National Dialogue — Promising concept or an illusion of progress for SA?
President Cyril Ramaphosa's announcement on Tuesday night of a National Convention to start a National Dialogue is clearly meant to get South Africans talking to each other about solving our problems. Be careful what you wish for.
At face value the concept of a national dialogue has much to recommend it. We are clearly in deep trouble, and many of our problems appear to be getting worse.
The national coalition government appears to have made little progress, our economy is barely stuttering, and the number of people who are unemployed, or under-employed, continues to rise no matter how you define it.
And of course, as President Cyril Ramaphosa pointed out, there is our history of a negotiated settlement that ended apartheid. A settlement that is still blamed today for some of our serious problems.
All of that said, there are some important questions to ask about the wisdom of this idea.
Firstly, very few leaders give up any power voluntarily. Ramaphosa, as leader of the ANC, is appearing to give the impression that the ANC will accept whatever settlement is reached through this process. But at the same time, the ANC will not, easily at least, be able to veto any settlement.
This is hugely significant. For the conspiratorially minded, it may even suggest that he has accepted that the ANC will never actually have a large amount of state power again.
For some, it could even suggest he has very little faith in whoever will replace him as leader of the ANC.
And it certainly reminds us that he has failed to enact a new 'social compact', something he has promised since before he was even elected leader of the ANC.
Different agenda
However, Ramaphosa might actually have a slightly different agenda.
Calls for this national dialogue have been growing for several years. For a long time people called for an 'Economic Codesa', to allow different role players in the economy to sit down and work out how to grow our economy.
The person who has been the loudest in his calls for this event is former president Thabo Mbeki.
It is interesting then that his foundation, and the foundations of other former presidents, have not been included in the list of people who are supposed to be guiding the process.
It must be said that including Mbeki, in any form, is unlikely to be constructive. He has shown that he appears focused on protecting his own legacy.
His conduct in the case of the Cradock Four families, in which he opposed an inquiry into the non-prosecution of those denied amnesty by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, suggests a very personal motivation.
To claim that his character is ' priceless ' in the face of questions from the families about why the government he led did not prosecute those who killed their fathers and husbands appears to defy rationality.
The sheer number of people involved is also interesting.
Thirty-one people are included on Ramaphosa's Eminent Persons Group from the most incredibly diverse backgrounds.Their role is to guide and champion the National Dialogue.
While there are business leaders and unionists (none of them are current, but they include Bobby Godsell and Bheki Ntshalintshali) there is also a rugby captain (you know the one), a mountaineer (Sibusiso Vilane), a rocket scientist, a storyteller, the chair of the National Planning Commission (Professor Tinyiko Maluleke), both Bishop Barnabas Lekganyane and Bishop Engenas Lekganyane (representing different strands of the Zion Christian Church), one Anglican Archbishop, an actor (John Kani), a football coach (Desiree Ellis) a former Constitutional Court Judge (Edwin Cameron) and Miss South Africa (Mia le Roux may in fact be there not to represent beauty pageant winners, but as a person who grew up deaf, representing people living with disabilities).
While there is much wisdom on this list, it is also not clear what value some others may bring.
Impossible position
And they have now been placed in an impossible position. It would be hard to say no to the Presidency, and yet now they are going to be asked questions about their views on our politics.
Someone like Siya Kolisi, almost universally respected, may find this hugely uncomfortable. Like singers and actors who have made political comments, he has no experience in making trade-offs and has no constituency to protect.
Now they will be thrust into the harsh glare of our political spotlight.
But this list is also curious because of who is left out.
Some ancient schisms, such as that in the Zion Christian Church, are recognised, while others, such as that in the Christian church, are not. There is an Anglican representative but not a Catholic one.
Perhaps more importantly, no one appears to represent that most under-represented group in our politics, those who have no job and no income.
This gets to the heart of one of our economic problems: organised groups that represent people who are unemployed, such as the Unemployed Peoples Movement, are often left out of the conversation and thus they have very little voice in our society.
Huge omission
That said, it is a huge omission.
It should also be noted that the sheer size of this committee may in fact be an attempt to make sure that nothing is done, that no agreement is reached on anything.
This might well be the ruse of an experienced politician, who knows that putting so many people in a room, from so many different parts of our society, will simply result in endless arguments.
Technically, this is supposed to result in a bottom-up approach, where people will be given the chance to speak in different parts of the country.
On paper, this is inherently democratic.
In practice, it can lead to undemocratic outcomes, as the most organised and the loudest voices can overwhelm the debate.
And our institutions have shown time and time again that public consultation can be ignored.
For years energy regulator Nersa has held public hearings before deciding whether to increase electricity prices. Despite so many people publicly opposing tariff increases, power prices have risen by more than 653% since 2007 (inflation during that time was 129%).
Economic reality
The reason Nersa did that, despite hearing from so many people who opposed it, was because of economic reality. Eskom needed the money.
Public consultation is very often about hearing what people want. Making decisions is about what is possible. Nersa has understood that (Eskom has often complained it has not increased prices enough) and thus had to ignore the public comments.
This is why bodies like Nersa are given legal authority to make decisions. They can force people to accept the outcome.
This process will have nothing like that.
It is also a fallacy to think that getting people in a room together will result in them getting closer. Yes, it can happen. But it can also lead to heightened tensions.
During the Codesa talks, the stakes were so incredibly high that very few people were prepared to use violence. The one group that was, the right-wing AWB, eventually used an armoured car to disrupt the talks.
But their support was tiny and measured in the hundreds.
There are now people in our society who publicly oppose our Constitution and have used violence in the past. One of them, Jacob Zuma, won the support of nearly 2.3 million people in last year's election. He will surely demand to be a part of this process.
Incentive
Also, before 1994 all of the parties involved knew there would be an election after the process. As a result there was an incentive to appear to be constructive.
No such incentive will be present in this situation.
Currently, one of the great divides in our politics is between parties and constituencies that support the Constitution, and parties and constituencies that don't. This process of a National Dialogue risks giving those who oppose the Constitution, in all sorts of ways, a much louder voice.
Imagine, for example, the separatist voices in our society, those who want independence for the Zulu Kingdom, or those who identify as Afrikaners, or who believe the Western Cape really is different to Mzansi, working together to dominate the process.
Also, considering how our politics is in the process of fracturing, creating more parties representing more diverse constituencies, the result could just be a cacophony of voices, making it difficult to come to any conclusion at all.
It is true that South Africa is in a difficult, and sometimes dangerous position.
As Ramaphosa himself said, in his eulogy for Winnie Madikizela-Mandela in 2018: 'We must acknowledge that we are a society that is hurting, damaged by our past, numbed by our present and hesitant about our future.'
He was entirely correct.
The history of South Africa, so violent and oppressive, has created deep scars. And thus deep tensions.
Sometimes our society can almost look like the most complicated knot of different types of string. When you pull it, you might be able to make sense of it all.
Maybe.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
29 minutes ago
- The Citizen
How to miss a miracle: Just don't try
The National Development Plan was visionary, but today its only value is as a mirror. The plan was the government's flagship strategy to create a more equal society and an environment of accelerated economic growth … Picture: Shutterstock I found a dusty copy of the original National Development Plan (NDP) published in August 2012 while moving offices last week. Paging through the 500-page glossy book, I was again reminded that it was an excellent document – well ahead of its time. But the irony is stark, as it now represents one of the biggest pipedreams in South Africa's democratic history. The plan was the government's flagship strategy to create a more equal society, with all proposals centralised to establish an enabling environment where businesses could grow and flourish to accelerate economic growth. The goal was average economic growth of over 5.4% between 2011 and 2030. Unemployment was targeted to drop to 14% by 2020 and to 6% by 2030. The government adopted the plan amid dancing girls and fireworks, proudly labelling it the magic blueprint for a prosperous future in South Africa. Read more SA expresses sadness, offers condolences to India after Air India crash [VIDEO] Well, that didn't quite happen. But it isn't a surprise. I also remember the ANC's elective conference in Mangaung a few months later, in December 2012, where Jacob Zuma was re-elected as ANC president. During his victory speech in a packed and boisterous venue, he feverishly brandished the plan in the air and shouted above the noise: 'This is the plan that will take South Africa forward.' The crowd noise tapered off and turned to discontented mumbling. A Cosatu official I had been speaking to bent down and muttered: 'It's a DA plan. It will never happen. Over my dead body.' That was nearly 13 years ago. It might as well have been the blueprint for the tallest building in the world, where the only execution was the theft of the building materials. ALSO READ: What is the National Development Plan, and will its hopes become a reality? No execution, but reviews continue … The National Planning Commission still exists, and it regularly publishes reviews of the original plan's failures. The cynic in me says it could be one commission Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana can cut as part of his austerity plan. The NDP still sports a beautiful cover, with crisp, glossy pages and an expertly crafted layout – a really professional document. Yet, despite its elegance, it has become a prime example of how a visionary and audacious plan, without execution, is ultimately not worth the paper it's printed on. It's a waste of money. Today, South Africa has no clear blueprint for its future. The government of national unity (GNU) is positive, but the leadership is currently focused on stabilising coalitions and tackling short-term crises. Beyond the immediacy, there is a vacuum of long-term strategic thinking. A positive development, however, is the GNU's stated focus on growth and job creation – core goals that echo the original intent of the NDP. ALSO READ: SA's expanding safety net: Millions more to receive social grants by 2030 Worth another (good) look Perhaps the plan's lasting value lies in its function as a mirror. If politicians and policymakers were to reread it today – really read it – they might come to a sobering realisation: the country's current economic policies are not working. This will require an aggressive reassessment of key policies: revisiting empowerment policies and frameworks, policies not to nationalise plundered and dysfunctional state-owned enterprises but to re-establish powerful, independent institutions like the Scorpions to combat corruption, and fundamentally rethinking how South Africa fights crime to restore the rule of law. We don't need another glossy plan. We need brave decisions, practical policy shifts, and the political will to act. This article was republished from Moneyweb. Read the original here.
The Citizen
44 minutes ago
- The Citizen
ConCourt's 'humanistic jurisprudence' source of pride, Ramaphosa
The Constitutional Court marked its 30th anniversary on Friday. As the country marked the 30th anniversary of the Constitutional Court, President Cyril Ramaphosa has called for continued recognition of the apex court's role in upholding democracy, saying its 'humanistic jurisprudence is a source of pride.' The Constitutional Court marked its 30th anniversary on Friday. Human rights Writing in his weekly newsletter, Ramaphosa discussed the threat to human rights across many parts of the world, with constitutionalism increasingly being tested. Ramaphosa stated that in March this year, the UN Human Rights Council said the 'world is facing a moment of profound instability' – characterised by conflict, democratic backsliding, declining respect for the rule of law, right-wing populism, attacks on civil society and judicial independence being undermined. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa defends transformation: 'We must dispel the false notion' Freedoms He said the council stressed the need for countries to strengthen democratic institutions charged with safeguarding fundamental rights and freedoms. 'As South Africans, we can be proud that we continue to strive to live up to this obligation. Even as we face numerous challenges, our democratic order is in good health, anchored in a progressive constitution and a Constitutional Court that continues to safeguard the rights of all'. 'Key facet' Ramaphosa said the imperative for the establishment of a specialised constitutional court was a 'key facet' of the multiparty negotiations that preceded the democratic transition. 'Whilst some believed that existing structures such as the Supreme Court could perform this task, the ANC advocated for a new court that was untainted by the past. 'Just as drafters of the constitution itself drew heavily on the experiences of other countries, when considering the model of the court, we looked to other jurisdictions for inspiration,' Ramaphosa said. 'Uniquely South Africa' Ramaphosa said while the ConCourt draws on the wisdom and support of international partners, it remains uniquely South African in its outlook, orientation, and values. The president said the court's first case in 1995, on the constitutionality of the death penalty, set the tone for a humanistic jurisprudence grounded in human dignity that endures to this day. 'In his judgment, one of South Africa's finest legal minds, South Africa's first black Chief Justice Ismail Mohamed, immortalised the vision of the new court,' Ramaphosa said. 'The South African Constitution is different,' Justice Mohamed writes. 'It retains from the past only what is defensible and represents a decisive break from, and a ringing rejection of that part of the past which is disgracefully racist, authoritarian, insular and repressive, and a vigorous identification of and commitment to a democratic, universalistic, caring and aspirationally egalitarian ethos.' Ramaphosa said throughout its 'proud history', the ConCourt has carried out its work without 'fear or favour, not hesitating to hold even the most powerful in society to account.' ALSO READ: Ramaphosa calls for dialogue to end Israel-Iran conflict
The South African
an hour ago
- The South African
Sale of loose cigarettes to be BANNED under new law
Remember when you could just score loose cigarettes at the little shop on the corner? Well, updates to the Tobacco Bill aim to ban the sale of loose cigarettes by informal traders and spaza shops. And anyone caught doing so faces hefty fines and even imprisonment. However, the Portfolio Committee on Health has been hearing arguments against the law over the last week. Specifically, the Tobacco Products Control Bill in South Africa regulates all aspects of tobacco control, public smoking, advertising and packaging. Millions of illegal cigarettes smuggled into South Africa have been destroyed. Image: Pixabay According to the Cancer Association of South African (CANSA), tobacco-related diseases kill nearly 50 000 South Africans annually. More than 7-million South Africans smoke and there are over 1-billion smokers worldwide. Nevertheless, spaza shop owners and informal traders believe the banning of loose cigarettes could bankrupt their businesses, reports The Citizen . A spokesperson from the Enterprises and Hawkers Association told parliament that the ban on single cigarettes would cripple operations. He said customers only buy loose cigarettes because they cannot afford a full box. And they're a reliable means to bring customers to the shop/trader. The vast majority of e-cigarettes are sold online and therefore suffer from lax safety control, which the new laws hope to amend. Image: File Furthermore, the new Tobacco Bill aims improve public health by introducing stricter regulations. It will hold traders liable if customers are found smoking publicly near where they've purchased products. These laws include not just loose cigarettes but banning tobacco product displays at point of sale and regulating electronic nicotine devices (e-cigarettes). Currently, smoking in indoor public places is banned. Unless the smoking area makes up 25% of the premises. However, the new Tobacco Bill will completely ban smoking in all indoor public places and certain outdoor areas, too. Sale of tobacco products online will also be banned. This is in a bid to control underage smoking. As such, anyone who buys cigarettes and/or e-cigarettes will need to do so in person and produce a physical identification document at the point of sale. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1. Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
