Open the debate on Reserve Bank & Avoid Continued Protection & Bankrolling of Big Banks


SARB Governor Lesetja Kganyago

The public protectors remedial action on changing the South African Reserve Bank (SARB) mandate[1] might have not met jurisdictional requirements in terms of the Constitution but Parliament should atleast debate the merits and demerits of amending the constitution on SARB’s mandate in order to prevent SARB from bankrolling private banks who create money out of thin air[2] as it did with Bankorp/Absa in the early nineties.

The debate on secrecy and lack of accountability by central banks is happening around the world and most recently in the United States of America where the Federal Reserve has come under serious scrutiny on accountability to the American public[3]. Here in South Africa, the banking cartel together with current leadership of SARB supported by the liberal media has treated any debate about SARB as some abomination and yet SARB is a public institution and must be subjected to public scrutiny and public accountability through a democratically elected parliament.

After Myburgh Report on African Bank was released in May 2016 which stated that African Bank conducted its business negligently, SARB and Public Investment Corporation(PIC)[4] came to its rescue by breaking the bank up into two entities then later funding the “new” African Bank with public servants’ pensions and SARBs ability to create money out of thin air. Governor Lesetja Kganyago in his replying affidavit to Public Protector’s report on CIEX Report stated that SARB can provide the same services as a private bank[5][6].

This bailout of African Bank is no different to the Bankorp/Absa ‘life boat’ where corporations are protected by public institutions but no such acts of “prudence” are provided for the general public by the same institutions e.g Fees Must Fall or Department of Small Business or Land Reform Programme.

A quick look into SARB’s operations before “majority rule” or “democracy” irrefutably proves that SARB provided facilities to advance full employment and protection of White minority economic interests as stated in SARB’s June Quarterly Bulletin of 1989 where some of policy directives included [7] :

  • The Reserve Bank will extend special facilities at a low rate of interest to the Land Bank to enable the latter to keep its short-term lending rates unchanged. This should prove of great benefit to the farming community. The expansionary impact of this limited credit extension on bank reserves and the money supply will be offset by open market operations
  • Additional financial assistance will be provided by the Department of Finance to the Industrial Development Corporation, the Small Business Development Corporation and other development corporations to enable them to keep their lending rates to small businesses as low as possible
  • The Government will consider ways and means of expanding interest rate subsidies on certain categories of housing loans extended by building societies and banks

The policy directives stated above support the remedial action given by the Public Protector, Busisiwe Mkhwebane. It is therefore disingenuous of SARB to claim that changing the mandate of SARB will have an impact on its independence. After all, SARB had a different mandate from 1921 to 1996 and it remained independent for all those years. South Africa has a unique central bank as its mandate is determined by the Constitution instead of an Act of Parliament so the Public Protector made a correct assessment but jurisdiction failed her.  Parliament can still bring about that fundamental change to ensure prosperity for all South Africans.

If SARB’s mandate is not changed then SARB can continue bankrolling failed private banks and protecting the banking cartel of 5 White controlled banks which control 91% of banking in South Africa.

The sudden change in SARB’s policies and mandate post 1994 leads one to anti-colonial British author Peter Robbins who said “Economic Apartheid has replaced legal Apartheid with the same consequences for the same people”

[1] Report No:8 of 2017/18 On allegations of maladministration corruption, misappropriation of public funds and failure by the South African Government to implement the CIEX Report and to recover public funds from ABSA Bank

[2] Bank of England Quarterly Bulletin Q1 2014,Money creation in the modern Economy By Michael McLeay, Amar Radia and Ryland Thomas of the Bank’s Monetary Analysis Directorate

[3] https://www.ft.com/content/ce851701-95c2-36f5-8a69-dddc5124fa92


[5]http://www.investecassetmanagement.com/south-africa/individual-investor/en/african- bank/

[6]https://www.resbank.co.za/Publications/Detail-Item-View/Pages/Publications.aspx?sarbweb= 3b6aa07d-92ab-441f-b7bf-bb7dfb1bedb4&sarblist=21b5222e-7125-4e55-bb65-56fd3333371 e&sarbitem=7893


South African Reserve Bank Quarterly Bulletin June 1989



Show More


  1. apparently the ANC Lekgotla currently taking place has now included all the critical deployees to Government so that they can take contribute to critical decisions paving the way for Government work.

    Mayors and others have been invited but one wonder why someone such as Governor of Reserve Bank would not be part of those critical deployees.

    Kganyago is currently holding AGM of Reserve Bank and whatever is taking place at Lekgotla is none of his business.

  2. The Global Mafiocracy: the banks, corporations, asset management firms, sovereign wealth funds, insurance companies and holding companies that collectively own each other and the wider network of global corporate and financial institutions, manifesting as a relatively small cartel of roughly 150 large financial institutions that wield unparalleled financial power in the modern world.
    Behind the major corporate and financial institutions are individuals and families, smaller units of concentrated power who own the largest shares and steer the operations of the global cartel. These individual oligarchs and family dynasties – from the Rockefellers in the US, to the Wallenbergs in Sweden, Agnellis in Italy, Desmarais’ in Canada, to the House of Saud in Saudi Arabia, Oppenheimer in South Africa, among others – control and.or influence large percentages of wealth within their respective nations and in the world of globalized financial and corporate networks.
    The structure of financial controls created by the tycoons of ‘Big Banking’ and ‘Big Business’ was of extraordinary complexity, one business fief being built on another, both being allied with semi-independent associates, the whole rearing upward into two pinnacles of economic and political power, of which one, centered in New York, was headed by J. P. Morgan and Company and the other, in Ohio, was headed by the Rockefeller family. When the two cooperated, as they generally did, they could influence the economic life of the country to a large degree and could almost control its political life, at least at the Federal level. They caused the “panic of 1907” and the collapse of two railroads, one in 1914 and the other in 1929.

    The global banking cartel, centered at the IMF, World Bank and Federal Reserve, have paid off politicians and dictators the world over [Including Washington]. In country after country, they have looted national economies at the expense of local populations, consolidating wealth in unprecedented fashion – the top economic one-tenth of one percent is currently holding over $40 trillion in investible wealth, not counting an equally significant amount of wealth hidden in offshore accounts.
    The big bankers of the world, who practice the terrorism of money, are more powerful than kings and field marshals, even more than the Pope of Rome himself. They never dirty their hands. They kill no one: they limit themselves to applauding the show.
    Their officials, international technocrats, rule our countries: they are neither presidents nor ministers, they have not been elected, but they decide the level of salaries and public expenditure, investments and divestments, prices, taxes, interest rates, subsidies, when the sun rises and how frequently it rains.

    At issue is who shall rule the world: the emerging 1% as a financial oligarchy, or elected governments. The two sets of aims are antithetical: rising living standards and national independence, or a renting economy, austerity and international dependency.

    Lord Alfred Milner, wealthy Englishman and front man for the Rothschilds, served as paymaster for the international bankers during the Bolshevik Revolution. Milner later headed secret society known as The Round Table which was dedicated to establishing a world government whereby a clique of super-rich financiers would control the world under the guise of Socialism. The American subsidiary of this conspiracy is called the Council on Foreign Relations and was started by, and is still controlled by international bankers. The “secret society” was organized on the conspiratorial pattern of circles … the central part of the “secret society” was established by March, 1891, using Rhodes’ money. The organization was run for Rothschild by Lord Alfred Milner The. Round Table worked behind the scenes at the highest levels of British government, influencing foreign policy and England’s involvement and conduct of WWI.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Back to top button

For As Little As A Monthly Donation or Subscription of R150,00 You can Keep UnCensored Alive

For those of you who read UnCensored regularly, we implore you to donate. For those who donate, we thank you greatly. 

%d bloggers like this: