Makana to challenge Eskom cut-off threat

Stakeholders want to interdict utility from switching off lights

Businesses in Makhanda have banded together with the Grahamstown Residents’ Association (GRA) to urgently interdict Eskom from switching off the lights in the Makana municipal area.

Eskom last week took out an advert warning it intended cutting its bulk electricity supply to Makana municipality from April 2 for up to 14 hours a day due to the municipality once again reneging on its payment plan to the power utility.

Makana owes Eskom over R85m, according to court papers. Eskom has warned that Makana’s breach had not been remedied, it reserved the right to entirely disconnect the municipality.

But, the GRA, the Grahamstown Business Forum (GBF), Beer Properties and the company that owns the Pick n Pay franchise want Eskom to be urgently interdicted from its plans to interrupt supply pending a comprehensive application to set aside its decision to do so.

The applicants also want the court to order the municipality and the power utility to take all the necessary steps required to ensure an uninterrupted supply to Makana municipality. It wants the court to compel Makana municipality to stick to any payment plan reached.

GBF chair, Richard Gaybba, says in an affidavit, the proposed outages would have a devastating effect on the already broke and dysfunctional municipality and all those who lived under its jurisdiction.

“Not only will it threaten the very fabric of society, it will threaten inter alia Rhodes University, the various private schools, the various government schools, businesses and the tourism industry.”

It would also irreparably affect the already unreliable supply of water to the city as this relies on electricity driven pumps. Similarly the already dysfunctional sewage works would break down further leading to further serious health risks for the community.

Gaybba points out that the municipality was in constant breach of its own council resolution in January last year that the local authority should pass on to Eskom all money collected from ratepayers for electricity. This was despite an excellent revenue collection for electricity. Had it done so, it would not now be in breach with the payment plan it had agreed to with Eskom in November last year.

He said the decision by the utility to advertise the interruption of electricity was “an exercise in self-help and collective punishment of the consumers of electricity” in circumstances where the ratepayers were not at fault.

This was contrary to the constitutional rights of the citizens. It was also irrational, unreasonable and unfair.

The municipality was already under the threat of being placed under administration and this final move would have a devastating effect on the economy. Gaybba said Eskom was obliged to consider less drastic option means to recover debt. This included supplying electricity direct to users, rather than through the municipality.

Attorney Brin Brody, who is acting on behalf of the GRA, GBF and the businesses said the matter had been set down to be argued next Thursday.