entities; 3.1.3       any other Measured Entity that undertakes any economic activity, whether direct or indirect, with any other Measured Entity that is subject to measurement under paragraph 3.1.1 to 3.1.2 and which is seeking to establish its own B-BBEE compliance.   Technical Services  are on hand to assist with the understanding of the above.

Statistics South Africa is the source used to determine the Net Profit After Tax (NPAT) for calculating the targets for Enterprise Development, Supplier Development and Socio-Economic Development. The latest statistics  were published during December 2025. The statistics in this version will be for the   3 rd  quarter of 2025.   Any B-BBEE Verification from hereon would most commonly apply the latest Industry Norms  published by Statistics South Africa. For example, if a B-BBEE Verification takes place in January 2026, the latest published stats to be used would be those posted during December 2025.   Technical Compliance Services  are available to guide members in calculating their Targets.

Tara Roos | 6 January 2026 Land reform and rural development minister Mzwanele Nyhontso has disclosed that forensic audits into farm equity schemes are happening, with the department pursuing fund recovery and considering further investigations into corruption. This follows a written question in the National Assembly by MK MP Andile Mngxitama, who asked what measures are in place to address corruption benefiting white farmers and to secure justice for farmworkers. Farm equity schemes were introduced to broaden ownership in commercial agriculture by allocating shares to farmworkers, often through trusts or joint ventures. The intention was to deliver dividends, representation, and eventual tenure security. In practice, however, many schemes collapsed under weak governance. Workers were excluded from management decisions, dividends were withheld, and equity was diluted or sold off under questionable circumstances. These failures undermined constitutional obligations under section 25 of the Constitution to ensure equitable access to land and section 23 to protect labour rights. Nyhontso explained that the department shifted from equity schemes to the strengthening of relative rights programme, under which land was purchased by the state and leased to joint ventures between former owners and farmworkers. He acknowledged that the programme experienced shortcomings, prompting a forensic audit. The minister confirmed that recommendations are being implemented “by way of recovering the funds” and that further investigations into equity schemes will be considered to determine whether corruption occurred and to provide remedial action. He added that justice for farmworkers would be pursued where wrongdoing is found. The report by investigator Mpho Sebashe, referenced in Mngxitama’s parliamentary question, documented how farmworkers in the Northern Cape were misled into selling their shares for as little as R20 000 each, losing multimillion‑rand stakes in 22 commercial farms. Sebashe’s findings pointed to fronting practices and systemic corruption, with government departments slow to act on recommendations. His work has become central to demands that the department confront corruption benefiting white farmers and deliver restitution to workers who were stripped of promised equity. Nyhontso’s reply aligns with these concerns by committing to audits and recovery, but it stops short of publishing findings or detailing restitution mechanisms. The broader context is South Africa’s highly unequal agricultural sector. Formal surveys confirm that white farmers continue to produce the majority of key commercial crops, while black farmers’ contributions are often confined to household use and informal markets, leaving them under-represented in official data. Ownership disparities remain stark: the Bureau for Food and Agricultural Policy notes that more than 70% of farmland remains in white hands, while black ownership accounts for less than 10%. Stats SA data shows that white commercial farmers dominate maize, wheat, and citrus production, while black farmers are concentrated in small‑scale livestock and household food security. These figures underscore why equity schemes were politically and constitutionally significant: they were meant to shift ownership patterns and embed transformation in commercial agriculture. Their failure and the corruption documented by Sebashe highlight how entrenched inequalities persist despite decades of reform initiatives. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.corruptionwatch.org.za/government-embarks-on-audits-into-farm-worker-equity-schemes/

Infrastructure News | 5 January 2026 Speaking at Water Wise’s Drop-by-Drop Water Conservation Outreach Project in Soweto – Nkanyezi Blose, project manager, EWSETA – highlights that communities are central to building a sustainable future. The Energy and Water Sector Education and Training Authority (EWSETA) is one of South Africa’s 21 Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) established under the Skills Development Act. “We are proud to work together with all of these stakeholders to build a sustainable community in Soweto. When community members have access to skills and knowledge, they have the power to transform the environment, the economy and the future,” says Blose. EWSETA builds, plans and manages skills development and training in the energy and water sector. The organisation researches the skills needed for both sectors and implements learnerships, internships, apprenticeships and skills programmes in different communities and also collaborates with different government departments and organisations. Blose adds that townships in particular have a shortage of skilled and qualified water and sanitation artisans. “Municipalities often lack the skills to maintain infrastructure and detect and repair leaks. There is also a phenomenon where skilled people are retiring and leaving the workplace and we need people to replace them.” In the water space, EWSETA focuses on skills around water conservation and management, water quality and treatment, infrastructure maintenance, wastewater treatment, water reuse and recycling, water monitoring and data management. “We don’t only need scientists and engineers. For every young person who hasn’t made it to university, there is still a path forward: technical training, on-the-job experience, entrepreneurial development. We believe that everyone can learn a skill. Everyone can build something. And it is these skills that will build a new tomorrow,” concludes Blose. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://infrastructurenews.co.za/2026/01/05/empowering-communities-through-skills-for-a-sustainable-water-future/