Treasury vs Presidency: The Battle for Central Control
Ramaphosa’s proposal on new government structure lacks oversight, says National Treasury
The National State Enterprises Bill [B1-2024] has reignited South Africa’s long-running debate over central control of state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Introduced by Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation Minister Maropene Ramokgopa, the Bill’s vision of a single holding company for SOEs pits the Presidency’s political drive for consolidation against National Treasury’s insistence on fiscal oversight, legal consistency, and governance safeguards. Minister Ramokgopa argued that some SOEs are essential for generating state revenue, while others provide strategic socio-economic value. She maintains that a central control model through a holding company would allow SOEs to operate commercially, attract private
investment, and deliver faster decision-making — all under a unified governance structure.
Treasury’s red lines
Treasury has warned that the Bill’s exclusion of most Public Finance Management Act (PFMA) provisions from the holding company’s operations creates major fiscal risks. Section 216 of the Constitution requires Treasury to enforce financial management standards wherever public funds are involved. In Treasury’s view, this means that central control cannot come at the cost of oversight and accountability.
Opposition MPs have raised strong objections. The EFF described the central control model as a ‘predetermined objective’ lacking justification, while MKP’s Mzwanele Manyi accused the Presidency of creating a platform for political capture by moving SOEs out of the public procurement system. The DA warned against adopting foreign models unsuited to South Africa’s democratic and economic environment.
Fiscal and governance concerns
The Financial and Fiscal Commission (FFC) has cautioned that launching a R615 million holding company without full PFMA oversight is a recipe for repeat bailouts. They argue that without independent sector regulation, central control risks becoming a bottleneck for investment rather than a catalyst.
The Bill must first clear the Motion of Desirability stage, where MPs decide if it should even proceed to full debate. Given the weight of Treasury’s concerns, it is possible Parliament will press pause, forcing President Ramaphosa to delay his central control ambitions.
Outlook: central control or practical reform?
For the business community, the core worry is that ideological central control will overshadow practical reform. South Africa’s SOEs need change, but concentrating power in the Presidency risks repeating past mistakes — particularly at a time of fiscal constraint.