The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

There is strong evidence to suggest that the Public Service Broadcasting Bill may be unconstitutional, as the Minister of Communications is not permitted to introduce a money bill. Section 73 of the Constitution states that only the "cabinet member responsible for national financial matters" - the minister of finance - may introduce a money bill. In terms of section 77 of the Constitution, any bill that imposes a tax, levy, duty or surcharge is classified as a money bill. Section 4(2) of the Public Service Broadcasting Bill creates a "Public Service Broadcasting Fund" which will comprise in part of "personal income tax collected in terms of the Income Tax Act". Section 4(3) of the Bill states that contributions in terms of section 4(2) "must not exceed 1 percent of the total income and annual turnover per annum of persons identified as determined by the Minister in consultation with the Minister of Finance." As the Business Day noted, this effectively means that, in terms of this proposed legislation, "taxpayers should contribute at least 1% of their personal income tax" to the Fund.

It is difficult to see how the Public Service Broadcasting Bill would not, then, be classified as a money bill, and how the offending provision could legitimately be introduced in the form of a bill by anyone other than the finance minister. Given that it appears that section 4 of the Bill can never be passed into law in this manner, and ought not to have been introduced by the Minister of Communications, ones wonders whether the Communications Department is simply unaware of basic constitutional law, or if there is a more ulterior motive for the introduction of this Bill. Is the Department attempting to apply pressure to the Finance Ministry, or attempting to circumvent constitutional requirements? What appears to be growing increasingly clear is that the minister of communications is actively attempting to overstep his powers, and circumvent due process, is an attempt to get his way. That, we believe, is not