Johannesburg - Several construction industry associations have rejected suggestions that surplus funds from the Sector Education and Training Authorities (Setas) could be used to help finance the R3 billion shortfall resulting from the government’s decision not to increase university fees next year.
The industry associations have also stressed the surplus funds had built up because of the ineffectiveness of the Seta system.
Minister of Higher Education and Training Blade Nzimande said recently the government might have to consider using “surplus funds” from Setas. But he appeared to backtrack on this view in Parliament on Tuesday.
“We need to be careful about raiding the skills levy money all the time as that could amount to robbing the poor to pay the poor.
Desperately needed
“The skills levy money is desperately needed to train workers and provide skills training to millions of youth and adults that are either unemployed or in a variety of vocational or short skills programmes and various adult education programmes,” he said.
Nzimande committed to disclose today the sources of the additional funding for universities because of a “zero percent” fee increase.
Deryck Spence, the executive director of the South African Paint Manufacturing Association, said they believed surpluses in Setas were “industry’s money” and not the Setas’ or the minister’s to use as he saw fit. “If the government starts raiding Seta funds, industry will be levied unfairly since the funds will not be used for the purpose that they were introduced for in the first place.
“Seta funds are for skills upliftment of the workforce and are accrued from payments made by the industry for industry-specific training, not for university studies or other crises that the government hastily has to channel funds to,” he said.
Spence added that any use of Seta funds for universities would be a severe setback for industry training.
Lea Smith, the president of the Institute of Plumbing of SA, said it was categorically against Seta funds and training levies paid by the plumbing sector being applied to fund the “zero university fee increase”.
“This is not because we don’t think that university students are deserving of the concession but because Setas, particularly the Construction Education and Training Authority, is totally failing in its duties to the plumbing sector.
“How can the government consider removing funding from a sector that is already underperforming and not fulfilling its obligations?” she asked.
Larry Feinberg, the executive director of the Association of South African Quantity Surveyors, said although the minister’s comments on obtaining funds from Seta surpluses still had to be clarified, raiding Seta or the National Skills Fund would be akin to “robbing Peter to pay Paul”.
“It would mean sacrificing money that should be spent on artisan development to fund university studies,” he said.
Achieved nothing
Speaking in his personal capacity, former Master Builders South Africa president Nico Maas said the funds paid by industry to Setas amounted to billions of rand but “ever since its establishment in 2000, the Seta concept has achieved virtually nothing”.
“Most of the people appointed to run it have not had the faintest idea of how to implement training and corruption has been rife.
“Industry has struggled to claim back on training levies and has had hardly any return on the investment it has been forced to pay,” he said.
Maas said it would not be a major loss to the industry if the government wanted industry to fund university education in a face-saving exercise because industry had in any event received little benefit from the Setas.
BUSINESS REPORT