A shortage of skills is widely believed to be a major factor inhibiting economic growth in South Africa. Extremely high levels of unemployment are frequently attributed to our poor education system (Bloch 2009) and to the weaknesses of our ‘skills development’ system (National Planning Commission 2011). Standards of training for artisans and other mid-level skills are low (Mukora 2009), as are the numbers enrolled in vocational and occupational education programmes. The quality of provision is erratic, and throughput rates of the colleges are at a low level (Taylor 2011). The institutions set up through the levy-grant system, the sectoral education and training authorities (Setas) and the National Skills Fund (NSF), have been much criticised. Many employers simply treat the skills levy as an additional tax: although 65 per cent of employers who should pay the levy are doing so, by 2004 only 10 per cent of levy-paying employers were participating effectively in the system (Kraak 2004a). Some blame overly bureaucratic and incompetent Setas, and others argue that employers do not want to train their staff. Setas are also criticised for their ineffectiveness in mediating between training and economic and social requirements, with one weakness seen as the fact that their labour market analysis is based on reports from workplaces and not on research (Erasmus 2009). Public perception, as reported in the media, suggests concern with the large amounts of money in the system, particularly where this has remained unspent, as in the NSF. Corruption and poor governance in the Setas have received copious media coverage.

Has anything been achieved through the skills levy? André Kraak (2011: 98-99) provides one of the few pieces of research arguing that there have been positive achievements: