Note to editors: the following speech was delivered today by BOSA Leader, Dr Mmusi Maimane MP, in Parliament’s debate on the Appropriations Bill.
Honourable Speaker,
The defining theme of this budget cycle is the supremacy of Parliament in lawmaking and our responsibility to ensure that Parliament can fulfil its constitutional duties.
South Africa faces profound challenges. We confront persistently high unemployment, communities demanding basic services, rising levels of crime, the ongoing scourge of corruption, and all of this within the constraints of limited public resources.
Now is the time for serious reflection on how we, collectively, address these crises. This is not a moment for political point-scoring. It is a moment for leadership. It is a moment to take ownership of the choices before us.
Because budgeting is, at its core, about choices.
The Appropriation Bill before this House, amounting to over R2.67 trillion, is more than a financial instrument. It is a statement of our values and our priorities. As we cast our votes today, we must be prepared to own those choices and be accountable for them.
But accountability must be matched by capacity. Parliament cannot effectively oversee how public money is spent if it lacks the resources and institutional capability to perform its constitutional mandate.
At its core, this debate is about whether Parliament exercises real authority over the public purse, or whether that authority exists only in principle.
Our Constitution did not create Parliament to be a spectator in the budgeting process. It created Parliament to be an active participant, a check on executive power, and the custodian of the people’s money.
That is precisely why this House passed the Money Bills Amendment Procedure and Related Matters Act. The purpose of that Act was to empower Parliament to amend, adjust, reject or approve the national budget.
It was designed to ensure that budgeting in South Africa would not simply be an executive exercise, but a democratic one.
Yet, like any law in this country, that Act is rendered meaningless if it cannot be effectively implemented.
The experience of the Appropriations Committee demonstrates that there are serious structural obstacles preventing Parliament from fully exercising the powers that the law intended it to have.
Firstly, the time allocated to Parliament to consider and amend the budget is simply insufficient.
The law contains a number of presumptions about what Parliament can reasonably achieve within the available timeframe.
In practice, committees are expected to scrutinise hundreds of billions of rands in expenditure, assess departmental performance, consider submissions from stakeholders, and evaluate alternative funding proposals, all within a very limited period.
Meaningful oversight cannot happen under artificial deadlines.
Secondly, the Act assumes that every committee is adequately equipped, trained and resourced to understand the full implications of budget amendments.
For many years, under a dominant-party system, Parliament largely accepted budgets as presented by the Executive. The culture and capability required to actively amend budgets was never fully developed.
Now, in a more competitive and accountable political environment, Parliament is expected to exercise powers that many committees have never been adequately trained or resourced to perform. This must change.
Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, National Treasury remains significantly better capacitated than Parliament itself.
Treasury has vast technical expertise, modelling capacity and analytical resources available to it. Parliament does not have equivalent institutional capacity.
Our committee has repeatedly encountered situations where we can identify spending priorities that require adjustment, but lack the technical infrastructure necessary to confidently formulate amendments.
A Parliament that cannot effectively amend a budget is a Parliament whose powers exist largely on paper.
Speaker,
Every law passed by this House has financial implications.
We may pass legislation to expand access to Early Childhood Development centres. We may pass legislation to improve healthcare delivery. We may pass legislation to strengthen policing or support vulnerable communities.
But if those laws are not matched by the necessary funding, they become promises without implementation.
A law that is not funded is often a law that cannot be realised.
This year’s budget process provides several practical examples.
The first is Statistics South Africa.
Throughout our deliberations, there was broad agreement that Statistics South Africa requires strengthening.
Reliable data is the foundation of sound budgeting. If we do not know where people live, where services are failing, how many children require schooling, or what pressures hospitals are facing, we cannot allocate resources effectively.
Bad data leads to bad decisions.
Yet despite widespread recognition of its importance, Parliament lacks the practical ability to direct additional resources towards Statistics South Africa through the current process.
For this reason, we believe that the Medium-Term Budget Policy Statement must contain a definitive increase in funding for StatsSA.
Secondly, housing.
The Appropriations Committee was unable to meaningfully engage with important recommendations emerging from the work of the housing portfolio committee. This reflects a broader challenge in ensuring that committee oversight findings are adequately incorporated into budget allocations.
Communities facing housing backlogs deserve better integration between oversight and budgeting.
Thirdly, the National Prosecuting Authority.
South Africans consistently demand accountability and justice. Yet prosecutions cannot happen without capacity. Prosecutors cannot be appointed without funding. Cases cannot be pursued without resources.
The fight against corruption depends on a capable prosecuting authority.
For this reason, serious consideration should be given to treating the National Prosecuting Authority as a distinct budget vote, allowing Parliament to exercise more direct oversight over its funding and performance.
Honourable Members,
South Africa is not well served by a budgeting process that remains overwhelmingly executive-led.
The intention of Parliament was clear when it passed the Money Bills Act. But our experience has shown that legislative reform is now necessary to ensure that Parliament can genuinely exercise the powers that the law provides.
We need more time. We need stronger technical capacity. And we need greater investment in parliamentary support structures.
And we need more training and resources for Members and committees tasked with carrying out this critical constitutional responsibility.
If Parliament is to be the guardian of the public purse, then Parliament must be empowered to do the job.
The rule of law requires more than passing legislation.
It requires giving institutions the practical ability to exercise the powers that the law confers upon them. That is the challenge before us.
And it is a challenge we must meet if we are serious about strengthening accountability, improving governance, and ensuring that every rand collected from the people of South Africa is spent in service of their aspirations.
Media Enquiries:
Roger Solomons
BOSA Spokesperson
072 299 3551