Loadshedding is back

[Former member 61586]

I'm starting to think the "political" leadership (ANC/Eskom/whomever) is actually encouraging these guys to do this. It gives them the leverage to acquiesce to the demands of an increase.

Thus reducing the blowback of said increase by the "public"

Yip. Just one big farce to get the 19.9% they asked for. Why hasnt the minister stepped in? Or the president? All part of the plan. May sound like some far fetched conspiracy theory, but so does Jaques pouws book, which is based on facts.

 

[Mephisto_Helix]

I'm starting to think the "political" leadership (ANC/Eskom/whomever) is actually encouraging these guys to do this. It gives them the leverage to acquiesce to the demands of an increase.

Thus reducing the blowback of said increase by the "public"

they said time was basically all made up to get what they wanted, of course this time round it's the same. To hell with what the ostriches say, this is once more deliberate

 

[Y'all Qaeda]

You have to prove it in a court of law FIRST...

Once they've proved that, then yes by all means cancel the contracts etc....

I wonder if they can use the future cancellation of the contracts as leverage to get some form of funding now perhaps? Too risky an investment I suppose.

Meh. Was just curious what happened to those contracts.

 

[R13...]

Yip. Just one big farce to get the 19.9% they asked for. Why hasnt the minister stepped in? Or the president? All part of the plan. May sound like some far fetched conspiracy theory, but so does Jaques pouws book, which is based on facts.

Who says the minister or even the president have not stepped in? Just because they don't manage crisis from a press conference doesn't mean they're doing nothing. Another thing, why appoint managers when you must go hold their hands at the first sign of trouble. They're paid to manage this let them manage it and where they feel overwhelmed then have them ask the minister to step in.

 

[Former member 61586]

You have to prove it in a court of law FIRST...

Once they've proved that, then yes by all means cancel the contracts etc....

Suppose you are right. Pretty strange though, that even under the new minister "integrity", these contracts are not even being reviewed to see how they can get out of them.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Suppose you are right. Pretty strange though, that even under the new minister "integrity", these contracts are not even being reviewed to see how they can get out of them.

Who says they aren't?

These sorts of things arent dealt with in the public eye....

 

[Former member 61586]

Who says the minister or even the president have not stepped in? Just because they don't manage crisis from a press conference doesn't mean they're doing nothing. Another thing, why appoint managers when you must go hold their hands at the first sign of trouble. They're paid to manage this let them manage it and where they feel overwhelmed then have them ask the minister to step in.

If you are the president or the minister, then you let the public know if you are stepping in. They haven't done diddly. And when you see managers that are paid to manage are fkcing things up wholesale, you step in as the buck ultimately stops with you (president and minister).Do you argue for the sake of arguing?

 

[Former member 61586]

Who says they aren't?

These sorts of things arent dealt with in the public eye....

CPS was dealt with in the public eye. That saps case was dealt with in the public eye. The public are the imbeciles funding these dodgy contracts. I would very much expect these "sort of things" to be dealt with in the public eye.

 

[Eniigma]

You have to prove it in a court of law FIRST...

Once they've proved that, then yes by all means cancel the contracts etc....

Surely they can at least be suspended pending an investigation.

Spend the next five years investigation and fighting in court over a 3 year (arbitrary lengths pulled out of thin air) while still paying for it and then trying to recover the money years and years later.

Besides I remember all the heroes coming in and defending the saps cancelling their contracts because they were corrupt. Same should apply here.

 

[ToxicBunny]

Surely they can at least be suspended pending an investigation.

Spend the next five years investigation and fighting in court over a 3 year (arbitrary lengths pulled out of thin air) while still paying for it and then trying to recover the money years and years later.

Besides I remember all the heroes coming in and defending the saps cancelling their contracts because they were corrupt. Same should apply here.

Nope.. suspending the contract would be akin to terminating the contract, so not a legal option unless the court approves the suspension.

 

[ToxicBunny]

CPS was dealt with in the public eye. That saps case was dealt with in the public eye. The public are the imbeciles funding these dodgy contracts. I would very much expect these "sort of things" to be dealt with in the public eye.

I dont disagree with you.. but just because it isn't being dealt with publicly doesn't mean it isn't being dealt with.

 

[Former member 61586]

I dont disagree with you.. but just because it isn't being dealt with publicly doesn't mean it isn't being dealt with.

OK, with that I can somewhat agree with. But do you honestly think they are dealing with it? Look at SAA? Do you think things are changing there?

Maybe I am just being pessimistic.

 

[ToxicBunny]

OK, with that I can somewhat agree with. But do you honestly think they are dealing with it? Look at SAA? Do you think things are changing there?

Maybe I am just being pessimistic.

I do think things are being dealt with or investigated...

I DON'T think its happening fast enough though...

 

[f2wohf]

I GUARANTEE you they could've cancelled that contract on the basis of it being corrupt. SAPS are doing with that guy who owns their IT systems? SASSA with CPS?

Not a single person has been held accountable for those coal contracts. Just quietly re-deployed or still at ESKOM, in a different position or perhaps even the same position.

SAPS the tender process was not followed and there’s no contract.

SASSA the contract is illegal because the tender process was invalid, not on the basis of bribes.

None of these cases are illegal because of corruption.

Singh is not redeployed, that makes a single person.

 

[Sneeky]

Does the EskomsePush app still function for checking load shedding schedules?
Anyone in an affected area confirm?

 

[R13...]

If you are the president or the minister, then you let the public know if you are stepping in. They haven't done diddly. And when you see managers that are paid to manage are fkcing things up wholesale, you step in as the buck ultimately stops with you (president and minister).Do you argue for the sake of arguing?

The strike is on day 2. What you can legitimately blame government for is failing to enforce essential services laws on the strikers. They are allowing the strikers to block access to power stations, sabotage systems, and intimidate anyone who thinks to report for duty.

 

[Former member 61586]

SAPS the tender process was not followed and there’s no contract.

SASSA the contract is illegal because irregular, not on the basis of bribes.

None of these cases are illegal because of corruption.

Singh is not redeployed, that makes a single person.

:crylaugh: If the tender process is not followed, the process is corrupt. If the contract is "illegal" it is corrupt. Logic much?

 

[Former member 61586]

The strike is on day 2. What you can legitimately blame government for is failing to enforce essential services laws on the strikers. They are allowing the strikers to block access to power stations, sabotage systems, and intimidate anyone who thinks to report for duty.

Electricity is a national priority that has a knock on effect on all sectors and a massive influence on the country. This thing should not even have got to day 1. An argument can easily be made, that what the strikers are doing is an act of terrorism or treason.

 

[f2wohf]

:crylaugh: If the tender process is not followed, the process is corrupt. If the contract is "illegal" it is corrupt. Logic much?

Corrupt: money or favors paid to gather an undue benefit.

Invalid: lack of validity, it can be for a simple small material requirement such as a new tax clearance not received.

No court has found money or favors to be given.

Legal words have a specific meaning the same way that a cough is not a flu.

https://www.werksmans.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/GLI-BC1_SouthAfrica.pdf

 

[Aquila ka Hecate]

Electricity is a national priority that has a knock on effect on all sectors and a massive influence on the country. This thing should not even have got to day 1. An argument can easily be made, that what the strikers are doing is an act of terrorism or treason.

And an argument can be made that Eskom knew exactly how the unions would react when they saw that "0% offer on the table".