The EFF leader pledged to more than double the current R2,400 monthly grant if his party wins upcoming local government elections.
Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) leader Julius Malema has pledged to increase the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) old-age grant to R4,500 per month should his party gain power. Malema made this promise while addressing supporters at the party’s provincial manifesto launch in North West on Saturday. He assured beneficiaries that an EFF-led government would not remove social grants, stating that the current R2,400 monthly grant, with a R2,420 variant for those over 75, is insufficient.
Malema also criticized the R370 Social Relief of Distress (SRD) grant as inadequate for unemployed South Africans and called for a new grant for unemployed graduates. He reiterated the R4,500 proposal in Mpumalanga, arguing that pensioners, particularly grandmothers, are the backbone of black families and deserve increased support. He asserted that the government could afford such an increase if public funds were not being misused.
The proposal comes as political parties campaign ahead of the November 4 local government elections, with social grants, unemployment, and the cost of living expected to be key voter issues. The EFF has a history of campaigning on substantially increasing social grants, having proposed an increase from R1,700 to R3,400 in its 2019 manifesto.
Why it mattersPensioners and recipients of social relief are directly affected by the proposed increase in the old-age grant and the potential introduction of a grant for unemployed graduates.
Read in ASJ →Attending the Springboks vs All Blacks rugby match at FNB Stadium can cost a family of four between R8,700 and R16,000, excluding merchandise and accommodation.
A family of four looking to attend the Springboks versus All Blacks rugby match at FNB Stadium in Soweto on September 5 will face significant expenses, with ticket prices alone ranging from R6,600 to R16,000. Official sales indicate lower category seats are R1,650 per person, while premium seating costs R4,000 each. Given that cheaper tickets sold out early, most families will likely opt for mid-range or premium options, pushing the total cost higher.
Additional costs include transportation, food, and merchandise. Driving from Durban, a roughly 600km round trip, could cost R1,500 to R2,000 for petrol and tolls, while flights for four can range from R6,000 to R8,000. Once in Johannesburg, local transport to the stadium is estimated at R50 to R100 per person. Food and drinks at the stadium are budgeted at R150 per person, totaling R600 to R1,000 for a family of four.
Further expenses include optional sit-down meals after the game, estimated at R1,000 to R1,500, and merchandise. Official Springbok jerseys cost R900 each, meaning a full family set could add R3,600. A budget-conscious family attending the match could spend around R8,700, while a mid-range option with meals and two jerseys would total approximately R12,300.
Why it mattersFamilies attending the Springboks vs All Blacks match face substantial costs for tickets, travel, food, and merchandise, impacting household budgets.
Read in ASJ →A comparison of nine everyday grocery items reveals that Botswana's prices are lower for flour, chicken, pasta, and sugar.
Shoppers in South Africa are facing increased pressure on household budgets, with the average food basket exceeding R5 000. A comparison of nine common grocery items across the border in Botswana, using a SPAR promotion valid until September 6, 2026, and South African Shoprite prices and promotions from the same period, shows varying results. Botswana emerged cheaper for 5kg of flour, 2kg of chicken portions, 500g of pasta, and 5kg of sugar.
For instance, 5kg of white bread flour in Botswana cost P61.99, approximately R73.92, while a comparable 5kg bag in South Africa was R79.99. The price difference for sugar was more significant, with 5kg costing about R94.21 in Botswana versus an estimated R112.48 for the same quantity in South Africa. Pasta also showed a notable difference, with a 500g pack priced at P13.99 in Botswana compared to R19.99 in South Africa.
The exchange rate used for the comparison on September 5, 2026, was P1 to R1.192619. While Botswana was cheaper for these specific items, South Africa offered lower prices for maize meal, rice, cooking oil, long-life milk, and pilchards. South Africa's chicken price comparison was based on a whole chicken at R49.99 per kilogram, not an identical 2kg frozen portion pack.
Why it mattersSouth African consumers may find certain staple goods more affordable when purchased in Botswana, impacting cross-border shopping habits.
Read in ASJ →The South African Communist Party's adherence to socialist principles may limit its appeal to voters disillusioned with the ANC in upcoming municipal elections.
The South African Communist Party faces a significant hurdle in the upcoming November municipal elections due to its rigid ideological stance. While not needing to disavow its Marxist-Leninist roots, the party must prioritize electability, a crucial factor in political success. This ideological purism could alienate voters who are weary of the ruling ANC.
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Joe Slovo offered a path forward for socialist ideology, arguing in his paper "Has Socialism Failed?" that socialism had been poorly implemented rather than fundamentally flawed. He critiqued the embrace of tyranny, cults of personality, suppression of dissent, and top-down governance that characterized some communist states.
Slovo proposed a direction towards "thorough-going democratic socialism," emphasizing that parties must gain support through democratic persuasion and ideological debate, not by asserting a right to lead. This approach contrasts with past practices where communist parties rejected multiparty democracy and stifled internal and societal voices.
Why it mattersThe South African Communist Party's ideological rigidity may prevent it from attracting voters who are seeking alternatives to the current ANC governance.
Read in ASJ →Survivors and relatives of those killed in the 1960 Sharpeville massacre are seeking to overturn legislation preventing compensation claims.
Legal action has been launched against the South African government by lawyers representing survivors and relatives of victims of the 1960 Sharpeville massacre. The lawsuit aims to overturn a law enacted a year after the event, which has blocked compensation claims for over six decades. The Sharpeville massacre, which resulted in 69 deaths and dozens of injuries according to official records, brought international attention to the brutality of apartheid.
Attorneys are challenging the Indemnity Act, seeking to have it declared unconstitutional and to certify the affected individuals as a class to pursue individual damages. The case is brought against the President, the Minister of Police, and the Minister of Justice. Survivors like 87-year-old Abram Mofokeng expressed hope that the government will honor past promises of compensation, recalling a pledge of R120,000 for those affected.
The legal challenge seeks to address the lasting impact of the massacre, with descendants like Mpai Chabane describing the intergenerational heartbreak of growing up without grandparents lost to the violence. The lawsuit's success could allow victims and their families to finally seek redress for the injustices suffered during the apartheid era.
Why it mattersSurvivors and relatives of the Sharpeville massacre victims are affected by a law preventing compensation claims for the 69 people killed and dozens injured.
Read in ASJ →