Advert
Advert – scroll down
Displaying the 5 latest comments.
Submitted | first-name | support | concern | top-concern | message |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2026-09-25 00:58:20 +02:00 | Karen | No I do not | All of the above | Passing Theft, Non-Technical Losses & Bad Debts onto Paying Consumers | |
2026-09-25 00:17:44 +02:00 | JAco | No I do not | All of the above | Passing Theft, Non-Technical Losses & Bad Debts onto Paying Consumers | |
2026-09-25 00:15:19 +02:00 | Hill | No I do not | Passing Theft, Non-Technical Losses & Bad Debts onto Paying Consumers | We demand that NERSA immediately enforce Policy Position 43(b) by clawing back and disallowing any tariff requests where municipal distribution losses exceed national regulatory standards (typically 7%–10%). We insist that paying consumers be legally shielded from funding municipal arrears and Eskom debt defaults through local tariff markups or surcharge adjustments. We require licensees to implement strict, automated tamper detection, independent metering audits, and universal prepaid infrastructure in non-paying areas before requesting any tariff increases from compliant ratepayers. | |
2026-09-25 00:12:51 +02:00 | Hill | No I do not | Municipal Hidden Surcharges & Diverted Electricity Revenues | We demand that NERSA automatically reject any municipal tariff application that is not supported by a fully audited, publicly accessible Cost of Supply (CoS) study (Policy Position 25(a)). We insist on the immediate statutory ring-fencing of all municipal electricity revenues into dedicated maintenance accounts, legally prohibiting councils from diverting electricity revenue to fund unrelated municipal wage bills or deficits. We demand that National Treasury set a hard, uniform percentage cap on the Municipal Surcharge on Electricity (MSOE) to prevent local councils from using surcharges to circumvent NERSA tariff controls. | |
2026-09-25 00:10:44 +02:00 | Hill | No I do not | Elimination of Inclining Block Tariffs (IBRs) for Middle-Income Homes | We demand that NERSA retain an energy-conservation tariff tier for non-indigent, low-to-middle-income consumers that does not penalise modest energy usage with large monthly service fees. We insist that the migration from IBRs to unbundled domestic tariffs be phased in gradually over a minimum of five years, with mandatory local affordability impact assessments. We require that smart metering infrastructure and Time-of-Use domestic options be provided without upfront capital cost penalties to the end-user. |
-
- A Punitive “Sun Tax” on Private Capital and Self-Reliance:
When recurring load shedding crippled businesses and households, citizens invested tens of billions of Rands in private savings to install rooftop solar, inverters, and battery banks. Shifting electricity billing away from consumption (c/kWh) toward mandatory fixed monthly network and standby capacity charges (R/kVA, R/kW, or R/Amp/month) under Policy Positions 11(b), 15, 27, and 30 acts as an availability penalty. It erodes household investment returns, penalises energy conservation, extends solar payback periods by years, and locks low-volume consumers into high monthly billing floors regardless of how little electricity they consume. - Punitive Double-Charging and Restrictions on Solar Prosumers (Policy Position 33):
The draft policy penalises grid-tied embedded generators who inject clean power into the network. Prosumers are forced onto mandatory Time-of-Use tariffs and made to pay standard Distribution Use of System (DUoS) and Transmission (TUoS) charges on both the electricity they import and the electricity they export. Furthermore, prohibiting solar owners from using clean export credits to offset fixed monthly network and retail service charges destroys the financial viability of feeding power back into the grid, actively incentivising frustrated solar owners to defect entirely. - Scrapping Stepped Block Tariffs (IBRs) Hits Middle-Class Families (Policy Position 38):
Eliminating Inclining Block Rate (IBR) tariffs for standard domestic customers removes the traditional “pay-less-if-you-conserve” framework. Replacing stepped usage tiers with unbundled capacity fees, monthly service charges, and flat energy rates will trigger immediate bill shocks for low-to-middle-income ratepayers, pensioners on fixed incomes, and large multi-family households sharing a single meter who actively manage their consumption. - The Threat of Consumers Funding Industrial Smelter Discounts and Expanded Free Power:
Expanding concessional Negotiated Pricing Agreements (NPAs)—granting heavy industrial smelters discounted electricity (historically around 62 c/kWh)—under Policy Position 54 creates a massive revenue gap. At the same time, proposals to expand Free Basic Electricity (FBE) from 50 kWh up to 200–300 kWh per month without an expanded National Treasury grant risk multi-billion-rand deficits. Opponents and energy analysts warn that if these industrial and social shortfalls are not strictly ring-fenced and funded via the national fiscus, the deficit will be loaded onto standard consumer tariffs. - Municipal Fiscal Shocks and Retaliatory Rates Hikes (Policy Position 47):
Local councils rely on commercial electricity markups (often 15% to 35% above bulk Eskom tariffs) to cross-subsidise indigent households, sanitation, and municipal salaries. Eliminating non-transparent municipal surpluses without an alternative municipal funding model threatens local government solvency. This could prompt municipalities to counter revenue losses by introducing aggressive double-digit hikes on property rates, refuse, and water tariffs. - The “Cost-Reflective” Affordability Trap:
Historically, the regulatory push toward “cost-reflective tariffs” in South Africa has been administrative shorthand for compounding above-inflation tariff hikes. Imposing rigid mathematical cost-of-supply formulas during a prolonged cost-of-living crisis risks accelerating grid defection among high-paying consumers, shrinking the customer base, and deepening energy poverty across South Africa.
- A Punitive “Sun Tax” on Private Capital and Self-Reliance:
-
- Halting the “Utility Death Spiral” and Ending System Free-Riding:
Physical electricity grids carry substantial fixed capital, maintenance, and operational costs that exist regardless of how many kilowatt-hours are sold. When affluent consumers install rooftop solar and reduce volumetric consumption (c/kWh), the fixed costs of maintaining poles, wires, substations, and spinning generation reserves are pushed onto poorer, grid-reliant households. Mandatory fixed capacity charges (R/kVA, R/kW, or R/Amp/month) under Policy Positions 15, 27, and 30 ensure that every grid-connected property fairly covers the network infrastructure and standby backup capacity they rely on. - Transparent, Unbundled Billing Empowers the Consumer:
Replacing opaque, single-rate blended tariffs with unbundled line items (Policy Positions 2, 3, and 27) provides complete visibility over electricity costs. Invoices will explicitly detail wholesale energy generation, transmission usage (TUoS), distribution maintenance (DUoS), customer service fees, and municipal surcharges. This enables consumers to see the true cost drivers of their power supply and prevents distributors from concealing administrative bloat behind arbitrary per-unit markups. - Eliminating Hidden Municipal Surpluses and Slush Funds (Policy Position 47):
For decades, municipalities have used non-transparent electricity markups as an unregulated funding pool to plug operational deficits and pay unrelated administrative costs. Policy Position 47 explicitly outlaws un-ring-fenced, non-transparent electricity surpluses. Municipal base tariffs must strictly reflect NERSA-approved Costs of Supply (CoS), and any municipal surcharge (MSOE) must be transparently itemised and regulated under National Treasury’s Municipal Fiscal Powers and Functions Act. - Shielding Compliant Ratepayers from Theft, Losses, and Bad Debts (Policy Positions 42 & 43):
Policy Positions 42 and 43 introduce an essential ratepayer protection by requiring NERSA to set data-based benchmarks for non-technical losses (electricity theft/meter tampering) and municipal bad debt. Any power theft, uncollected debt, or distribution losses exceeding these approved regulatory standards must be removed from the licensee’s allowable revenue base. Utilities and dysfunctional municipalities can no longer force paying, law-abiding consumers to finance stolen power and uncollected municipal debt. - Equitable 50/50 Transmission Cost Allocation (Policy Position 19):
Under Policy Position 19, transmission network costs will be split 50/50 between generators and consumers, ending the historical regime where end-consumers carried 100% of the transmission cost burden. This creates locational pricing signals that encourage power plants to build closer to demand centres and ensures South African households do not subsidise transmission infrastructure used for cross-border power exports through the Southern African Power Pool (SAPP). - Capping Exploitative Prepaid Vending Fees (Policy Position 45):
Policy Position 45 addresses a significant consumer protection vulnerability by mandating NERSA to implement a standardized pricing framework within 12 months. Setting allowable service fees and commission caps on third-party vending platforms will eliminate predatory markups and ensure equitable, transparent token purchases for millions of prepaid electricity users.
- Halting the “Utility Death Spiral” and Ending System Free-Riding: