Possibly the most significant thing about our new National Development Plan (NDP) is that the overview begins with a quotation from the White Paper on Reconstruction & Development. Back in 1994 this white paper gave us our very first national development plan which was supposed to be implemented through the Reconstruction & Development Programme or ‘RDP’. In the white paper the RDP was defined as “…a policy framework for integrated and coherent socio-economic progress”; which exactly defines the substance of our new National Development Plan.
The great difference between them is, however, that whilst the RDP was big on the implementation strategy but very limited on specific objectives, the NDP is big on specific objectives but very limited on the implementation strategy. Quite logically then, combining these two plans in order to bring the NDP specific objectives together with the RDP implementation strategy would make great sense. The only stumbling block to applying this logic is the very ugly state of current national politics.
As the agency which produced the RDP white paper in 1994 (as well as, in 1996, the new South African Constitution) the Government of National Unity (GNU) was quite exceptional. As a product of the negotiated settlement between the struggle movement and the apartheid regime, this national government agency only worked for a short time before it self-destructed due to internecine political differences. But while it did exist it worked at a level of professional government never seen before in South Africa. This was because getting on with the vital task of ‘rainbow’ nation building demanded that political differences be set aside in order to urgently resolve the historical socio-economic crisis in this country.
With the abandonment of the GNU and the RDP all that was good about the Rainbow Nation began to unravel, to the point now where we have arrived at a state of serious government dysfunctionallity. This is quite apparent, for example, in the high level of political squabbling, slandering, and mud-slinging going on right now; the high level of institutional corruption and inefficiency; and the dire lack of a meaningful economic policy to address burgeoning poverty.
As a result of this political time-wasting our country is in an even deeper state of socio-economic crisis than it was back in 1994 – hence the local riots breaking out everywhere right now. Martin Luther King was right when he stated, “The riots are the voice of the unheard”. The appalling plight of the people on the ground in South Africa has been unaddressed for too long now.
Over the last two weeks in Botrivier, however, I have witnessed a most remarkable turnaround. All three tiers of government have been represented here at the same time, talking to and engaging with the Botrivier community in a most open and forthright manner. Provincial ministers, national ministry observers, and local government officials were actually having a real discussion with the people on the ground. And I think everyone there was relishing the experience, and sensing the potential for some special outcome – something new and creative beyond the realm of our current dividedness and moribundity.
On the government side all it took was professional, GNU-styled conduct to get past these barriers. It is early days I know, but from the government officials I witnessed a genuine level of commitment which bodes well for our local future. On the community side, however, there is a serious problem. Government has long been attempting to build a bridge across the socio-economic divide, but it is only half a bridge. Without having their own capacity or resources the community on the ground does not have the means to build their side of the vital bridge. So the government attempt is a half-bridge to nowhere, except, obviously, down – which is where, nationally, we are still headed right now.
The original ‘Rainbow’ spirit of the RDP has quite evidently been lost by the people on the ground, so now the community lacks the organisational inspiration and togetherness necessary to establish a worthwhile democratic process. As a result it will take a lot of effort and commitment on the part of professional government to get it back. And get it back they must, because achieving ‘integrated and coherent socio-economic progress’ will inescapably depend on meaningful democratic participation for it to succeed.
The National Development Plan projects that by 2030 South Africa must grow its GDP to 2,7 times its current size (which implies a high, but not-impossible, growth rate of 5,4% per annum). Expanding the structure of the national economy to this size will be the entrepreneurial task of civil society and not of government. Government’s strategic role in securing this outcome must rather be to create the environment of logistical opportunities necessary for this huge expansion of GDP to become possible.
A new RDP would then be enabled to do the rest.
I am bored with all these plans for South Africa. When is there going to be a Development Plan for the Tribal Homelands?
We pay a fortune to provide services to the Tribal Homelands, and to the Tribal Chiefs to manage them, yet despite all that arable land, all they export is migrant labour? And this 18 years after the ANC took control of the country?
I did read the NDP as initially submitted for comments. A very disappointing product with constant references to apartheid and little substance to future activities. The 60 odd million spend on it a serious waste of time and money. I did not read the final product.
In order to build a united nation, we should stop creating labels for groups of the population. We were stopped from using the “K” word. But our government is still referring to blacks, whites, indians, coloureds and generalising their conditions, intentions and any other potential description. This is further “specified” in a gender differentiation, a previously disadvantaged group while the today’s disadvantaged (our school population) get little effective attention.
The general impression of people is one of mistrust of Goverment members and their actions or plans. This is inspite some laudable actions and undertakings at the lower community levels. Some of these are succesful but despite the lack of government support.
The ping-pong being played in the latest tragedy, is a perfect example of the “no direction” mode of the ANC and its members who were elected to take on the responsibility of governing “ALL South Africans”.
The Russian Communist elite sold all the State assets to themselves and became the new Russian Oligarchy.
The ANC elite did the same with South Africa’s parastatals.
Cyril Ramaphosa, Tokyo Sexwale and Patrice are Mining magnates in with Anglo America – the Homelands migrant labour to mines system suits them – so why would they stop it?
“Expanding the structure of the national economy to this size will be the entrepreneurial task of civil society and not of government. Government’s strategic role in securing this outcome must rather be to create the environment of logistical opportunities necessary for this huge expansion of GDP to become possible.”
I agree with your sentiments, but unfortunately government will not allow this to come to fruition for a few reasons:
* The unions, which hold the voting base for the ANC, insist on interfering in any new legislation, which is essential for change to happen.
* Civil society no longer trusts government to act efficiently.
* Government, the ANC, will not accept that it is incapable of management of the economy for reasons of ego/pride.
* The entrenched partnerships, deals, alliances, etc feeding off the tenderpreneurship /BBEE environment which have become entrenched in the last 20 years are too strong to be influenced by reason. See the recent elections in the Northern Cape where John Block has been re-elected.
@Ian Dewar
Thanks a most interesting read and important article. Keep on keeping us informed and giving us hope.
The ANC slogan is “the land belongs to those who live on it” so why not give the Rural Land into ownership of the Rural Women who live there, not to the men who have migrated to the cities and taken city wives.
And in the interests of another of their slogans “Gender Equity” why not have that rural land devolve in the female line to the eldest daughters?
So far “Gender Equity” seems only to apply to the ANC’s city wives, and the rural wives have been abandoned.
Of course, if we do adopt the policy that the women who farm the Tribal Lands should own them, then the country has just built a very expensive house for Zuma’s first wife, not that I begrudge her, considering that his second wife has the prestige of the UN job.
But I do wonder which of Zuma’s daughters she will leave it to – or will she leave it to a female member of her own family?
And I do think that the same policy should be adopted as for the white farms- that they can’t be sub-divided into non-viable units, to prevent the Homelands following the same path as Haiti.
In present-day South Africa ‘professional government’ has become an oximoron. Far from government building a bridge ‘half way’ it has emphasised the gulf between it and its stakeholders and beneficiaries on the one hand and ‘the people’ on the other.Thabo Mbeki years ago talked of the two economies, rather than one economy to be shared by all, which was the RDP ideal.
As to bridge building, tell that to the Marikana miners
And to which DAUGHTER will Mandela leave Qunu?
Since we are now going to have Gender Equity between the Black Women Homeland Farmers and the White Male Farmers?
You are partially correct in propagating the idea of reviving the RDP.
However we need to go beyond the RDP with the establishmenmt of Public Banks to finance investment in new sustainable infrastructure and agriculture as well as monetary reform with full (100%) reserve banking.
We need this as a contingency plan to address all the looming and converging financial and ecological crises.
Do yourself a favour and watch the documentary “Four Horsemen”.
I see that todays cartoon strip in Business Report describes an Optimist as someone with out experience… And yet you claim much.
You have drawn a distinction between action and palaver… between RDP and New Growth Plan. Immediately after this you document a decline since a mythical time when things worked… a time called “Then We” and NOW; [neglecting btw that GEAR replaced RDP before the latter could prove your hypothesis.]
And then you wax enthusiastically over some palaver in a self-described place called “Nowhere”…Bot…what? and confuse that with the ACTION required to impliment any plan.
“…. everyone there was RELISHING the experience, and SENSING the potential … from the government officials I witnessed a GENUINE level of commitment which bodes well for our local future. …. having a REAL DISCUSSION with the people on the ground.”
Above are your… but what others call, weasel words, describing the front stage performances of those worthy notaries who carefully confused palaver with result. And confused you.
[and fol de rol] You did not describe one bridge that was built, school constructed, tarred road completed task in your premise… simply you documented verbiage and ultimately that means your commentary is meaningless…. simply words without performance.
Sorry… It did sound as though you were surprised to have an enjoyable experience… Nonetheless as the cartoon affirms it was the wrong experience…
As an entrepreneur I have withdrawn my support for a business that was established 4 years ago to assist young blacks who needed mentorship and finance. The reason is that Government is not prepared to do their work. You can make appointments, write letters and proposals and nobody in Government gives a damm; e.g. I am waiting for Eskom to respond 13 months after our initial meeting which was initiated by another Governments agency to support SMEs like the NDPlan. All clowns in a bankrupt circus.
The GNU was a lash-up which never worked properly and was eventually torpedoed by the National Party before they collapsed and went over to the DA, so that part of Mr. Dewar’s article doesn’t really hold up.
On the whole a return to the RDP, or rather to the principles underlying it, would be a good idea. It’s worth reflecting that the basic principles of the RDP did not go away when GEAR was introduced; government policies continued to be based on the RDP for over a decade.
However, the RDP itself was very much a compromise. We need a national plan which will enliven the public as well as providing a way out of our economic and social crises. Sadly, nobody seems willing to develop one; the National Development Plan, like the DA’s “Growth and Jobs Plan” is basically a sequence of shabby gifts to the rich which will have little or no positive impact on the poor or downtrodden and which most South Africans care little or nothing about..
@Yaj. I’m betting on the Cooperatives Bank Act 2007 combined with <70$ Android connectivity to a local, cloud-based, transactions exchange. With a CES Talent exchange for starters followed by a local digital-rand exchange for mobilizing cooperative commerce (the CES team are already testing this). And lastly a local 'Bio' trading exchange to promote the local eco-services industry.
But we'll have to see what pans out over time. Drastic necessity will have to be the mother of this innovation, I think.
@ X entrepreneur. I know how you feel about bureaucratic indifference. I once flew to Pretoria at my own expense to meet, at their request, with three directors of the Presidents Policy Unit – and none of them were there when I arrived. Re the circus, for me that was it. I didn’t even get an apology.
@The creator. Well in actual fact our local RDP did work really well and kept itself going until 2001 before it became redundant. In 1999 I even made a submission on behalf of our RDP to the hearings on the Municipal Systems Bill. And central to my current ICT system design is the excellent, participative structure plan they created for the whole Plettenberg Bay Municipality (now the Bitou Municipality).
Behind its success I think, was the fact that our RDP organization was maybe the only one which truly followed the ‘no-politics’ RDP guideline. The problem was that the local elected politicians just could not get a handle on a real democratic process so they consistently ignored its incredible value.
Maybe I should have been a bit more specific in my post though. I believe we now need an Economic Reconstruction & Development Plan, or ERDP.
Even with all its waffle the NDP does talk to that notion.
@Bogroid. A real character assassination if ever I saw one. Did it get your rocks off?
You know absolutely nothing at all about my life experience since I signed up with the Anti-Apartheid Movement in 1986. Nor about my involvement in the 1994 elections. Nor about my involvement with the RDP from 1996-2001. Nor about my involvement in youth development, or LED, or fighting for the environment. Nor about my continuing involvement in trying to manifest constitutional transformation.
But most offensive of all you know absolutely nothing about Botrivier – a community which was radically traumatized by two angry protests only a few months ago, and which, under great political duress, pulled itself together and managed to organize a meaningful dialogue with three tiers of government. We don’t need a bridge here, we already have several thank you. But thanks to their own effort and solidarity the community is now having their roads fixed, and house building starts later this month. And that is just for starters.The dialogue continues about many other grievances.
This community is not ‘Nowhere’ as you so very insultingly called it. But maybe with your mealy-mouthed cynicism and bitter pessimism that is where you should rather be. I’m sure you’d be the star attraction there.
@X Entrepreneur: I have retired in a small village in the Northern Cape. In recent months I have met some entrepreneurial people with local interests at heart.
1. A builder: needs some permit to operate a concrete mixer. After 5 years of letter writing, still no reply from Kimberley. Gave up…he is coloured and knows the name Manyi.
2. A man wanted to set up a regular bus/taxi service in an area with no public transport and where neighbouring villages are 70km apart. No responses to requests.
3. A man seeing local “resources” mined by local people carted away on trucks, suggested local beneficiation…..reluctant to ask for support from government.
4. A man found a group of (black) people from Mpumalanga (= 2000 km East) on a school project in his (coloured) village while many people in the village can do this job and are unemployed. The community is considering to keep their kids from school in protest.
These are four frustrated coloureds, who want to support their commnities but feel being marginalised by either non-response or blatant discrimination.
Um Creator; the NP went to the ANC (have you heard the name van Schalkwyk?) – do you work for the SABC’s history re-writing department?
@jack – yeah, in theory the ANC scooped up the NNP but in practice the DA absorbed a lot of counsellors. Not a bad idea though as they were experienced in what they did (if you ignored their ugly source)
Dear Mr Sparrow, I am clearly more familiar with South African political history than you, but I will try to explain in simple terms.
The Democratic Party and National Party merged to form the Democratic Alliance. Subsequently, after the Democratic Party element broke its word and stole the Mayorship of Cape Town from the National Party element, a number of National Party leaders were driven away and joined the ANC. However, the rank and file of the National Party, being strongly racist, remained with the Democratic Alliance.
It was much more a disaster for the DA than for the ANC, since it deprived the DA of its control of Cape Town (which the NP and DA had dominated, though with a dwindling majority) and enabled the ANC to gain power in the Western Cape sooner than would have otherwise been the case. And, of course, getting all those right-wing dinosaurs into the party hindered the DA from developing into a potentially effective opposition. But unfortunately the DA has been opportunistic and short-sighted from the get-go.
It seems to me that what has progressively happened since 1994 is that the ANC has been taken over by individuals who are into self-service rather than public service. Self-service demands no personal evolution as we are born with self-service ability. Genuine public service on the other hand has to be preceded by a degree of personal evolution, it actually cannot happen without such evolution.
@ Ian Dewar. There is an old saying “Publish and be dammed” You published and i read what you said. You didn’t say all that stuff in your blog about how you were what the Afrikaners call “a Joiner”; and how you did hundreds of socially useful things in places YOU describe as “rural obscurity”: where it seems, reading your range of comments, that you played the life long game of “Suffering Martyrs”.
I just read what you said. And you failed to make your point [in my opinion], and i explained why, which you have ignored. And now you are attempting to use outraged dignity to obfuscate less than competent delivery.
In your general ranting response you have carefully avoiding dealing with what i regarded as a crucial incongruence in your presentation, which is to a debating forum btw. You have demonstrably confused palaver with action… Now you want to come along and talk about some arcane development, which was not in your original presentation. Maybe it was in a paragraph you deleted and then forgot you had.
Perhaps the reason why you encounter people who do not show up for meetings is due to your intentions and sub-texts being similarly fuzzy.
@creator, it’s the reason I cannot get myself to vote for them. They really should clean house…
@Creator; nothing like a good generalisation or two and make up a few things as you go along. ” However, the rank and file of the National Party, being strongly racist, remained with the Democratic Alliance”. I guess you support the ANC who enjoy similar behaviour when they are not out having a few tardy mineworkers shot. Does it work for you?
Sure, plenty NP members may now enjoy home in the DA; fact remains, Kortbroeks’s NP joined the ANC; whether you like it or not.
I don’t support the DA by the way but I’m quite fond of facts.
@blogroid. Aaaah. I am hoist by my own petard. Silly me. It was an ill-considered response written in the hurry to get to another day of martyr meeting.
Firstly I did not draw a distinction between the RDP and the New Growth Plan. I drew a distinction between the RDP and the National Development Plan. So you are referring to completely the wrong case of ‘palaver’. You may, if you have indeed read this document, wish to denigrate it as being ‘palaver’, but for all of its many rather flowery bits it does contain many home truths, and a lot of useful information.
Secondly you denigrate a period of real RDP activity on the ground as ‘mythical’.
Thirdly you denigrate a current attempt to do democracy on the ground as ‘palaver’, and the town it is happening in as ‘Nowhere.
And lastly you denigrate all of the role-players in this unfolding palaver as being completely worthless. Including, most clearly, myself.
Pray tell me, Oh Supercilious One, exactly where is the debate to be found in all this denigration?
@ Ian Dewar
Being facetious is not becoming. You are still confusing palaver with action.
The new growth plan is the latest national development plan. Are there others?
Secondly, as i understood your point, the RDP worked in practice and produced a great many houses over time. Your concern was whether the new plan could ‘happen’ because the plan that replaced RDP didn’t.
It didn’t, you suggested, because in some way it lacked the follow through procedures that typified why RDP was [a relative] success. So far so good.
The rest of your blog dealt with a happy series of palavers… cool: and then there was no follow through so what was your point ?… You wanted to share a happy moment: Fine, put it on Facebook. You made an opening statement and then never drew any conclusion and you are still obfuscating and behaving as though this were some kindergarden forum and you are having a tantrum.
There is nothing special about the place you struggle to exemplify. The country is awash with angry citizens battling to deal with bureaucratic ineptitude, corruption and indifference: all in nameless places to outsiders. Who ever heard of Marikana before last month?
So you set out to make a point that you didn’t make; and now go on about cynicism and alleged superciliousness as denial behaviour… In effect your frantic inability to understand your error is part of the problem of underdevelopment: as you have so completely demonstrated.
Thank you.
@blogroid. You make a bold statement that the new growth plan IS the latest national development plan, and then you have the temerity to ask the question, ‘Are there any others?’
For your information the New Growth Plan was introduced by the Minister of Economic Development on the 26th October 2010. It was about structural adjustments to affect growth in the economy and had no connection to the 1994 White Paper on Reconstruction & Development – which was a policy blueprint for national transformation and reconciliation.
The National Development Plan I refer to was released in November 2011 by the National Planning Commission – and does quite clearly connect to the White Paper because it also talks to transformation and reconciliation.
As you understand it the RDP produced a great many houses. Read Chapter 9 of the original White Paper and you will see that every ministry of government had a programme to advance the RDP. It would appear evident, therefore, that you have absolutely no knowledge about the participative civil society programme of the RDP I referred to in my post – the doing local democracy bit.
So I did make my point in the post, but you completely failed to understand it because you did not bother to check the facts.
The flawed substance of your attack on my integrity, along with your contemptuous denigration of my community’s achievements, reveal you to be nothing but a supercilious intellectual bully. So apologize, or get off my blog.
@Ian Dewar
“The great difference between them is, however, that whilst the RDP was big on the implementation strategy but very limited on specific objectives, the NDP is big on
specific objectives but very limited on the implementation strategy.”
This is the point you made up front Ie: The RDP was big on action and achievement and the NDP [in whatever incarnation] is not.
SO … That is paragraph 2… The following 9 paragraphs do not in any way provide anything other than vague utterances around the topic… inherently vacuous
statements of no significance, in which you attempt to convert a ‘happy’ experience into some earth shattering denouement, which inexorably becomes an “ain’t it awful” statement that:
“The original ‘Rainbow’ spirit of the RDP has quite evidently been lost by the people on the ground, so now the community lacks the organisational inspiration and togetherness necessary to establish a worthwhile democratic process.”
And you suggest i am impugning your “community! Do you actually understand what you have written? Apparently not.
Attempting to deflect criticism of your inherently ill thought out blog by impugning the messenger is, as Johnson could have observed “The last resort of a scoundrel”. You have simply become one more catcalling naysaying voice signifying nothing.
I will get off your blog because frankly you are a waste of time, and my holiday is over. Your motion was self-aborted and i rest my case.