Public Enterprises Minister Barbara Hogan recently suggested underperforming parastatals might be sold off. The reaction was shock and dismay from the ANC and alliance partners.
But the option of divestiture, the correct technical term, has long been part of ANC government policy.
This policy is contained in the policy framework document, “An Accelerated Agenda towards the Restructuring of State Owned Enterprises”. This was published in 2000 and is still the most comprehensive policy document on parastatals.
Jeff Radebe, then the minister of public enterprises, reminded in the foreword of that document that The Reconstruction and Development Programme itself in 1994 suggested a range of actions to transform parastatals.
One of the choices for government was whether the public sector should be ” … reduced in a manner that will enhance efficiency, advance affirmative action and empower the historically disadvantaged, while ensuring the protection of both consumers and the rights and employment of workers”.
“Reduced” in that context means either privatisation or closure.
As far as I know the comprehensive policy framework of 2000 has not been officially superseded, though privatisation has been put on the backburner.
Even in the Mbeki era, the ANC was never particularly enthusiastic about divestiture. By contrast it has nationalised both water and minerals.
Actually, it would be irresponsible of the ANC government not to sell underperforming businesses when bailing them out would waste money otherwise available for other things like housing and healthcare.
It could be argued that poorly performing parastatals need to be recapitalised to be attractive enough to find a buyer.
This kind of thinking comes about because people only look at the money that has been spent on these assets over the years. But because you have spent lots of money on something, it does not mean it is valuable. Ask anyone with an iskorokoro.
Can the government continually pour money into Denel, for instance? Would it not be better to close it or sell it? I know that it employs people, but at what price those jobs?
And not every State asset is strategic. What’s strategic about the SABC when the Broadcast Act obliges all broadcasters, public and private, to do the State’s bidding? Or is strategy in this context another word for propaganda?
SABC 3, which I understand is not performing its intended role of subsidising the other public TV channels and non-commercial radio, could easily be sold off. The resulting tax revenue from a successful channel could be used to beef up the public broadcaster.
As for Hogan’s “thinking aloud”, her criticism of the government she is part of for barring the Dalai Lama from the country shows she is prepared to speak her mind.
But this is not a case of Hogan thumbing her nose at government. She can justifiably say she was just reiterating government policy.
Good riddance in advance…
ANC Policy is currently what was passed at polokwane. Previous documents while they may inform debate are not current policy.
The response she will get is that it is time to redraft the the documents taking into account the “developmental state”.
She will only win if she can frame her thoughts in the “developmental staet” context. It is a loose enough concept to accommodate many things
So you’d rather see your tax money wasted on organisations that are inefficient and corrupt, instead of it’s being used to benefit education and health, Siphiwo?
I have been at the receiving end of Denel’s corruption when manuals that were my property were stolen wholesale from my company by them. Not an organisation that I would weep over if it were closed down and saved everyone a lot of money that can be sued far more profiablly elsewhere.
If the ANC just wants Yes men in its ranks, then it will wither away long before the state as it becomes morbid and defunct, bereft of new ideas which are the lifeblood of any organisation.
Reg,
There has just been an election, in which the rival faction of the ruling party, committed to an about turn on many policy issues, won!
It will take a while for all the relevant policy documents to be officially scrapped and dissenters identified, expelled or silenced.
The Party received its mandate on a communist / labour alliance ticket, and the partners are now impatient and eager to start implementing their ideology.
Individuality and independent thought are the anathema of a communist mindset.
It’s the ‘you’re either with us or you’re against us’ mentality.
Barbara Hogan’s comments will not sit well with the Party bosses.
As a general rule Barbara Hogan is right., Privatization of non-core services is not only in line with policy its also essential to free the government to focus on one of its more important CORE services like providing basic security to its citizens – like reigning-in out of control crime thats currently crippling our nation.
And was it not President Zuma who first said that ‘inefficiencies’ in the public service would not be tolerated? Why is he applauded whilst Hogan is villified for saying it?
Privatisation is not the only solution. State enterprises could be run on sound business and management principles as Government departments should also do.
The fault does not necessary lie with the chosen business model but with the lack of competence and ethics at management levels and lack of work ethics at workers level.
The latter requires so many control measures that in the end no one does anything for fear to be held responsible and loose the 1 million+ income package.
It is interesting to see Gwede Mamtashe’s level of involvement in this issue…seems he is now taking over the roll as boss and the rest dance…including Jacob Zuma
More on the Hogan saga at:http://blogs.24.com/ViewBlog.aspx?blogid=9f5d3758-e66f-4448-8ddb-4fc5062c2521
The ANC believes that:
1. Policies set by the NEC are mandatory for all members.
2. These policies can only be changed by the NEC.
3. Members should act as a collective with each one given on their given task to achieve the goal of the NEC.
4. Strict enforcement of party discipline.
Hogan did not conform to these rules – it is not in the ANC’s culture to discuss policy in public. She will either conform or be removed
“Democratic” centralism will not lead to free flow of ideas in the ANC – especially in a country with no real opposition party.
It is definitely not !
Politicians want to tender and get their share so butt out with efficient management.
There are billions up for grabs for cheap delivery of tenders (or halted constructions).
Our ANC cadres are only billionaires and aim for trillions so Hogan – you are counter-revolutionary !
Enough is uncountable.
If people want to voice an opinion cantrary to that of the ANC, they join such parties as DA,ID and cope. Members of the ANC should know by now that official positions of the ANC are communicated through what channels. And one has a view contrary to the party position there are avenues to raise that.
Those who want to be seen to be independent should follow Mr Feinstein and his ilk.
She can certainly say that, but it would not be true; indeed, she should be fired. The fact that Mantashe was involved rather than Zuma, however, suggests that she will not be.
At the moment we have an enormous economic crisis. Shattering South Africa’s public enterprises (which is basically Hogan’s declared agenda) if they are not immediately profitable would contribute to this crisis. (The money ploughed into underperforming enterprises is invariably far less than the money which would be lost if the enterprises were closed down.) Hogan is clearly a deluded neoliberal and is talking nonsense which undermines the ANC’s professed agenda.
The fact that she has not been dismissed suggests that the ANC’s real agenda is well to the right of its professed agenda.
Dave Harris writes of ‘important CORE services’. I think there is a typo here. What he meant to write was ‘important CADRE services’ and that means keeping any state institution, no matter how useless and costly it might be, in existence because it provides slots for cadre deployment.
Reg, i think you’re missing the point. It is not about whether she could “justify” what she said through searching for some statement in ANC policy that might leverage her instinct-talk/gut-talk.
The worrying thing, is what appears to be her tendency to necessarily exchange policy for this very gut-talk. It is very wrong, confusing, and if acceptable, could set a wrong precedent for the culture of sending contradictory signals to government policy.
You cannot be acceptable to spend money, time and precious skills in researching and debating policy only to be undermined by people because the “think freely”. No one is saying people should not think freely, this should happen within the confines of how policy is developed.
Letlhogonolo I get what you are saying but is it really necessary to wait for the policy conference next year and wait for 2012 before any changes are implemented. What she said makes perfect sense. aNd Polokwane resolutions never scrapped the privitisation policies.
Things need to change, Its about time the goverment started been efficient and serving the people on the ground not ego’s of leaders……