Cdes,
 
While we all agree that Privatisation is an threat to our long term
nationalisation of entities as advanced by the SACP, COSATU and of late
the ANCYL. It is correct for the movement to put this matter into
perspective around the mandate of this Ministry. The National
Electricity Utility (Eskom) has strategic role to play in our
developmental path as a country and contrary to fact that tariff hikes
are seen as the only source of supporting the expansion plan, long
before now in 2003, the Cabinet decided to take 30% of the Generation
sector to Private entities as IPP. We have never seen any IPP coming
online because of the inherent role of Eskom as both player and Referee.
Now if we are to continue to disguise the rules, as advanced then that
what is needed is to cushioned the burden of increase away from the poor
and Private parties should play a role, then why is it a problem now to
want to fast track the decision taken then? I am not trying to defend
1st Enterprise Ministry but want clarity like many tax payers as to who
should carry the burden for this expansion programme. Having Eskom as
State owned is it not in the public good? Do we really need this
injection of private equity in our entities to then dictate the
transition? Then what happen to the fact that masses are still without
access to this energy (mindful of the fact that 82% have access to
electricity)? How far are we adjusting our baseline that seeks to see
Universal access in 2014, informed by the continuing population growth?
Hence the jobs we talk about are all driven by this electricity, be it
for SMMEs or Big capital.
 
In getting the answer to these question requires clarity on variety
issues at the table. The commitment of Government to fund Eskom from
Fiscus and not some quasi-Loan based on Treasury- Harvard based scheme
as per the consultants or advisors . The financial model for Eskom and
the differentiated approach in dealing with connection of new business
and households together with ensuring that there is adequate Reserve
Margin? Now if the State fund Eskom from the fiscus it means the entire
tax base support this entities including those that do not have access
to this service. Is this the correct move and what are the justification
for citizen to pay for something they do not have? If this not good then
those that use the service pay for it at what level of tariff? If we are
to separate the two objective, 1st that there is a need for new
Connections that requires New generation and the State as the
sole-shareholder should carry the burden, 2ndly that there is a need for
improve services including quality and security of the existing supply,
which electricity end-users should pay for it.
 
In order to ensure that this two objectives are carried forward at the
same time requires some sacrifice, I think what is needed should be the
reversal of Cabinet Decision and Policy of the 30% Private Sector
participation in Generation. If we then agree that this decision stand
we must then say what kind of intervention should be put in place to
support such a decision? Does Cabinet decision of establishing a stand
alone System Operator not protection enough to diversify this myth? I am
calling it a myth because in practical world there is not going to be
any effect to end-users who are at distribution level to benefits by
this split but only Capitalist who are supplied at Transimisison level.
The very same Munics will continue to charge us as they wish to
strengthen their cashflow base and for their sustainability. The fact
that the REDs programme has been stalled is a signal of this market
flaws inherited in our system.
 
I think it is correct for NUMSA to raise this question of the IPP
(Privatisation) in whose interest? Capitalists or the new known
comprador Bourgeois, who will take this stake in Eskom? Does it matter
when a Capitalist is Black or White? Because all want to maximise
profit. Therefore we should rally behind the call by NUMSA to make the
Ministry to come clear in terms of long term policy direction of our
National Utility. 
 
In conclusion, the Minister might come and go, our very own Communist
(not sure now) Erwin arrived and decided that IPP is the way to go and
reverse Jeff (also former Communist) decision to cluster Generation
business of Eskom. What is at play here is that the minds at Public
Enterprise have remained and very few fresh ideas came through all these
years. The views of Hogan are not new to the circles of those in this
sector. Therefore the view that suggest the formation of a team will not
solve anything, NERT (comprised of Economists, Specialist representing
BUSA, Energy Sector Players, Unions and Government) was put in place to
deal with crisis and look at the model for funding, diversification,
DSM, energy efficiency, security of supply etc. The labour play a
critical role in this body, which look at thing at recommend to the
Inter-Ministerial Team that then report at NEDLAC. If there is anyone to
be blame, it will have to be ourselves as to how serious do we take our
deployment. All this interventions are there, what we must ask is what
is the commitment of Government to implement or even listen to this
reports that even put proposal in place.
 
I hope, we all come together and engage on this matter of Policy
preference once and fr all. This is the only obstacle in our quest for
better SA, with jobs etc.
 
Lets talk

>>> Castro Ngobese <[email protected]> 2/26/2010 11:08 PM >>>

‘Hogan wants to privatise Eskom’
26 February 2010
Kingdom Mabuza

Public Enterprises Minister on collision course with union 
THE National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa) has accused
Minister of Public Enterprises Barbara Hogan of subtly trying to
privatise Eskom.




“This was what she said when she was hired for the job, and then she
was compelled to retreat from a policy that simply has not worked,”
Numsa spokesperson Castro Ngobese said yesterday.
Numsa was not pleased with Hogan’s utterances that “we are not selling
off, but getting equity partners. At the same time we need independent
power producers” .
Departmental spokesperson Ayanda Shezi yesterday said Hogan was willing
to meet the unions to clarify her statement.




Ngobese said: “There are clear indications that the Zuma administration
is privatising Eskom despite failed intentions of the previous
administration under Thabo Mbeki.”
Ngobese said Hogan was “covertly implementing Gear interventions in
terms of which national assets such as Eskom are handed to profiteers on
a silver platter” . 
“The World Bank is attempting to build privatisation into its proposed
4billion (about R31billion) loan to Eskom, which Numsa formally opposes,”
he said.




Ngobese said Hogan should consider assembling a team of experts to
investigate the crisis at Eskom.
“The team, to be assembled in consultation with trade unions and civil
society, should investigate the forces behind the huge tariff hikes, the
procurement practices and the role of consultants,” Ngobese said. 
“As Numsa, we are prepared to go to the streets to oppose any
clandestine, for-profit privatisation of Eskom .”

-- 
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply
to this message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery
options, pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email
[email protected] . You don't have to put
anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the
message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address
(repeat): [email protected] .

-- 
This message is subject to the CSIR's copyright terms and conditions, e-mail 
legal notice, and implemented Open Document Format (ODF) standard. 
The full disclaimer details can be found at 
http://www.csir.co.za/disclaimer.html.

This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, 
and is believed to be clean.  MailScanner thanks Transtec Computers for their 
support.

-- 
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .

Reply via email to