Cut government expenses to fund Eskom, increase the subsidised electricity allocation to the poor and link tariff increases to wage increases.
These were some of the suggestions civil society organisations gave to the National Energy Regulator of SA (Nersa) during the second day of public hearings on Eskom’s tariff application for 2023/2024 and 2024/2025.
The public hearings, which are being held virtually, suffered from disruptions due to the implementation of stage 5 load-shedding, which continued throughout Tuesday and was expected to remain until Thursday, by when Eskom hopes to move to lower levels of power cuts.
One presenter, JP Narainsamy of the KwaZulu-Natal Fishers’ Forum, told Nersa that it would have been better if these hearings had been hosted as an in-person session instead of virtual because the power cuts and a lack of access to computers, laptops and smartphones prevented many affected parties from taking part in the sessions.
The tariff application being considered forms part of Eskom’s fifth multiyear price determination (MYPD5) originally submitted in June 2021 in which the state-owned power utility is now asking for increases in the standard tariff of about 32% (to be implemented in 2023) and about 9.5% for the 2024/2025 financial year.
Those presenters who managed to navigate load-shedding schedules and were able to state their case to the regulator agreed unanimously that the increases sought by Eskom are unaffordable and, if granted, would affect the poor and vulnerable the most.
Vusi Zweni, a representative of Ubunye Bama Hostela, a movement of hostel dwellers, said the 32% increase for 2023/2024 would not be affordable for workers and that the allowed tariff increase should be in line with average wage increases that are usually tied to consumer inflation rates.
Earn living
“Eskom has outpriced itself to the point where its tariffs cannot be paid by citizens,” said Burton Jaganathan from the access to information activist group, the Right2Know campaign.
Eskom has failed in supporting the economy, he said, to the extent that instead of facilitating the progress of businesses owned by “working-class people such as spaza shop owners” its unreliable electricity supply is making it almost impossible for these business owners to earn a living.
“We are asking for stable, consistent electricity supply so that people can plan and organise their lives, so that they can protect the food in their fridges, and so that they don’t lose their appliances — which they cannot afford to replace — because of the damage done by load-shedding,” said Jaganathan.
Instead of making citizens pay more for electricity, government should cut its spending and use the money saved to fund Eskom, he said.
This can be achieved, for starters, “by cutting ministers’ salaries” and by getting rid of all deputy ministers, according to Jaganathan.
He also said ministers should not be allowed to have spokespersons, but that they should “speak for themselves”.
David Hallowes, a researcher at environmental justice organisation Groundwork, told Nersa that Eskom’s “unaffordable” tariff applications show that the “system as a whole has failed”.
“Cost-reflective pricing will not fix what is wrong — there is now a mismatch between what people can pay and what Eskom says it needs to run its system,” he said.
Eskom always indicated in its tariff applications how it intends to shield the most vulnerable from high increases in the cost of electricity, but still it is the poor who suffer most and can least afford higher energy prices.
People are being forced to resort to cooking on wood-fuelled fires and paraffin stoves, or they are left with “a choice between buying food and paying for the electricity to cook it,” Hallowes said.
The “extraordinary escalation in [electricity costs]” also raises the risk of more people in SA slipping into poverty, he said.
The hearings will resume on Wednesday.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.