Parliament has finalised the Eskom Debt Relief Amendment Bill, formally establishing the legislative basis of a restructured debt support programme for the country’s embattled power utility.
The National Assembly adopted the measure last week and the National Council of Provinces followed suit on Wednesday, with 56 votes in favour, 10 against and no abstentions. The bill now awaits presidential assent.
The amendment replaces the previously proposed R70bn debt takeover for the 2025/26 financial year with a revised loan structure totalling R90.2bn over two tranches — R80.2bn in 2025/26 and R10bn in 2028/29.
It modifies provisions in the original Eskom Debt Relief Act of 2023 to include interest-bearing loans and repeals section 2(3), which had tied disbursements to strict conditional compliance. The changes were tabled in response to Eskom’s improved financial indicators, including a reported R34bn profit before tax and a 16% increase in revenue.
Appropriations Committee chair Mmusi Maimane characterised the bill as a “commitment to recovery, structured oversight and irreversible reforms.” reduced diesel expenditure and a declining debt trajectory were evidence of a turnaround, he said, but cautioned that municipal arrears remained a systemic risk.
“The municipal debt has now moved to R94.6bn, with cities like Johannesburg and Tshwane failing to fulfil their financial obligations. We need to ensure that Eskom’s financial viability is not crippled by municipalities,” Maimane said.
The DA's Kingsley Wakelin endorsed the equity conversion mechanism embedded in the relief programme, arguing it would reduce sovereign debt over time. The MK party’s Sanele Mwali opposed the bill, criticising its perceived tolerance for fiscal non-performance and alleging that it effectively subsidised municipal default.
The EFF and IFP questioned the removal of compliance safeguards, while the Freedom Front Plus warned against repeated failures in governance and the slow pace of unbundling.
The bill’s repeal of section 2(3) — which had mandated strict conditionality — was a point of contention. Nhlanhla Hadebe (IFP) and Ernest Hendricks (PA) called for its reinstatement, with Hendricks proposing additional provisions for independent audits and quarterly parliamentary oversight.
“Relief must translate into improved service delivery, not executive excess,” Hendricks said, invoking the committee’s oversight obligations under the Public Finance Management Act.
Deputy finance minister David Masondo said the amendment had stabilised Eskom and reduced the sovereign risk premium. “Because of this debt relief and other interventions, load-shedding today is lower than it has been in the recent past,” he said, noting the constitutional obligation to ensure basic service delivery and the broader economic implications of power instability.
The amendment bill marks a shift from immediate debt takeover to conditional loans tied to performance metrics and oversight. While Treasury maintains this structure preserves fiscal integrity and incentivises reform, the removal of original accountability provisions introduces uncertainty regarding enforceability.
Eskom’s future performance, particularly in light of continued municipal nonpayment and operational inefficiencies, will determine whether the relief translates into systemic recovery or becomes another cycle of conditional leniency without lasting consequence.
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.