Dear Portfolio Committee on Employment and Labour,


Background Overview
South Africa’s development policies have commendably focused on youth (under 35) and women, yet citizens aged 35–60 remain structurally excluded from employment, entrepreneurship, education, and skills development programs. Many of today’s middle-aged citizens “grew out” of youth without ever accessing foundational support due to:
• Family circumstances such as high rates of single-parent or grandparent-headed households, leaving children without parental guidance or resources;
• Limited academic capacity from poorly resourced schools in townships and rural areas, resulting in low pass rates and subsequent dropout;
• Early teen parenthood, forcing young people into bread-winner roles rather than continued education;
• Geographic neglect, where underserved communities lack training centers, reliable transport, and internet access.
These factors created a generation that entered adulthood under-prepared and unsupported, only to encounter new age-based barriers at 35.
Supporting Statistics & Impact Analysis
• In 2022/23, SAPS recorded 1 815 636 serious and violent crimes—a 7.7 % increase year-on-year.
• Youth unemployment (15–24) exceeds 60 %, and growing cohorts age into exclusion without skills or qualifications.
• 63 % of South Africa’s youth were unemployed at the start of 2019; 35.4 % of children experienced some form of sexual abuse; and 12.2 % reported neglect during their lifetime.
• Unemployment for ages 35–60 stands at over 33 %, more than double the OECD average for 55–64 year-olds.
• Contact crime peaked at 44 murders per 100 000 in 2023, with males aged 25–34 the most represented victims and perpetrators.
• Ages 15–24 account for the highest victimisation rates, but perpetrators aged 25–34 commit the largest share of violent offences—yet only under-35 citizens receive targeted prevention programs.
• In 2013, gang-related murders comprised 12 % of Western Cape homicides, with minors as young as 14 arrested on such charges. By 2024, Western Cape gangs were recruiting 12-year-olds to conceal weapons and act as “spotters,” under orchestration by older leaders (30–60) seeking to insulate themselves from detection and legal risk3.
• The prison-based Numbers Gangs—led by inmates aged 30–60—maintain hierarchical structures that funnel youths into 26s and 27s as entry-level roles. These young operatives absorb initial legal exposure while advancing the economic interests of senior members.
Personal and Public Impact
This issue is deeply personal. I lost my brother to a robbery-related shooting and survived two armed robberies myself. Reformed offenders cite lack of opportunity as a root cause. Citizens aged 35–60 repeatedly face age-based gates: youth programs close at 35, while business funding demands “proven success” they were never given the chance to build.
Nationally, this exclusion fuels desperation, crime, and economic stagnation. If we fail to reverse it, we consign millions to informal survivalist economies and burden our criminal justice and social grant systems.
Problem Statement
• Age-based eligibility criteria disqualify millions from entrepreneurship, funding, and skills development.
• Programs expect fully functional businesses or advanced qualifications by 35, despite decades of denied access.
• Structural ageism channels capable citizens into informal or illicit livelihoods.
• The current youth definition (14–35) is misaligned with delayed socioeconomic late bloomers, who were shut out as youth and are now being shut out again.
Who Benefits and Who Is Excluded
Group Benefits Excluded
Under 35 youth Skills grants, internships, funding —
Women (all ages) Targeted empowerment programs —
Ages 35–60 (middle-age) None unless self-sustaining/proven Citizens with informal skills
60+ (pensioners) Old Age Grant Opportunities for active engagement
Recommended Reform: Expand Youth Bracket to 18–40
We propose extending the national “youth” age range from 14–35 to 18–40. This would:
• Provide late-bloom entrepreneurs access to mentorship and capital.
• Reduce Old Age Grant and SRD grant expenditure as more citizens remain economically active.
• Align policy with OECD best practices—countries like Germany and Norway support employment for 55–64 year-olds through lifelong learning and age-friendly work policies.
• Attract investment: age-inclusive markets show stronger consumer confidence and workforce stability.
Additional Recommendations
1. Remove age caps on entrepreneurship funding and business-development grants.
2. Launch national “Second-Chance” entrepreneurship incubators for 35–60 year-olds.
3. Integrate age-inclusive metrics into economic and social development reviews.
4. Host pu