The Social Relief of Distress grant suffers from a high rate of exclusion errors, estimated at approximately 50% of eligible individuals. These errors stem from systemic barriers in the application, approval, and appeal processes, exacerbated by inadequate budget allocation. Government agencies’ prioritisation of reducing inclusion errors over exclusion errors directly contravenes the constitutional obligation to progressively realise the right to social assistance.
The proposed amendments to the SRD grant regulations, particularly the addition of new criteria, pose a significant risk of further exclusion errors. Moreover, the static value of the grant, the one-year extension, and additional punitive measures contradict stated government policy and undermine commitments made by the President and the Department of Social Development (DSD).
Amendment of Regulation 5
The amendment extending the end date of the regulations to March 2025 fails to address the recurring issue of uncertainty for beneficiaries. We advocate for an extension aligned with DSD’s stated policy until the end of the 2025/26 financial year, reflecting the government’s commitment to future basic income support.
Proposed Retention of the R350 Value of the SRD Grant
Retaining the nominal value of the SRD grant at R350 per month for the fifth consecutive year is unacceptable. DSD’s own acknowledgment of the grant’s diminishing real value underscores the urgent need for a substantial increase to effectively alleviate poverty.
Amendment of Regulation 6A
The proposed clause regarding the recovery of funds from irregular beneficiaries lacks clarity and raises concerns about retrospective application and unfair recovery measures. We recommend against its inclusion in the regulations.
Cancellation of Payments
The provision to cancel payments after 90 days if applicants are deemed untraceable or fail to update details places undue burden on beneficiaries affected by administrative inefficiencies. We oppose its insertion in the regulations.
Responsibility of the Applicant
Holding applicants accountable for ensuring correct contact details disregards systemic barriers to communication and digital exclusion among vulnerable populations. We reject the inclusion of this clause.
In conclusion, we urge the authorities to consider our recommendations seriously in the interest of upholding constitutional rights and mitigating the socio-economic challenges faced by vulnerable communities.