Concerns have been raised about the results of the 2011 census, due to the notable
discrepancies. According to Rob Dorrington of the Centre for Actuarial Research at the
University of Cape Town and a member of an expert evaluation team of the Statistics Council,
the population growth revealed by the census results was inconsistent with fertility, mortality,
and survival estimates [The Sunday Independent 4 November 2012].
The 2011 census recorded almost 1.2 million (2.3%) more people than had been projected in
the 2011 mid-year population estimates. Male and female numbers were 673 755 (2.7%) and
510 048 (2%) higher than previously estimated. Both the census results and the mid-year
population estimates are published by Statistics South Africa (Stats SA).
In proportional terms, the biggest difference between the two reports was in the 80+ age
category. The census registered 232 432 more over 80s than had previously estimated, a
62.1% increase.
However, some age groups were overestimated in the previous projections. Most notably,
there were 723 805 (13.6%) fewer 10-14 year-olds in the census than had been previously
estimated.
Of the 1.2 million additional people counted in the census, 794 662 were African (an increase
of 2%), 135 611 were coloured (an increase of 3%), 12 063 were Indian (an increase of 0.9%),
and 21 013 were white (an increase of 0.5%).
The statistician-general, Pali Lehohla, said that the high outcome of the census was based on
a ‘statistical, well established sampling procedure’ [Business Report 5 November 2012].
No matter what the excuses are... the fact is that we still seem to have questionable figures, which make it difficult for government to plan efficiently going forward.
Monday, 12 November 2012
Sunday, 11 November 2012
Gay day in the USA
Tuesday night was not a good night for homophobes.Americans in Maryland, Maine and Washington State voted to extend marriage rights to gay and lesbian couples, marking the first time that gay marriage rights have ever been approved by voters in a referendum. Over the past several years, voters in 32 states have passed ballot box initiatives to deny marriage rights to same-sex couples.
In Maine's case, a referendum three years ago had annulled a same-sex marriage law that had been passed by the state legislature, once again stripping gays of the right to marry. Now the electorate has seen the light and corrected this little oversight.
Also of note: Minnesota voters said no to a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Phew!
In all four cases, pro-gay forces won by a margin of about 4 percent.
But the good gay news doesn't stop there. Wisconsin's Tammy Baldwin (pictured) has become the first openly gay(at the time of being elected) US senator!
“Tammy Baldwin’s victory showed what a majority of Americans already know: that candidates should be judged on their qualifications for the job and not their sexual orientation,” said Herndon Graddick, president of the gay rights organization GLAAD.
Add to that the re-election of the first sitting President to support gay marriage and you know there were a lot of angry haters. Take that Mitt!
Thursday, 8 November 2012
South Africa has lost confidence in President Jacob Zuma
The South African people are bearing witness to the emergence of a government and a country different to that envisaged by President Nelson Mandela and those who fought to liberate South Africa from oppression and ushered in a new democratic order in 1994.
The Marikana tragedy; the appalling ‘Nkandlagate’ scandal; the failure by the government to deliver textbooks and workbooks to school children in Limpopo and the Eastern Cape; the downgrading of South Africa’s credit rating by two major ratings agencies; the mounting disrespect for our Constitution and judiciary; the growing number of our citizens who must face the indignity of unemployment; and the uncontrollable and rising tide of corruption in the public service – all of these collectively point to the reality that ours is a country which lacks decisive leadership and vision.
In response to this mounting crisis of leadership, the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament, Lindiwe Mazibuko, mandated by the ACDP, AZAPO, COPE, DA, FF+, IFP, UCDP and UDM, will this afternoon table a motion of no-confidence in Jacob Zuma as President of the Republic of South Africa.
President Zuma no longer has the confidence of our political parties to serve as president on the grounds that under his leadership:
• The justice system has been weakened and politicised;
• corruption in the public service has spiralled out of control;
• unemployment levels continue to increase;
• the economy is weakening; and
• the right of access to quality education has been violated.
Section 102(2) of the Constitution states: ‘…if the National Assembly, by a vote supported by a majority of its members, passes a motion of no confidence in the President, the President and the other members of Cabinet and any Deputy Ministers must resign.’
Following the 2009 election, the National Assembly elected President Zuma into office, and it is through Parliament that the president is held accountable to the South African people for the execution of his responsibilities. The National Assembly has the power and the duty to force the President’s resignation if he fails to maintain the confidence of the citizens of our country.
It is therefore appropriate that the future of the President be discussed and debated in Parliament in an open and transparent manner by the MPs who elected him.
Parliament must demonstrate to the people of our country that it cares about who leads us, and that it is not willing to sit back and let one man destroy the freedom and prosperity that was fought for and promised them.
The Marikana tragedy; the appalling ‘Nkandlagate’ scandal; the failure by the government to deliver textbooks and workbooks to school children in Limpopo and the Eastern Cape; the downgrading of South Africa’s credit rating by two major ratings agencies; the mounting disrespect for our Constitution and judiciary; the growing number of our citizens who must face the indignity of unemployment; and the uncontrollable and rising tide of corruption in the public service – all of these collectively point to the reality that ours is a country which lacks decisive leadership and vision.
In response to this mounting crisis of leadership, the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament, Lindiwe Mazibuko, mandated by the ACDP, AZAPO, COPE, DA, FF+, IFP, UCDP and UDM, will this afternoon table a motion of no-confidence in Jacob Zuma as President of the Republic of South Africa.
President Zuma no longer has the confidence of our political parties to serve as president on the grounds that under his leadership:
• The justice system has been weakened and politicised;
• corruption in the public service has spiralled out of control;
• unemployment levels continue to increase;
• the economy is weakening; and
• the right of access to quality education has been violated.
Section 102(2) of the Constitution states: ‘…if the National Assembly, by a vote supported by a majority of its members, passes a motion of no confidence in the President, the President and the other members of Cabinet and any Deputy Ministers must resign.’
Following the 2009 election, the National Assembly elected President Zuma into office, and it is through Parliament that the president is held accountable to the South African people for the execution of his responsibilities. The National Assembly has the power and the duty to force the President’s resignation if he fails to maintain the confidence of the citizens of our country.
It is therefore appropriate that the future of the President be discussed and debated in Parliament in an open and transparent manner by the MPs who elected him.
Parliament must demonstrate to the people of our country that it cares about who leads us, and that it is not willing to sit back and let one man destroy the freedom and prosperity that was fought for and promised them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)