SA’s load reduction crisis: Government promises ring hollow as MPs push back

2026-03-24 - 17:40

Minister of Electricity and Energy Kgosientsho Ramokgopa appeared before Parliament on Tuesday to outline what he described as a structured, funded and sequenced programme to eliminate load reduction. The minister emphasised that load reduction is localised power cuts affecting roughly 1.69 million customers across 971 feeders. He was clear that load reduction is not a generation problem but a distribution failure driven by illegal connections, meter tampering and vandalism. He said more than 380 000 smart meters have been installed nationally, over 199 000 consumers have been removed from load reduction schedules, and the department expects full elimination by the end of the 2026 financial year. Opposition parties were unconvinced. A semantic shift that hides ongoing suffering DA MP Kevin Mileham drew an immediate distinction between progress on paper and reality on the ground. “We do not congratulate a fish for swimming,” he told the house. “Providing a stable, reliable supply of electricity is not a localised miracle. It is the basic statutory mandate of Eskom and the Department of Electricity and Energy.” He argued that the government had simply rebranded its failures. “We have moved from load shedding to load reduction – a semantic shift used by the state to hide its failure to maintain distribution infrastructure.” Communities in areas like Soweto, he said, were experiencing transformer failures not because of a generation shortfall but because of years of neglected maintenance. Mileham said “load reduction” was, in his words, “a cynical attempt to move the goalposts and escape accountability.” Ramokgopa hit back sharply, dismissing what he called Mileham’s “technical limitations and incompetence.” He accused the member of contradicting himself – first claiming load reduction was the same as load shedding, then conceding it was an isolated distribution challenge. “I never thought that it will reach such preposterous proportions,” the minister said. Moreover, he argued that the DA’s concerns about transmission expansion also rested on a flawed assumption that grid rollout follows a linear pattern when the government expects output to peak as skills, industry and procurement programmes mature simultaneously. ALSO READ: Cheaper electricity will spark ferrochrome revival, says Ramokgopa Targets disputed, progress questioned Action SA’s Athol Trollip acknowledged the reduction in load shedding as a relief; but refused to frame it as a triumph. “It was the ANC government that switched the lights off in the first place,” he said, pointing to years of cadre deployment and state capture that hollowed out Eskom’s generation capacity. He warned that structural problems remained deeply embedded. “Whether it’s a failing transformer, the shutdown of a generation unit, or the collapse of a pylon, the result is the same: loss of dignity, loss of income, loss of opportunity, and loss of jobs.” Trollip also took aim at the persistence of illegal connections, arguing the GNU was “turning a blind eye to izinyoka [illegal connections]” and that Eskom remained dangerously reliant on diesel-powered open-cycle gas turbines. “South Africa does not need temporary relief, it needs structural energy reforms,” he said. “We need a competitive electricity market, accelerated private sector generation, capable municipalities, and above all, accountability for those who broke Eskom in the first place.” EFF MP Nazier Paulsen challenged the minister’s figures directly. Where Ramokgopa pointed to over 140 feeders restored in the current financial year, the party argued that Eskom had “only achieved roughly 30% of its target for moving customers out of load reduction.” The party accused the minister of “flying blind by failing to implement the mandatory integrated energy plan, making multi-billion-rand procurement decisions without a legal or evidentiary basis.” ‘Eskom will not be privatised’, Ramokgopa assures MPs MK Party’s Adil Nchabeleng raised structural concerns about the years ahead, warning of a looming capacity cliff. “Between 2029 and 2030, 9.4 gigawatts of coal power will retire,” he said. “This is not speculation. It is scheduled reality. This country is on a track to lose the single largest source of firm baseload energy without any equivalent replacement.” Ramokgopa was unapologetic about the government’s direction. Responding to calls from EFF and others about privatisation fears, he was emphatic: “We will not privatise Eskom. This asset will remain in the stable of government.” He also pushed back on claims that climate financing arrangements were being mishandled, saying any international funding – including the widely cited $12 billion offer – would only be accepted if it was more affordable than commercial borrowing. “If it doesn’t meet those requirements, we are not going to take that fund,” he said. Affordability crisis compounds the power crisis Several parties shifted the debate toward the cost of electricity, arguing that fixing infrastructure means little if households cannot afford to use it. The DA called Eskom’s recent tariff application “an assault on the poor and the middle class,” warning the country was “creating a pantry of energy paupers where electricity is a luxury reserved for the elite.” Ramokgopa says Eskom engineers will deliver Ramokgopa closed his responses with a direct appeal to the credibility of the technical programme he leads, drawing a line under opposition charges that the government’s promises were politically motivated. He reminded the house that many members had called the department’s interventions an “election gimmick” during the sixth administration. “I made the point that our interventions are not politically expedient – they are led by science; they are led by competent engineers,” he said. “And today we have solved the problem.” He went further, making what he described as a public commitment: “As a group of engineers, we are going to resolve the load reduction.” The minister further acknowledged the timeline concerns raised as “a particularly useful intervention” and conceded that the rollout would not be uniform, with five of the nine provinces expected to be resolved by year-end and the remainder to follow. He framed the IRP not merely as an energy planning document but as “a fundamental tool of transformation” that would “fundamentally alter the economic relations of society.” READ NEXT: Eskom’s Gauteng load reduction: Here’s when power goes off in your area for the rest of March