Spin-doctors can’t save terminal SAA

SAA wants the country to believe that the cancellation of domestic and international flights this week was part of a responsible strategy to save money ahead of any further capital investment.

This sort of spin-doctoring may have flown under the radar were it not for the legacy of maladministration and inefficiency that has plagued the beleaguered airline.

Like other state-owned enterprises, SAA has been on a downward trajectory for some time with bail-outs provided as the only possible solution to the ongoing turmoil.

SAA has said to Treasury that the R2 billion that was promised to aid the business rescue process has not materialised and it cannot rehabilitate its finances.

The National Union of Metalworkers of SA (Numsa) and South African Cabin Crew Association have accused Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan of allowing the situation at SAA to worsen.

Numsa spokesperson Phakamile Hlubi-majola has accused the government of not being committed to the rescue of the airline. “Gordhan and (Finance Minister Tito) Mboweni on different platforms have said SAA must be sold.

“They have demonstrated time and time again that they would prefer a scenario where SAA is liquidated and sold.”

These allegations reveal the mistrust among the different stakeholders involved in the airline.

While there remains a lack of political willpower in what to do about SAA, 10 000 jobs, the possibility of a shrinking aviation sector and immense harm to the country’s tourism sector are on the line.

ALL ACROSS the country, many pupils have not yet been placed in a school. One of the reasons for this is the dire shortage of schools.

In a seminar by Professor Jan de Groof in October 2019 on SDG4 (Sustainable Development Goals pertaining to education) he mentioned that this is a worldwide problem and one that will not be remedied in the near or even distant future. For this reason, the time has come to consider and support alternatives to school attendance.

For the past 20 years, home education families in South Africa have prospered and proven that this alternative approach to education is successful in equipping children for the future. Home educated learners have attained higher education qualifications, started their own enterprises or are gainfully employed.

They are well-educated adults who are well-adjusted, resilient, and tolerant of differing viewpoints.

Home education families currently have the freedom to educate their children according to the philosophy and pedagogy of home education, but this freedom and associated success is being threatened by the regulations proposed in the Basic Education Laws Amendment (Bela) Bill.

The proposed regulations of section 51 presume that parents who opt to home educate their children are negligent, uncaring and incompetent in raising and educating a child. We must convince a bureaucrat (the head of department) that we are acting in the best interest of our children. Unlike those under suspicion of corruption, rape, and murder, home education parents are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

Any education programme should meet the child’s basic learning needs, such as literacy, oral expression, numeracy, and problem solving and the basic learning content such as knowledge, skills, values, and attitudes according to the child’s abilities and in accordance with the family’s religion, beliefs, and values. The past 20 years have proven that home education, with its variety of approaches and curricula (or lack thereof), has achieved exactly this.

The bill requires that children undergo annual assessment by a competent assessor. This is supposedly so that the DBE (Department of Basic Education) can support the parent by pointing out where a child struggles and needs support.

The home education parent is involved daily in the education of the child. She/he knows where the child struggles and will provide (or seek) the necessary support. The parent does not require the costly services of an assessor to point this out.

The DBE falsely proclaims that home education is for the rich. Home education can be expensive, but in most cases, it is equivalent to, or cheaper than, attending a good public school. Should the BELA

Bill become law it will make home education unaffordable for most families and they will not be able to comply with the regulations. In addition, the DBE will be acting in direct conflict with SDG 4.1 which states that by 2030 all girls and boys are to complete free, equitable and quality primary and secondary education.

Section 51(14) states that the minister may make regulations relating to the registration and administration of home education. This is a truly concerning statement. Should the minister act on this section, this arbitrary law-making will be a violation of the foundations of constitutional democracy and the rule of law. It amounts to an abuse of power. It provides no stability and trust in the law Home educators remain hopeful that through consultation, the DBE and government will put forth a law that ensures liberty in learning, serves the best interest of the child, protects the rights of the parent and assists the government in meeting the UNESCO requirements, particularly as parents’ main concern is with providing a better future for their children.

Anelle Burger is the spokesperson for Cape Home Educators