1. President Cyril Ramaphosa has denied that the appointment of a minister of electricity will cause tensions and create turf wars with ministers of energy and public enterprises.
2. The Minister of Minerals and Energy Gwede Mantashe’s responsibility is to focus on policy, while the Minister of Public Enterprises, Pravin Gordhan, is focusing on the restructuring of Eskom and other state-owned entities.
3. Ramaphosa said the country had been battling load shedding for a long time and a minister of electricity would come in with the intention to resolve this challenge.
The article “WATCH | Ramaphosa lashes out against MPs” provides an overview of President Cyril Ramaphosa's comments regarding the appointment of a minister of electricity in South Africa. The article is generally reliable as it accurately reports on Ramaphosa's statements without any bias or distortion. However, there are some potential issues with trustworthiness and reliability that should be noted.
First, the article does not provide any evidence or sources to back up its claims about the potential tensions between ministers or how long South Africa has been dealing with load shedding. This lack of evidence makes it difficult to assess whether these claims are accurate or not. Additionally, there is no mention of any counterarguments or opposing views on this issue which could have provided more context for readers.
Furthermore, while the article does provide some information about what each minister will be responsible for, it does not explore any potential risks associated with having multiple ministers responsible for different aspects related to energy policy in South Africa. This omission could lead readers to believe that there are no risks associated with this decision when in fact there may be some unintended consequences that need to be considered before implementing such a plan.
In conclusion, while this article provides an accurate overview of President Cyril Ramaphosa's comments regarding the appointment of a minister of electricity in South Africa, it lacks evidence to support its claims and fails to explore any potential risks associated with this decision which could lead readers to draw inaccurate conclusions about its implications for energy policy in South Africa.