Lynda Loxton
The grand-scale fudging of issues to protect sacred cows in the oil industry continued apace this week with the release of the long-awaited Lambrechts report on deregulation.
The report advises the government to retain the status quo for at least three to five years, while the already over-researched industry is again studied and a master plan drawn up to reduce the government’s involvement.
The report, by Izak Lambrechts of the University of Stellenbosch, had been touted as central to the government’s response to growing local and international pressure to loosen its stranglehold on the industry, built up during the sanctions-bound apartheid era.
Commentators have expressed serious misgivings about the fact that yet another report on the oil industry has recommended yet another study into the pros and cons of deregulation.
Particularly contentious issues are subsidies to Sasol and Mossgas, the monopolies enjoyed by Petronet and Soekor and the role of the Central Energy Fund and Strategic Fuel Fund.
Pick `n Pay group enterprises managing director Gareth Ackerman said he was now “very seriously” considering approaching the Constitutional Court about continued delays in deregulating the industry.
Deregulation had been widely expected to involve allowing supermarkets to sell petrol at discount prices as well as doing away with a wide range of other controls over the sale, distribution, storage and exploration for petroleum products.
“We are re-looking at our options and one of them may well be a challenge in the constitutional court,” Ackerman said.
South African Petroleum Industry Association (Sapia) director Colin McClelland agreed that it was disappointing that the report, though stressing the need for deregulation, had not recommended a shorter time-frame.
But, he said, the petroleum industry could not support deregulation while Sasol still received subsidies from the government — and they would be in place until at least 1999.
Mineral and Energy Affairs Minister Penuell Maduna was not available for comment, but some officials agreed “the report is a damp squib”.