Frans Cronje (A tiger is chasing an ostrich around the
vegetable garden, 7th August 2012) captures the scenario of
relationship between the ruling African National Congress (ANC) and the private
sector in South Africa (hereinafter refers to as SA). While the Tiger (members of the National
government) seems to be in unanimity in its pursuit of the Ostrich (some
section of the business community), the business community is divided into
Ostrich and Tiger riders. The Ostrich according to Mr Cronje is the section of
the business community who are not comfortable with the leadership of the
country, while the Tiger riders are the section of the business community who
have influence on the government and enjoys patronage.
In appraisal of the above assertions, it is a common knowledge that the Tiger is the largest cat species and can even get more curios than the cat. Therefore, the Tiger can be more dangerous, especially when a foreign object or prey steps into its territory. In most cases, the Tiger reacts the violently when the prey is bigger in nature (the Ostrich). The media and the legal luminaries, (in this case the lower animals) in SA have had field days criticising SA’s political leadership, without getting as much harsh reaction from the government. It has been very different when the government is being criticised by a bigger animal such as a CEO of the business community. While its reaction may be considered as intimidating tactics -scolding the business community, whenever the business executives make comments on the management of the economy; that of its intention to suffocate the media and judiciary, through the media tribunal creation, as well as review of the powers of judiciary is a bit subtle. The scolding tactics is nonetheless dangerous.
The government, business community and labour quagmire have become primordial and gelatinous, given that they fight over everything from policy to cricket. Is it not high time they channelled their energy and resources on constructive discussions and “social dialogue” on issues like solving the “triple challenge” of unemployment, poverty and inequality in SA? Some observers even use another phrase to describe this triple challenge and call it “unholy trinity”. Trinity in objective sense supposed to be something good, holy and positive from ecclesiastic point of view. In this case, it is used in a negative and detested manner given that it has become an ill wind that blows no one any good. All of SA economic growth has not in any way positively correlated to the well-being of the majority of its masses. More about the social dialogue will be elaborated on the later section of this piece. Before then, it is important to paraphrase some of the boring and depressing statistics relating to the triple challenge:
On unemployment, 25% of the SA population are unemployed, with about 6% more already given up searching for jobs. 70% of these unemployed people are youths who are the future of the country.
Anderson, A. (2012, 10 July). Red Tape sends another
company across the border. The BusinessDay, p. 2.
Molele, C. & Makinana, A. (2012, Feb 17-23) ANC sets its sight on the
judiciary. Mail and Guardian, p. 4.
National Treasury, South Africa: The
Budget Review 2012.
In appraisal of the above assertions, it is a common knowledge that the Tiger is the largest cat species and can even get more curios than the cat. Therefore, the Tiger can be more dangerous, especially when a foreign object or prey steps into its territory. In most cases, the Tiger reacts the violently when the prey is bigger in nature (the Ostrich). The media and the legal luminaries, (in this case the lower animals) in SA have had field days criticising SA’s political leadership, without getting as much harsh reaction from the government. It has been very different when the government is being criticised by a bigger animal such as a CEO of the business community. While its reaction may be considered as intimidating tactics -scolding the business community, whenever the business executives make comments on the management of the economy; that of its intention to suffocate the media and judiciary, through the media tribunal creation, as well as review of the powers of judiciary is a bit subtle. The scolding tactics is nonetheless dangerous.
The intimidating tactics stems
from the fact that catching the Ostrich is not easy, given its ability to run
very faster than the predator. Secondly, the Ostrich can be dangerous on its
own when pushed to the corner and can quickly strike back and kill the chaser. On
the other hand, the lesser animals such as the media and judiciary can be
handled and dealt with easily by the government through obtaining some backing
from the parliament. Therefore, the Tiger’s major concern is the Ostrich.
Though, there is another bigger
animal that the Tiger will have to overcome in the mix. This time the labour
Union or Leopard. The labour refuses to change its spot, though it agreed with
government on some issues by becoming a member of the tripartite alliance, same
as it has agreed with the business community on some issues, such as the
Gauteng e-toll saga. The good aspect of this animal fight is that these animals
are not elephants. Some of them like the Ostrich can run when the battle is so
fierce and unpredictable, whereas some can even camouflage when they are not
sure of the next strategy to deplore during battle, such as the Tiger. It is
another common knowledge, the impact on the grass, in this case when two
elephants fight. But in this case, the fight could be separated through
jaw-jaw, given that the animals involved are not elephants.The government, business community and labour quagmire have become primordial and gelatinous, given that they fight over everything from policy to cricket. Is it not high time they channelled their energy and resources on constructive discussions and “social dialogue” on issues like solving the “triple challenge” of unemployment, poverty and inequality in SA? Some observers even use another phrase to describe this triple challenge and call it “unholy trinity”. Trinity in objective sense supposed to be something good, holy and positive from ecclesiastic point of view. In this case, it is used in a negative and detested manner given that it has become an ill wind that blows no one any good. All of SA economic growth has not in any way positively correlated to the well-being of the majority of its masses. More about the social dialogue will be elaborated on the later section of this piece. Before then, it is important to paraphrase some of the boring and depressing statistics relating to the triple challenge:
On poverty,
despite different kinds of grants provided by the government to alleviate
poverty in SA, about 17% of its population leaves below the World Bank
definition of poverty as those earning less than $1, 25. Using SA’s measure of
poverty through its stipulated National Poverty Line (NPL) of R500 per month,
23% of the population find themselves below the NPL.
SA continues to
experience perfect inequality of about 0.6 or Gini-coefficient of about 0.60. Other inequality indicators – like land, wealth, health,
and life expectancy – are as bad or if not worse. For instance, the life expectancy
in SA has decreased significantly to 52, 8 in 2012 from 62, 9 in 1995, while
infant mortality rate in 2012 is at 43%. In 2011 data, South Africa is ranked
123 among the medium human development countries of 141 countries, below
countries like Botswana and Namibia, with Human Development Index (HDI) value
is 0, 619. On unemployment, 25% of the SA population are unemployed, with about 6% more already given up searching for jobs. 70% of these unemployed people are youths who are the future of the country.
The
mistrust between the public and private sector is very huge; both sectors need
to work together otherwise, the quest for equity, and tackling of the unholy
trinity of unemployment, poverty and inequality will be what Jonathan Crush
aptly describes as another “faddish intellectualism destined…to bloom and fad.”
The quest to solve the socio-economic problems will turn out to be another talk,
without walking the walk.
Back to the social
dialogue, the good news is that government has accepted that there is a problem
in the society posed by the triple challenge. The government has continued to
spend heavily annually since 1994 to reduce inequality and poverty levels in
the country, but the impacts and outcomes of government spending is not
significant in any way to address the triple challenge. The government has
focused on the symptoms and not the sickness, given that the 47.1% of the 2012
budget was allocated to the social services.
The labour, as
well as the business community also agrees that something must be done about
the triple challenge. The problem at the moment is the lack of coordination
among the stakeholders on how to address the issue. This is evidenced in
different reactions from different groups. When it comes to fighting poverty, everyone
has the some views on how to solve it, whereas reducing inequality brings more diverging
opinions as a result of the fear of having to share.
This sort of
problem is what NEDLAC (National Economic Development and Labour Council) should
be dealing with by converging people to engage in meaning discussions to proffer
solutions. NEDLAC could not provide much for government, business community and
labour to work with, given accusations against NEDLAC- from the same people it
is supposed to serve. NEDLAC has been termed a lame duck institution serving
some parochial interest, rather than carrying out its lofty objectives of
promoting inclusive socio-economic growth in SA. For example, the poor members
of the society who NEDAC are supposed to champion their causes are not given
the platform to table their problems.
Alternatively, the
National Planning Commission has done a wonderful job to diagnose the problems
facing the country, including the triple challenge. The commission also shared
some ideas on how to solve those problems. However, sharing ideas and putting
them in practice are different kettle of fish. South Africa is blessed with
plethora of institutions and think-tanks that can produce some good heads to
assist the commissioners, to engage constructively with government; labour; the
business community; the civil society, and faith based organisations to come up
with the best strategy to handle the triple challenge. SA democratic freedom
was achieved through dialogue and there is no how the country cannot achieve
economic freedom, if it engages in a constructive dialogue. The dialogue in my
view:
·
Should sensitise
the government that its primacy of jurisdiction is to create an enabling
environment for businesses and private sectors to contribute their quotas on
inequality and poverty reduction through job creation, as well as social
responsibilities
·
Should prove that
the much craved “economic freedom” lies much on how well the current political
freedom is utilised
·
Should look at
how to convince the private sector to invest about R530 bn locked away in in
banks, which the business community have refused to invest in SA citing
uncertainties
·
Should reveal
that the investment of such huge amount of money in the economy will make lots
of differences in tackling the triple challenge. The knock on effect of
significant job creation in the economy will be felt economically and socially.
This is because when people have jobs, they will contribute to the growth of
the economy on one hand, as well as get out of poverty, and reduce inequality
on the other hand.
·
Should open the
eyes of the stakeholders, the trickle-down effect of the huge investment of
R530bn on Southern Africa region in particular and African integration in
general
·
Should provide a
strategy to equip the youths to become good and efficient mangers, as well
competent technocrats and leaders in the near future.
- Should convenience the stakeholders that inequality
leads to lower socio-economic growth, development and less efficiency.
This is because paucity of opportunity means that people are not being
fully used in contribution to the economy.
·
Should address
the causes of the incessant service delivery protests across the country, to
avoid SA version of the “Arab Spring.”
In conclusion, the
garden is too big for the Tiger, the Tiger riders, the Ostrich and the Leopards
to dine and eat carrots together and peacefully. The Tiger should realise that
by chasing the Ostrich and other animals away, it will not see any other prey
to feed on. Also the Ostrich should stop running or sticking its head in the
sand, giving that outside the garden, life is more uncertain. Rather, the
Ostrich need to tame the Tiger. The Tiger riders should desist from their
sycophant mentality and altitude, while the Leopard should for once change to a
more compromising position for the greater good of SA, or else its constituency
will suffer the most if the situation becomes worst.
References:
African Human Development Report (2012). Towards a
Food Secure Future. New York: United Nations Development Programme African
Bureau, p. 155. Retrieved 1 August
2012 from www.undp.org/.../Africa%20HDR/UNDP-Africa%20HDR-2012-EN....
Crush, J. (1995). Introduction; Imaging
Development. Power of Development. London: Routledge, pp. 1-23.
Human Development report (1995).
The United Nations Development Programme, p. 156. Retrieved 3 August 2012 from http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr1995/chapters/
Human Development report (2011).
The United Nations Development Programme, p. 129. Retrieved 3 August 2012 from
hdr.undp.org/en/reports/national/.../Timor-Leste_NHDR_2011_EN.p...
Mkandawire,
T. (2012, March). Building the African state in the age of globalisation: The
role of social compacts and lessons for South Africa. Inaugural Annual Lecture.
MAPUNGUBWE Institute for Strategic Reflection (MISTRA).
National
Planning Commission. (2011). National Development Plan: Vision 2030. Retrieved
February 16, 2012 from http://www.npconline.co.za/medialib/downloads/home/NPC%20National%20Development%20Plan%20Vision%202030%20-lo-res.pdf.
Qobo, M. (2012, 12 July). Time for undemocratic Nedlac to shut up shop.
BD Live. Retrieved
August 10, 2012 from
http://www.bdlive.co.za/articles/2012/07/13/mzukisi-qobo-time-for-undemocratic-nedlac-to-shut-up-shop
Rasool, F. (2012, February 8). Why e-tolling won’t
fly. iWeek, pp. 20.
Stiglitz, J. (2012). The Price of Inequality.
Project Syndicate. Retrived 22 July 2012 from http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/the-price-of-inequality.
Vick, C. (2012, February 16). A media tribunal will be a lot harder to
ignore. The BusinessDay, p. 11. 
