The views expressed do not reflect those of any POLICY WATCH SA clients
Does anyone know if ‘government of national unity’ Communications & Digital Technologies Minister Solly Malatsi’s decision to withdraw the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) SOC Ltd Bill still stands? Because the sudden move upset at least two fellow MPs. One (Khusela Diko, who chairs the National Assembly committee concerned) immediately issued an official media statement expressing dismay at the Minister’s apparently procedurally irregular approach to announcing his decision. The other (Minister in the Presidency, Khumbudzo Ntshavheni) reportedly told journalists at a briefing on last week’s Cabinet meeting that no Bill tabled by a member of the executive may be withdrawn without Cabinet’s prior permission (Eyewitness News). But since no formal statement has been made confirming this, ordinary South African have been left in the dark.
Malatsi’s decision seems to have been leaked to the Sunday Times, spotted by TechCentral – and welcomed via X in a post from Michael Markowitz, who heads up the Gordon Institute of Business Science media leadership think tank. Which is how we spotted it. On a Sunday, nogal – well before the Minister officially announced the Bill’s withdrawal. Which he did the following day, almost as an afterthought in a statement outlining various issues prompting the move.
Malatsi also posted screen shots of his statement on X where, as ‘a guy who dabbles in politics and sports’, he wrote: “after extensive consultations, I’ve decided to withdraw the SABC Bill, widely held as fatally flawed, to focus on a sustainable funding model. Now we focus on the funding model to ensure the SABC can fulfill its mandate to inform, educate, and entertain all South Africans”.
Unfortunately, however (presumably aware of Malatsi’s intentions) his party the Democratic Alliance had already welcomed the decision with a statement of its own – penned by MP Tsholofelo Bodlani and quoted the same day in a post on X.
Our role is not to comment on the pros and cons of whether or not the Bill should remain in Parliament for processing. It’s simply to draw attention to a public relations blunder that may well have sparked annoyance beyond Ntshavheni and Diko circles.
According to her press release, Diko believes the Bill can be fixed and should be – in-committee. Mainly, it seems, because the largely financial “challenges” facing the SABC “require a considered and urgent response”. In Diko’s view any further delay in implementing the “crucial reforms necessary to save ... (such a) strategic public institution” would “sound ... (its) death knell”.
Malatsi believes that “trying to amend the Bill” would not be “the right path forward”. Instead, he would like to see “the urgent development and implementation of a sustainable financial model for the SABC ... prioritised”. According to his statement, “the SABC Bill suggests a delayed funding model, giving the Minister three years to develop a sustainable framework”. It also proposes granting the Minister “additional powers, including influence over board appointments ... risk(ing) eroding the broadcaster’s independence at a time when media freedom is more crucial than ever”.
Tabled in October 2023, according to a memorandum on its objects the Bill responds to two Gauteng High Court rulings (Dali Mpofu vs SABC, 2008, and SOS Support Public Broadcasting Coalition and others vs SABC, 2014). Underpinned by recommendations emerging from a National Assembly ad hoc committee inquiry into the SABC board and proposed areas of amendment recommended by the SABC itself, the Bill also includes clauses intended to address issues arising from a disconnect between the South African Broadcasting Act, 1999, and the Electronic Communications Act, 2005 – and is aligned with the requirements of the Companies Act, 2008, and the Public Finance Management Act, 1999.
Comments