Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana is facing a call from the EFF that he pay back millions of rand "wasted" on the aborted Budget Speech.
Image: Independent Newspapers
THE ECONOMIC Freedom Fighters (EFF) has escalated its criticism of Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana, demanding that he bear the costs associated with the R2.3 million that was "wasted" on his aborted Budget Speech in February.
Red Berets MP Omphile Maotwe made the call almost a week after Godongwana and Parliament suffered legal costs after the EFF and the Democratic Alliance (DA) took the Finance Minister to the Western Cape High Court over his first attempt to increase VAT.
Maotwe, whose party had called for Godongwana to step down due to the Budget fiasco, described the R2.3 million, which was spent preparing for the Budget, as wasteful expenditure.
“All of this was avoidable had the minister simply listened to the millions of South Africans who rejected the VAT increase and demanded an inflationary adjustment to personal income tax to protect workers from bracket creep.
“We will demand that the minister personally pay for this wasteful expenditure, and that it be deducted from his salary,” said Maotwe.
Parliament had made all necessary preparations for the Budget to be delivered on February 19 despite calls from various parties, including the DA, for it to be postponed due to disagreement over the VAT increase.
However, on the day of the event, Godongwana took to the podium but surprised the nation by announcing the postponement of his speech due to political pressure.
The expenses for the aborted Budget were revealed by Godongwana, who is known for imposing austerity measures in the government, in response to Maotwe’s parliamentary questions.
The money was spent on printing documents, catering in Cape Town and Pretoria, translation, a sign language interpreter, a live reads radio station, English and Zulu language podcasts, and editing.
In his response to Maotwe’s question of who would be held responsible for the financial losses, Godongwana said “N/A (not applicable)”, meaning the answer was not available.
National Treasury did not respond to media enquiries sent to its spokesperson, Cleo Mosana, although the department's automated e-mail system acknowledged the query. Mosana had also promised to respond.
National Assembly spokesperson Moloto Mothapo said there were no costs associated with rescheduling the delivery of the revised Budget Speech.
“Unlike the Sona, which is a ceremonial sitting involving joint sittings of both Houses, formal invitations, special protocol arrangements, and extensive logistical co-ordination, the Budget Speech is delivered during an ordinary plenary sitting of the National Assembly.
“It does not require any special ceremonial arrangements beyond what is already budgeted for the routine sittings of the House,” said Mothapo.
When approached for comment, Freedom Front Plus's DR Corné Mulder said the Budget fiasco had financial implications “all round”.
“To calculate the amount is likely impossible. However, it is ironic that all could have been prevented if there had been timeous, effective, and sufficient consultations and decision-making within the GNU,” said Mulder.
Three Western Cape High Court Judges - Mabindla Boqwana, Andre Le Grange, and Katharine "Kate" Savage - ruled that the resolution of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces on April 2 to adopt or accept the report of the Standing Committee on Finance and the Select Committee on Finance, which adopted the 2025 Budget’s Fiscal Framework pending alternative to the VAT increase, be set aside.
They also suspended the 0.5% VAT increase pending Parliament’s final determination on the matter.
“The Minister of Finance shall pay 50% of the costs of the Democratic Alliance on the Scale C, such costs to include the cost of two counsel(s). The Speaker of the National Assembly and chairperson of the National Council of Provinces shall pay 50% of the costs of the Democratic Alliance, jointly and severally, on Scale C, such costs to include the cost of two counsel(s),” read the judgment.
The ruling was the same when it came to the EFF’s legal costs.
Instead of increasing tax, the DA proposed an amendment to the fiscal framework to reduce consolidated expenditure by R13.5 billion in 2025/26, R29.844 billion in 2026/27, and R1.616 billion in 2027/28.
The EFF proposed the adjustment of personal income tax brackets in line with inflation, saying this would protect workers from being unfairly pushed “into higher tax brackets due to the rising cost of living”.
The uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party recommended an increase in wealth and corporate taxes and “a cut to the executive and costly patronage, and an end to corruption and fruitless expenditure”.
Following the flip-flopping on the Budget, Economist Dawie Roodts told the Daily News this week that “in the 40 years I have analysed this country’s budgets, I’ve never seen a finance minister make such a serious misstep”.
Godongwana has since faced political calls for his resignation, although he maintained in a statement released on April 27, immediately after the court ruling, that his decision to increase VAT was constitutional and appropriate “given the limited options available to balance fiscal sustainability with service delivery needs”.
He said the matter was removed from the court roll after he had reached consensus with the DA and EFF to have the matter settled out of court.
“Minister Godongwana welcomes the court order, as it is entirely consistent with his announcement on 23 April 2025 to suspend the VAT increase. Having already announced the withdrawal, the minister felt that he would no longer have cause to continue with the court case,” read the statement from his office.
Welcoming the court ruling, DA Federal Council chairperson Helen Zille said this would ensure that any changes to the VAT rate must be properly approved by Parliament before taking effect, “and sets aside the unlawful support lent to this VAT hike by a number of parties”.
“We are pleased that the Minister of Finance eventually came 'back' to the table and agreed to suspend the VAT increase in a lawful manner. This shows that government decisions cannot be made without proper oversight.
“The impending VAT hike has now been formally stopped by an order of court agreed between the Minister of Finance and the DA,” said Zille.