A new ‘RDP bureaucracy’ has come in for some sharp criticism, reports Reg Rumney
No one in government actually knows how much of the money in the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) fund has actually been spent, say two academics who have been monitoring the RDP.
Their criticism of the government’s role in the ANC’s, and lately the Government of National Unity’s (GNU), grand plan to put right the economic wrongs left by apartheid, is part of an assessment of the RDP’s progress over the past year.
The editors of the newsletter RDP Monitor, Gavin Lewis and Mel Brooks, say the problems of actual delivery of the RDP have become glaringly apparent. And they say in a news release that an RDP bureaucracy may itself be an obstacle to implementation of the programme.
The RDP, the plan contained in the widely distributed policy framework book published by the ANC, has to be distinguished from the RDP office and the bodies charged with implementing the RDP at provincial and local level.
Grant Mitchell is one of the editors of another publication devoted to keeping an eye on the RDP, RDP Tracker, which in its June edition noted public perceptions of slow progress in implementing the RDP.
Mitchell notes that it is hard to separate government RDP spending and spending arising from existing programmes. The RDP office, he says, sees itself as a catalytic department which will disappear with the ending of the GNU.
He adds: “The philosophy behind the RDP is different to the welfare state model in the United Kingdom. The idea behind the RDP is to reorientate resources already there into the thinking of the new regime.”
Stressing that his criticism is not aimed at the RDP as a vision, Lewis blames “endless policy formulation at the central level” for the lack of progress, and the increasing tendency towards attempting to centralise
“According to (Minister without Portfolio) Jay Naidoo we all have to become born again before anything can
Lewis and Brooks note in the RDP Monitor that the RDP office has issued its own assessment of its progress over the last year, and quotes numerous figures on free health care, housing subsidies, primary school nutrition and electrification of housing. “The figures continue: R437-million rolled over from RDP funds last year, R5-billion allocated from the Budget, R600- million derived from the sale of reserve oil stocks, and anticipated foreign aid of up to R1-billion.
“An estimated R2,5-billion of these moneys has been allocated to existing projects (mostly education and training, urban and rural development, health, transport and water supply), R700-million for housing subsidies, R700-million for local authorities to leverage funds for installing and upgrading bulk
“But how much has actually been spent other than allocated? Other than for free health care and primary school nutrition, we can attest that nobody in government knows. NGO’s, which with all their faults have on-the-ground knowledge, stand paralysed, with not a week going by without one closing. Even semi-state organisations such as the Development Bank of Southern Africa exist in limbo.”
Lewis and Brooks note the RDP requirements of detailed business plans, the reorganisation of laws and regulations, rationalisation of all the former provincial and homeland systems, and development of new policies are all rational and in line with the GNU’s stress on fiscal discipline.
Just as clearly the local government elections in November are crucial to the implementation of the RDP.
“However, if local authorities take as long as central government in getting delivery off the ground the country could be facing difficult times.
They conclude an “… RDP bureaucracy is emerging, as inaccessible as the old”.
At the time of going to press the RDP office had not responded to faxed questions about the criticism of its