Cosatu held its biannual central executive committee meeting from April 24 to 26. The meeting discussed a host of issues. Zwelinzima Vavi reports on the debates on the nature of democracy in South Africa and the anti-privatisation campaign that may culminate in a two-day strike
The allegations of a conspiracy against the presidency sparked reflections on the progress of our democracy. The leaders of the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) supported an investigation of any genuine threat to the president. Still, they universally agreed with former president Nelson Mandela’s expression of esteem for the three leaders named by Minister of Safety and Security Steve Tshwete.
The leaders of Cosatu’s affiliates expressed distress over the reduction of political debates to rumours and personalities. The current discourse is phrased, not in terms of policy differences, but as a string of stories and slanders. That is the language of power, not democracy.
Consider the current unpleasantness in the African National Congress. As far as we can see, not a single report, either in the press or from participants, has mentioned conflicts over policy. These centre on how to treat HIV, and on economic policy above all, how the government can or should intervene to restructure growth to benefit our people. To meet the challenges facing South Africa, we need an open, reasoned airing of these differences. Only on that basis can we find a viable way forward.
In contrast, the current process yields not a forum but vague allegations of conspiracies and plots centred solely on access to power. That is not the democratic movement we built over so many years of hardship. It is not an approach that can resolve our country’s problems. Instead it creates an atmosphere of fear and intolerance.
Rumours become a way to justify any action against individuals without dealing openly with their views. But if those in power silence people through authority, rather than discussion, they will always fear the silenced.
Second, the central executive committee emphasised the risk of using state power to resolve the internal problems of political movements. At the heart of democracy lies the independence of political parties from the power of the state. If the state controls parties, the concept of democratic elections and accountability becomes a joke.
This is not to say that the discourse in the democratic movement has deteriorated beyond recall. Even as the current scandal emerged, the alliance plans a series of workshops on key economic issues. We hope that they will finally provide space for serious engagement.
The central executive committee issued a statement to communicate Cosatu’s views, although several people expressed misgivings that some journalists would sensationalise any hint of disagreements within the alliance. Unfortunately, those fears have come true, with a host of misrepresentations in the media.
To underline the weight of debates on the economy, the central executive committee agreed on an anti-privatisation campaign. The campaign responds to the way government at all levels from municipalities to parastatals to the public service has become enamoured of the private sector as a provider of basic services. This approach can only slow the extension of infrastructure to working people.
Proposals for privatisation may not use the word, but they have one thing in common: they make provision for basic government services dependent on the profitability of private companies. They include:
l The sale of assets and shares, and the termination of government monopolies in basic infrastructure. In one combination or other, these strategies are proposed for the four biggest parastatals: Telkom, Eskom, Transnet and Denel.
l The contracting out of local-government services, especially water and refuse removal. This effectively leases assets to private companies.
l Proposals to outsource “auxiliary” services in the public service, particularly in health, education and the police.
Proponents of these strategies, for instance in the Department of Finance, argue that they work in the United States and Europe. This conclusion is over-optimistic at best.
Consider, for instance, the debacle in California, which is suffering from blackouts following the establishment of a market for electricity. Unfortunately, the Californian system forms the model for current proposals for dismembering Eskom.
South Africa is in a far worse position than these countries to use private service providers. Many of our communities lack both basic infrastructure and the incomes to pay for services. That does not make an attractive environment for private providers who, after all, need to make a profit.
Supporters of privatisation argue that regulation will control this risk for the poor. Strangely, not even the uneven record of our regulatory agencies deters them. The fact remains that strong regulation requires skills and resources, both of which are in short supply.
In any case, proposals for restructuring are notably short on details of targets for serving the poor. Indeed, most do not include any research whatsoever on the likely impact on the distribution of services, incomes or assets.
Advocates of privatisation argue that the state can also subsidise services to the poor. This approach essentially replaces cross- subsidies within state entities with “transparent” subsidies through the budget. It makes the financing of infrastructure subject to annual treasury recommendations.
This approach can prove highly destabilising, as the Eskom experience illustrates. This year a subsidy for electrification replaced the historic system of internal cross-subsidisation and the resources provided dropped 40%.
The transformation of the state must take place within a framework that ensures the systematic extension of quality services to the poor. The current scattered and untested proposals for privatisation cannot achieve that aim. We hope our anti-privatisation campaign will help develop more appropriate guidelines.
While government remains obdurate, the central executive committee called for a two-day national strike in support of our demands.
Zwelinzima Vavi is Cosatu’s general secretary