Critical Consumer Pat Sidley
THE Gauteng administration this week made history for its citizens and consumers. It called together a gathering of consumer organisations, groups with a consumer interest such as civics and trade unions, and those journalists who have had to do the job of consumer groups in the absence of adequate ones. Some groundwork had already been done, but the gathering was called to make a start on formulating a useful policy for consumers in the region.
For reasons best known to the constitutional planners, who seemed not to have cared, consumer affairs were tagged on as an afterthought to the constitution. They have landed up falling under provincial, as opposed to national, jurisdiction.
Consumer issues also fall under the ministries (as they have always done) of economics or trade — and do not have their own. But a ministry dedicated to consumer concerns, according to those involved, is an ideal to strive for, and a beginning must be made with what we’ve got.
So, using the Johannesburg City Hall’s newly refurbished legislative chamber for the first time, consumers were required to put their heads together and find a path through some extraordinary red tape — generated by the new constitution — to a decent policy which has relevance to the daily lives of consumers.
It was not the only move of that nature this week. The consumer departments of each province also met, with a view to finding some way of sorting out consumer needs at a provincial level so that work is not duplicated and so that consumers in all provinces get access to consumer rights. By all accounts the task at hand is enormous.
In the background of these events was the knowledge that the Co-ordinating Consumer Council had effectively decided to close up shop and to make its resources available to the provinces. The council was funded by taxpayers, being allocated between R5-million and R7- million annually.
Ironically, the Consumer Council of Bophuthatswana was given much more — R11-million — and has managed to keep this allocation since becoming the North-West Consumer Council.
This funding, when anybody considers how the budget will work, should ideally, along with other funds (from other small pots here and there), be allocated to provincial consumer budgets.
The battle is on, however, between national consumer interests (which have a record of not having adequately protected consumers) and provincial interests.
And, on a smaller scale, a battle looms with the non- governmental consumer groups, which are going to want access to government funds — at least for a while, as many of them cannot function without donations.
The name of the game in the major battle is “devolution” — a buzzword that peppered Monday’s discussion in the City Hall, along with Quangos, organograms and a call for consumer legislation to be “user-friendly” (which should have been applied within the legislative chamber).
Most don’t know it, but South Africans have a plethora of laws, regulations, departments, institutions and the like to protect consumer interests.
They do not always come in that guise, like the Competition Board, but ultimately what they are supposed to do is protect consumers.
One such group, the Ad Hoc Technical Committee on Consumer Legislation (which has existed for around five years, drafting laws in consumer-unfriendly language) this week announced the arrival for discussion on the consumer scene of a Property Transactions with Consumers Bill.
The committee, along with one or two others, has suddenly become more active.
It is hard to avoid the conclusion that the activity has some relationship to the debates around devolution of power. In theory, and presumably in practice, this ad hoc committee’s resources (its budget, its work and its workers) ought to “devolve” to the provinces.
Whatever the spur, it seems a good thing for consumers that their rights are on the agenda and are provoking such moves.
In the Johannesburg City Hall this week, the consumer representatives were addressed by Gauteng Economics MEC Jabu Moleketi, who presented a cohesive view of how consumer rights ought to be protected. It was a singular relief to find a political representative who is in tune with consumer needs (even if this Critical Consumer finds a potential clash in his portfolios).
The workshop had been organised by Collette Caine. She is long-time consumer watchdog at City Press, but has taken leave to help Gauteng get its consumer show on the road. It is Caine who has doggedly fought her way through the morass to get devolved powers and money flowing, make sense of an Alice in Wonderland budget and get some consumer priorities on the agenda.
The gathering devoted its attention to the need for a legal committee to review existing legislation and work on new user-friendly legislation. It repeatedly emphasised the need to educate consumers who cannot enforce their rights without it and it suggested useful structures and functions.
Gauteng consumers may yet see a civil body formed, independent but funded by government, which will present consumer views and needs to the provincial government. Early indications are that it will be receptive to them.
It is always sad, however, when an organisation which could have transformed itself into something useful simply keels over and dies. More’s the pity when it commits suicide. The Consumer Council, in a transformed state, may have been able to perform a useful function at national level. Instead, it gave up.
Such an event leads this Critical Consumer to remark: the council is dead. Long live the provinces!
One hopes they live up to the optimism and potential of this week.