The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

The Portfolio Committee on Basic Education strongly emphasised the need for urgent drafting of regulations relating to the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act.
 
Committee Chairperson Ms Joy Maimela said: “The majority of Members of the committee are of the view that deliberate attempts are being made to hold the full implementation of the BELA Act by delaying the drafting of regulations, especially those that speak to the two contentious sections. These regulations should provide the necessary clarity to implementers of the Act.”
 
The committee received a briefing today from the Department of Basic Education (DBE) and provincial departments of education on the implementation of the BELA Act and progress regarding the regulations mainly pertaining to Section 4 and 5 of the Act. The BELA Act that was signed into law in 2024 by President Cyril Ramaphosa.
 
At the time, parties were afforded extra time to deliberate on the contentious issues of admission and language policy contained in sections 4 & 5 of the Act and to submit proposals on how the disputed elements in the sections will be resolved. No consensus could be reach and the Act remained as enacted with the understanding that regulations setting out the norms and standards were to be prepared.
 
Ms Maimela reminded the Minister of the DBE, Ms Siviwe Gwarube, that the deadline for the regulations was at the end of June 2025. Minister Gwarube, indicated that she acted within her powers to issue the draft guidelines for the provincial departments of education, stating it is a guide to implement the BELA Act, but not binding.
 
The Minister indicated that the ten draft regulations were at an advanced stage and would be finalised in due course. She also told the committee that ten task teams were established to handle each regulation and two of those were nearly complete and are in the Office of the Chief State Law Advisor. Ms Gwarube denied that she succumbed to the outside influence to draft the guidelines.
 
Ms Maimela said the committee is extremely concerned over claims that these guidelines are in violation of the South African Schools Act (SASA). Some provincial departments of education told the committee that they are concerned with the revised version of the admissions part of the guidelines that contradicts the SASA and impacts on the province’s administrative powers. Special reference was made to “collaboration vs after consultation, the powers of the HOD and the appeals process”.
 
 Ms Maimela said: “We have not been furnished with any guidelines or regulations. During our engagements with the provincial departments of education, it became apparent that the guidelines differ from the SASA. Some provincial departments of education are also confused by whether they received guidelines or regulations. This is confusion we were concerned about from the start. If the provincial departments of education are confused, what about the general public and other stakeholders. We cannot allow this confusion.”
 
Several provincial departments of education told the committee that the Council of Education Ministers (CEM) rejected the guidelines and said focus should rather be on drafting the guidelines. The CEM referred the matter back to the Heads of Education Departments Committee (HEDCOM).
 
Ms Maimela said the committee requested the Minister to provide a comprehensive report within four working days on the process that led to the drafting of the guidelines. “The committee is of the view that the time spent for draft guidelines could have been utilized rather for drafting regulations. “We need the detail of what led to the guidelines as we must discuss if we need to write to the Office of the President and explain the confusion created in the sector,” emphasised Ms Maimela.
 
She went on to say that the committee engaged with eight provincial departments of education. Challenges of infrastructure, funding for compulsory Grade-R, training of Grade-R practitioners and stipends paid to them, were some of the concerns that were highlighted.
 
Ms Maimela said the committee resolved not to engage with the presentation of the Western Cape Education Department (WCED) as it felt that the presentation lacked the details the committee wanted. “The WCED has been told to amend its presentation and address the shortcomings. The WCED had a seven-slide presentation, but only three of those slides had the required information. We took a dim view as we noted that the WCED seems to disregard our oversight role. We informed it to prepare a more detailed presentation that actually speaks to the request we sent to them,” reiterated Ms Mailmela.

Issued by the Parliamentary Communication Services on behalf of the chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Basic Education, Joy Maimela