SA deserves more than empty promises

POLITICAL parties have started campaigning for the 2024 national elections. One could tell from the questions by the opposition parties and answers by the president in the recent question-and-answer session in Parliament.

The opposition parties will bring up old empty promises that have not been fulfilled by the ruling party and the ruling party will make new promises that it cannot account for.

For instance, the ruling party has said before we will never experience load-shedding and the opposition has tried to hold it accountable to that rhetoric in Parliament and the media. Although it has come up again, this time with the appointment of the minister of electricity for the sole purpose of fulfilling the promise of ending load-shedding – there is at least a plan.

However, the promises by the last administration have created a trust-deficit among the ruling party, the people and the opposition.

In addition to this, the opposition parties have realised that they cannot hold the ruling party to its promises in Parliament because it has slight and subtle characteristics of oligarchy.

The opposition have realised this and resorted to the courts.

On January 23, 2023, the UDM, Build One South Africa, IFP and other organisations lodged an application in the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria to interdict Eskom, the president, the minister of mineral resources and energy as well as the minister of public enterprise to stop load-shedding.

They are requesting the court to order as an interim relief that the government exempts or supports public health establishments, public schools, electronic communications networks, the SAPS, small and medium businesses, and any entity responsible for water from load-shedding.

They are also requesting the court to order the shutting down of certain power stations be reviewed and be set aside and that Eskom, the president, the minister of mineral resources and energy and the minister of public enterprises be ordered to account and provide specific actions that are being taken to end load-shedding, such as the budget allocated for it and the time it will take to end load-shedding. This court case was heard this week.

The organisations are well within their right to approach a court that has competent jurisdiction because section 152(1)(b) of the Constitution states that the local government has to “ensure the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner” and there are other rights in the Constitution such as the right to education, the right to life, the right to healthcare, food, water and social security, and the right to freedom of trade, occupation and profession that are impacted by load-shedding.

It was revealed in former CEO of Eskom Andre De Ruyter’s answering affidavit that there was a reconstruction and development programme to provide electricity to an additional 2.5 million households and when that target was achieved, a further surplus demand after industrial growth.

The opposition can therefore also make these promises without accounting with a plan to assure the people that they can fulfil their promises. In the upcoming elections, the citizens deserve to be offered plans or policies, not empty promises, to allow them to make an informed choice at the voting booth.