Draft amendments to the Social Relief of Distress grant regulations

The IEJ and #PTG argue that the draft SRD grant regulations are regressive and fail to meet government commitments to 'extend and improve' social assistance. They highlight a 50% exclusion error rate and criticize the decision to freeze the grant at R350, which they claim is unlawful and irrational given inflation. The submission proposes a two-phase increase: first to R530 to align with the Child Support Grant, and later to the Food Poverty Line of R760. Additionally, they oppose new regulations regarding the recovery of irregular payments and the cancellation of applications for 'untraceable' applicants, arguing these shift the blame for systemic administrative failures onto vulnerable beneficiaries.

• The SRD grant is characterized by a high rate of exclusion errors, estimated at approximately 50% of eligible persons, which the authors attribute to systemic barriers in application, approval, and appeal resulting from inadequate budget allocation.
• The proposed retention of the grant value at R350 per month is described as unlawful, irrational, and discriminatory, as it represents a real-term decrease of around 16% since 2020 and fails to account for cost-of-living increases.
• The authors propose a two-phase increase for the grant: an immediate increase to R530 in April 2024 to equalise it with the Child Support Grant (CSG), followed by a phase-in to the Food Poverty Line (FPL) of R760 during 2024/5.
• The submission argues that the proposed end date of March 2025 is too short and creates uncertainty; they recommend extending the grant to the end of the 2025/26 financial year in line with Department of Social Development (DSD) policy.
• The authors oppose the insertion of Regulation 6A regarding the recovery of irregular benefits, fearing that vague language and inaccurate bank/database verification could lead to the recovery of funds from deserving beneficiaries who received ad hoc donations or loans.
• The submission criticizes proposed clauses that would cancel applications for 'untraceable' applicants after 90 days or exempt the department from liability for wrong mobile numbers, arguing that non-payment is often due to systemic administrative failures rather than beneficiary negligence.

APA

Institute for Economic Justice (2024). Draft amendments to the Social Relief of Distress grant regulations. https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/IEJ-PTG_SRD-submission-March-2024.pdf

Chicago

Institute for Economic Justice. Draft amendments to the Social Relief of Distress grant regulations. 2024. https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/IEJ-PTG_SRD-submission-March-2024.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite press release |author=Institute for Economic Justice |title=Draft amendments to the Social Relief of Distress grant regulations |date=7 March 2024 |url=https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/IEJ-PTG_SRD-submission-March-2024.pdf |access-date=17 August 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@misc{instituteforeconomicjustice2024draft, author = {{Institute for Economic Justice}}, title = {{Draft amendments to the Social Relief of Distress grant regulations}}, publisher = {Institute for Economic Justice}, year = {2024}, month = mar, url = {https://iej.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/IEJ-PTG_SRD-submission-March-2024.pdf}, urldate = {2026-08-17}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }