I was surprised to read that Peter Bruce had included me in his column two weeks ago as a member of “The Left” that had conspired to “cancel” Capitec CEO Gerrie Fourie. It seems like Bruce has spent too much time reading about American culture wars and not enough time understanding how to measure unemployment in South Africa and the long history of that endeavour. I know labour economists of a variety of political persuasions and none of them believe the unemployment rate is anywhere close to 10%.
Bruce’s defence of Fourie is that Capitec has a lot of data, and Fourie says something similar in a recent interview published elsewhere. But this “millions and trillions” argument is unconvincing without telling us what that data says that backs up the claim that the unemployment rate is 10%.
One would expect that after all the pushback he received, Fourie would bring out all the evidence he and Capitec’s army of data scientists and AI tools could muster. But he instead gave us two nothingburger facts: first that 3-million Capitec customers have money coming into their accounts frequently that are not salaries and some of this income “is believed” to be earned in the informal sector; and second that the 2023 Finscope survey finds that the informal sector is double the size of Stats SA’s estimate.
The first fact is interesting, but without more analysis it isn’t clear what it means. Given the history of migrant labour in Southern Africa, some of these 3-million customers could be people receiving remittances from employed family members, which would tell us something important about how people without employment survive but not that unemployment is 10%. The Stats SA 2023 General Household Survey estimates that around 2.5-million households in South Africa receive remittances.
The second fact provided by Fourie is just embarrassing for him. While it is true that the size of the informal sector in the Finmark 2023 survey is double that of Stats SA’s estimate in 2023, the size of the formal sector is 23% lower. This means that total employment estimated from 2023 Finscope is very similar to the QLFS estimate, and unsurprisingly Finscope finds an unemployment rate of 37%. The large differences in the two estimates of the size of the informal sector deserve further investigation but cannot be taken as evidence for a 10% unemployment rate.
Fourie made an obviously false claim in his Business Day article, which he has not acknowledged or apologised for. He followed this up with non-evidence for his position thereafter. Fourie, Bruce and those who support Fourie’s fringe position are wrong, and they should admit it. Solutions to and explanations for high unemployment are what we need to debate, and the debate should be conducted by people who know something about the issue. Fourie and Bruce should bow out of it.
— Andrew Kerr, associate professor, School of Economics, UCT
National dialogue admits failure
If a “National Dialogue” is to be a national dialogue, then participants should be communities through their elected representatives, not people selected by the failing government.
The subject of a national dialogue should be a review of the framework under which the country operates, not issues occasioned by the failure of people who have a mandate to do the work they are paid for.
This need for a national dialogue appears to be an admission by those currently with a mandate to run our affairs that the task is too heavy for them.
The only time a responsible government would need a national dialogue is when they feel restricted by the framework — for example, the constitution — under which they operate, believing it is stifling their ability to meet their obligations. Such a national dialogue would be a platform to review the framework and implement necessary adjustments that would enable the mandated to meet their obligations.
It is not a discussion on the failures of the mandated that we need. It is action from those we have voted for to run our affairs. If they cannot do what their mandate dictates, they must resign. The electorate also has a responsibility to fire them or forever suffer.
— Dr Kenosi Mosalakae, Houghton
WSU is a victim of ANC corruption
In his opinion piece (Sunday Times, June 23), the council chair of the beleaguered Walter Sisulu University (WSU), Tembeka Ngcukaitobi has missed an opportunity to place the challenges faced by WSU in the context of toxic factional power struggles within the ANC and how they have led to the university becoming a dangerous place for academics and students.
Ngcukaitobi makes an attempt to assure readers that WSU has improved its academic stature without referring to the political infighting for contracts and tenders that has compromised the academic reputation of WSU.
The initiatives by the WSU community to find healing and recovery for students should be applauded. But in the long term these initiatives become ineffective unless they are complemented by bold interventions aimed at changing both the culture and systems of WSU that have compromised the core business of the university. For WSU to succeed, the leadership of the university must confront the elephant in the room — which is ANC aligned individuals assisted by trigger-happy criminals bent on using university funds for self-enrichment. These funds are often acquired by compromising the procurement system or simply by stealing university funds.
A university may be led by competent and capable leaders, but no leadership can survive where the dominant culture is that of sabotaging the system for the financial gain of corrupt individuals.
The environment at WSU has degenerated to a point where students find it difficult to merely go on with their day to day lives on campus.
This is the moment at WSU where the chair and his team must stand and deliver.
— Dr Tutu Faleni, Pretoria
One man, one party, one paycheck
South Africa has become a playground for people who want to start political parties. Everyone thinks opening a political party is a quick way to make money if they can win enough votes to get a seat in parliament. Opening these political parties is no longer about serving the interests of the people or about ideology, but rather about getting a source of income.
The reality of the matter is that the former deputy president of the EFF has been played by MKP president Jacob Zuma. After contributing to writing that party’s constitution, he was thrown out like rubbish as the party’s secretary-general. He is now left with no option but to accept that he is not wanted in that tribalist party — he knew from the beginning that he would be a black sheep there. So who is to blame?
His press conference last Thursday was nothing but a way of trying to bring some dignity to his quest to establish a new party. It's quite clear that is the direction he will take. And this party will be useless, just like many other small political parties that only exist to contest elections and serve the interests of those leading them. Perhaps he should leave active politics and focus on academia.
— Tom Mhlanga, Braamfontein
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.