Voluntary civil society coalition organisation Budget Justice Coalition (BJC) on Tuesday called for greater transparency regarding government’s economic measures put in place to deal with the coronavirus (Covid-19) pandemic, saying some measures were punitive and inadequate.

The BJC alleged government’s economic measures were protective of business interests and not human rights.

“Evidence is piling up that millions of people are suffering as a result of a loss of income and the restrictions placed on the informal market by the lockdown regulations. This threatens to undermine the initial progress made in the public health response to the disaster. Given the likelihood of ongoing restrictions on work and movement for the remainder of the year at least, the BJC believes the State can and must do more to prioritise its available resources to support health care needs, incomes, livelihoods and access to food for everyone,” said the organisation.

The BJC had concerns about funds sourced from the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the New Development Bank.

It claimed that finance from these organisations had previously come with significant costs.

It demanded transparency from government on the conditions of the funds and also urged government to reject finance with conditions that were “anti-poor”.

“National Treasury’s worst case Covid-19 scenario estimates that up to 7-million jobs could be on the line. Yet only 17% of the funds announced – R88-billion – are budgeted for direct cash transfers via social grants and UIF payments to the poor and working class. The need far outstrips the allocation of these funds. Little information has been provided yet on the R100-billion allocated to job protection and creation - despite job losses continuing to pile up. We call for transparency on these measures,” said the BJC.

It raised questions about the R200-billion of finance guarantees to support businesses, adding that relief for businesses should not come at the expense of realising and protecting human rights in the future.

The voluntary coalition called on government to undertake a “developmental quid pro quo” for taxpayer funded business support to implement inclusive economic reforms for the public good.

“This could, for example be in the form of a five-year development programme to employ more workers, to equalise wages for men and women, to procure more from local small businesses and to scale up implementation of broad-based black economic empowerment,” it suggested.

It went on to say the tax relief for businesses did not include the payment of wages or the retention of workers

The BJC wants a clear commitment that job retention was a condition of the finance guarantees and the R70-billion in tax relief for businesses. Any businesses that are registered or shift a portion of profits into a tax havens should not receive any taxpayer support, said the BJC.

FOOD SECURITY & CHILD GRANTS

The BJC has called out government for not adequately addressing the rising hunger levels in the country and said government’s social grant budget was not enough as the R50-billion allocated to the disaster relief package only represented a tenth of the R500-billion economic relief package.

“Prior to Covid-19, Oxfam-SA put the number of people in South Africa who regularly experience hunger and malnutrition at 13-million. The largest survey since the lockdown began, conducted by the Human Sciences Research Council, involving almost 20 000 respondents, found that almost a quarter (24%) had no money to buy food. More than half of residents in informal settlements and townships have run out of money for food. This equates to around 15-million people in South Africa right now who are experiencing hunger,” the BJC explained.

It also criticised government’s food programme, which it says is too small to meet the demand of 15-million people.

The BJC also unpacked government’s child support grant plan saying if the R500 grant was allocated per caregiver and not per child, 2-million more people would be below the food poverty line.

“The relief package does not acknowledge or cater for the fact that, in addition to job losses and rising food costs, around 10-million children have since mid-March lost their daily main meals due to the closure of schools, the National School Nutrition Programme, and ECD feeding schemes. The 7.1-million caregivers who receive [child support grants] on behalf of children have been excluded from accessing the new R350 Covid-19 grant. The majority of these caregivers (around 6-million) were unemployed or working in the informal sector prior to lockdown,” said the BJC.

Government’s R20-billion Covid-19 grant over six months (R350 per month) also came under fire from the BJC, which said it did not cover the majority of those in need.

The BJC said the Covid-19 grant did not have sufficient transparency or explanations.

The organisation suggested a universal grant but also called for a public engagement process to unpack the rationale and illegibility criteria for government’s Covid-19 grant.

It further recommended that government increase social grants, attach child grants per child, allow unemployed caregivers to receive the unemployment grant, allow informal food traders to trade without a permit and ramp up food distribution.

“The promotion, protection and realisation of human rights cannot be simply implied in the economic responses outlined by the government, but must be explicitly addressed. The government is obligated to take measures to prevent, or at least to mitigate against, the human rights impacts of Covid-19, and to ensure that everyone’s rights are protected, with particular consideration for marginalised and vulnerable populations, including foreign nationals residing and working in South Africa. South Africa’s Covid-19 responses should provide impetus for the long-term mobilisation of resources and capacity toward the fulfilment of all socioeconomic rights, to further the spirit of the South African Constitution,” said the BJC.