#Letter: Play open cards about loadshedding bias

Vernon Pillay of Erasmus Dam, KwaDukuza, writes:

With regards to an article “KDM apologises for prolonged power outage”, it is a slap in the face of people from the many affected areas.

The apology creates a perception that is akin to a form of discrimination.

I have asked the community, and they just say, “because its Salt Rock…”

Since KwaDukuza is given a north and south loadshedding schedule, the northern region has been discriminated against in the past.

Now ward 22 and its surrounding areas are part of the southern grid, to which this categorical apology was issued to. Why the bias KDM?

Confusingly the article states: “The power outages experienced…will be part of the municipality’s dossier to Eskom…to have substations temporarily exempt…until new substations are commissioned.”

Really? Asking for exemption for a specific area which compels you to do so for every other disenfranchised area?

You cannot say Eskom is responsible for switching off the specific areas, because according to the report, with your input, published on the WhatsApp group “Group 2 Fair and Equitable Load Shedding” by the chairperson of the iLembe Civic Action Movement (ICAM) Walter Schotter, “Eskom’s response clearly states that KDM approached them to handle the loadshedding, so this is not Eskom’s issue. They merely require X amount of power to be removed from the grid by KDM.”

Please answer this hot potato question, officially.

Who from KDM is responsible for physically switching off power to areas in KwaDukuza, north and south, when it is time to activate loadshedding?

Please publish a report (on your Facebook page) detailing which areas and districts are exempt from loadshedding and why?

As a citizen, I ask this in terms of the Bill of Rights *32 – access to information.

Follow The North Coast Courier on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram & YouTube for breaking news

Telegram Broadcast Service: https://t.me/joinchat/yJULuN8NaCs5OGM0