~

Feike has seen correspondence dated from December 2024 confirming that Minister Dion George had in fact revoked the authority of the DDG to decide exemption applications in terms of section 81 of the MLRA. We are trying to obtain confirmation from Minister George when in fact he had revoked this authority.  On 31 March 2025, a new set of delegations was issued by Minister George, confirming that he retains the sole power to decide any exemption application.  There are a number of significant changes to the delegations, including concerning section 28 matters.  We are also aware that despite these changes, the DDG had continued to issue decisions in terms of section 81 of the MLRA.  Members of the fishing industry are urgently advised to study any recent decisions (from approximately August 2024) taken in terms of section 28 or section 81 of the MLRA and see who took those decisions. If the decisions were taken by the DDG, it is extremely likely that these decisions h...

12 months ago, South Africa saw the appointment of its first fisheries minister from the opposition Democratic Alliance party as a consequence of the formation of the Government of National Unity (GNU).  Admittedly, there was a substantial amount of hope that the decades of mismanagement, bad policy, destructive fisheries management and corruption at the Fisheries Management Branch located at Foretrust Building, Foreshore, Cape Town would come to an end.  That hope was not blind hope. It was based on the fact that while in opposition, the DA had espoused the type of policies and action needed that would certainly see the rapid righting of the rotten fisheries ship that is the Fisheries Management Branch.  12 months later and that hope has been dashed as the DAs Dion George has actually just continued with the same bad policies and incompetent / corrupt staff that he inherited from his ANC predecessors. In fact, George has been doubling down and issuing even worse decision...

 What is going on with fisheries control, Minister George? Your FCO's are randomly issuing fines to skippers of fishing vessels demanding they pay "admission of guilt fines" for the most mundane non-existent issues.  FCO's are supposed to foster a relationship of co-operation with the fishing industry as opposed to creating a hostile environment where it appears that FCO's are out looking for bribes. What else could explain why FCO's are issuing fines in cases where a tuna pole vessel's newly painted lettering mistakenly reads "TB" as opposed to "TP"?  Or issuing a fine to a tuna long line vessel because it has wooden bamboo poles on board because the FCO does not know that bamboo poles are also used to gaff tuna caught by long line to be brought safely on board the vessel? (Not to mention that the tuna long line conditions do not contain a definition of what is "tuna long line gear" and there is no criminal prohibition for ha...