The Department of Social Development (DSD) has distanced itself from posts circulating on social media, claiming that the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress grant is due to end.

The SRD grant provides temporary financial assistance to vulnerable South Africans affected by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Amid uncertainty over the future of the SRD grant, Acting Head of Communication Sandy Godlwana says DSD has issued a stern warning against the spread of misleading information.

“The Department further cautions that it is unlawful to use the official image of the Minister or the Department’s logo without authorisation, particularly for the purpose of spreading misinformation. Such actions are misleading and constitute a misrepresentation of government communication.”

While the SRD grant will continue for the time being, the government has not yet made a decision regarding its status beyond March 2027.

Oliver Meth, Head of Communications at Black Sash, says the panic caused by the fake news highlights just how heavily many disadvantaged South Africans rely on the grant.

“The panic caused by the rumours reminds us that people depend on the grant to survive. Our position is clear: the grant should not only continue, but be made permanent and extended beyond a temporary intervention.”

Godlwana urges the public to disregard social media videos and posts making unverified claims and to rely solely on official government communication channels for updates.

“DSD strongly discourages the creation and circulation of fake news that causes unnecessary panic and distress among social grant beneficiaries.”

Official information is published through:

• Department of Social Development (DSD) website

• South African Social Security Agency (SASSA)

• National Development Agency (NDA) official platforms

• Verified government social media pages

• DSD WhatsApp Channel

The National Transport Minister, Barbara Creecy, is moving towards a zero-tolerance approach to drinking and driving, signalling a potential ban on alcohol consumption before getting behind the wheel.  

This came up during the presentation of the report on the 2025/26 festive season road safety campaign on Thursday. Creecy highlighted that serious measures were needed as part of efforts to curb the country’s persistent road death toll. 

READ MORE: Road fatalities drop 5% during 2025/26 festive season – Smile 90.4FM

She said that analysis of crashes throughout the year showed that reckless driver behaviour was the leading cause of crashes and fatalities on South Africa’s roads. 

She identified speeding and drunk driving as the main contributors. 

While enforcement operations would continue, Creecy said current laws were outdated. 

 “Our driving and drinking policy was formulated almost 30 years ago. In today’s South Africa it is totally unacceptable that there is a law that allows people to drink and then drive,” she said.  

Creecy said she never understood the existing legal limits and argued that it failed victims and their families.  

“I cannot explain this to anyone who has lost a parent, a brother, a sister, a child as a result of a road accident.” 

She confirmed that the government intends to amend Section 65 of the National Road Traffic Act to formulate “a clear-cut, easy to understand and unambiguous policy that says drinking and driving is not allowed”. 

“A law that allows drivers to drink a certain amount and get behind the wheel of a car must be scrapped,” said Creecy. 

Road safety advocates have welcomed the proposal, but note that the implementation thereof would require careful planning.  

Kashifa Ancer, campaign manager of Rethink Your Drink, said the minister has taken an important and long-overdue stance.  

Ancer highlight that evidence was available to show that each unit of alcohol increased the risk of a crash.  

“Each unit of alcohol, for example, a 330ml can of beer drunk within an hour, increases blood alcohol content by about 0.02%. And each unit drunk in a short time, like in about an hour, doubles risk of causing injury or being injured,” said Ancer.  

She said the organisation supported a 0.02 blood alcohol content limit, alongside broader alcohol law reforms. 

“This, however, must be backed by broader alcohol reform, including progress on the draft liquor amendment bill and pricing measures, including minimum unit pricing and a complete overhaul of our current excise tax system to prevent harm before it happens and save lives.”  

US President Donald Trump has finally received a Nobel Peace Prize, albeit symbolically. Trump has long coveted the Peace Prize, ever since his first tenure as President.

On Thursday, Venezuela’s opposition leader, María Corina Machado, who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for 2025, handed her medal to Trump during a meeting at the White House.

Trump might see the prize as rightfully his, but in reality, it is only symbolic. The Norwegian Nobel Committee says the Nobel Peace Prize cannot be shared, nor transferred to others.

The #NobelPeacePrize medal.

It measures 6.6 cm in diameter, weighs 196 grams and is struck in gold. On its face, a portrait of Alfred Nobel and on its reverse, three naked men holding around each other’s shoulders as a sign of brotherhood. A design unchanged for 120 years.

Did… pic.twitter.com/Jdjgf3Ud2A

— Nobel Peace Center (@NobelPeaceOslo) January 15, 2026

“Once the announcement has been made, the decision stands for all time.”

Machado’s meeting with Trump, and her symbolic gesture, comes a few weeks after US forces seized Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in Caracas and charged him in a drug-trafficking case, even though critics say the real plan was to control Venezuela’s oil.

Trump has so far not endorsed Machado to become Venezuela’s new leader, despite her movement claiming victory in the contested 2024 elections, instead dealing with Maduro’s ally and now acting head of state, Delcy Rodríguez.

Stroking Trump’s ego might help Machado in that respect.

It comes as the US has completed its first sale of Venezuelan oil under a new energy arrangement, generating about $500 million in revenue.

But unlike typical oil sales, the money from the initial transaction is being held in bank accounts controlled by the US government, with the main account reportedly located in Qatar, a neutral site chosen to allow the funds to move freely and avoid legal seizure by creditors.

Critics warn that this arrangement raises complex questions about sovereignty and legal norms in international energy deals.