United States President George W Bush’s statement that “poverty remains a huge and urgent global problem” and that “we will stand together in Johannesburg to bring our full support to this important battle” must ring hollow given that he has not deemed it necessary or worth his while to attend the World Summit on Sustainable Development in Johannesburg. The ever available Secretary of State Colin Powell will instead be representing the US.
The question that arises is why Bush had no reservations about attending the G8 conference with much fanfare but has not deemed it necessary to be present in Johannesburg.
Is the answer simply not that the World Summit will be attended mostly by leaders and delegations from Africa, Asia and Latin America, most of whom are poor and not Caucasian, unlike the wealthy all-white (except for the honorary white Japanese prime minister) G8 delegates? Does the planned dispatch to Johannesburg of Powell confirm that Bush feels it below himself to rub shoulders with the “poor but well-attired non-Caucasian delegates”, something their soul brother Powell is better cut out to do than his “masser”?
Clearly the summit does not generate in the developed world the excitement it does in the developing world, thereby inviting suspicions that those comfortable in their cocoons in the West have no desire to share with the lesser mortals in the “Third World” their gains — most of which have been and are amassed on the backs and with the blood of Africans, Asians and Latin Americans, whose resources are looted by the neo-colonialists masquerading as multinationals/ conglomerates/international bankers/the International Monetary Fund/World Bank, or what have you.
Powell, who “graced” our shores almost a year ago, most certainly did not come, see and conquer when he was last here, and it will be interesting to see what his mandate from Bush will be at the summit.
One thing is certain and that is that Powell will unleash lectures on good government, pats on the back for the good guys (Presidents Thabo Mbeki and Olusegun Obasanjo) and direct (President Robert Mugabe) and indirect (President Daniel arap Moi) brickbats for the bad having the courage to follow their own agenda for their countries without feeling compelled to act in a manner calculated to earn the stamp of approval from Uncle Sam, who is always peering over their shoulders with the likes of the CIA and others. –Cornwell Ndlovu
Sustainable solutions
The eviction of farmers in Zimbabwe has come at a good time at the opening of the World Summit as it highlights the position taken by many nations to the detriment of worldwide sustainable development. It is easy to reverse the destruction of our environment, but it is not politically expedient in some countries, and others see the initial economic losses only. Zimbabwe is a classic case where resources are sacrificed on the altar of political expediency.
In poorer countries it is time to start talking in terms of the human- carrying capacity of the agricultural land. For sustainability it is necessary to balance land use with productivity. Subsistence agriculture is not sustainable as populations increase and yields contract. A different system must be adopted.
Agriculture must revert to some form of commercial status where economies of scale can be employed. This should lead to less waste and a higher human-carrying capacity on the land. Examples are the Cape wine farms that have incorporated hotels and restaurants.
Commercial enterprises will ensure that erosion and other forms of degradation will be checked as they impact on future viability. Machinery to implement corrective measures will be more readily accessible.
Governments, such as the United States, that attach more importance to the economic considerations of industry than environmentally sustainable practices, are denying the ingenuity of their scientists. If industries are forced to look for alternative approaches to production, scientists will come up with the answers.
Entrepreneurs are often motivated solely by financial considerations so it will be necessary for governments to lay down social development criteria.
The world has moved forward over the past 40 years and entrepreneurs have generally accepted that they get better work from their employees if working conditions are improved, so policies aimed at making employers socially aware should not be difficult to enforce. Similarly, everyone is more aware of environmental issues and any reasonable policies curtailing degradation of the environment will not meet heavy resistance.
The First World needs to look at undeveloped countries as a potential for business. If policies of fair trade are adopted and the millions of poor elevated, they will become a huge market for First World products. With globalisation, economies of production can be exploited using the abundant Third World labour to produce products that are labour intensive.
We hear of workers in the First World working longer hours to earn enough to satisfy their needs. The poor in the Third World waste much of their time scavenging for basic survival needs. It is time to achieve a balance by the First World accepting a more social approach to capitalism and the Third World adopting better governance to curtail corruption and encourage investment.
If the leaders at the World Summit can offer more employment creation through the acceptance of capitalism, tempered with social considerations and combined with good governance, it will have achieved a major step forward for sustainable development. –A McCormick, Harare
Distortion of the truth
The article “Umgeni boss in hot water again” (August 23) links a number of unrelated issues given by a “source” and thereby paints a picture that I am using my position as chairperson of Umgeni Water to solicit business and am acting in competition with Umgeni. This is a distortion of the truth.
I am a director of MSGM Masuku Jeena, a firm of chartered accountants that provides financial services to both the private and public sector. MSGM directors have in the past rendered forensic services to MTN Nigeria and audit services to Lever Bros in Nigeria.
In November last year MSGM was approached by its client Thelani Consulting, a firm of engineers, to join it in a consortium to respond to a World Bank advert calling for proposals to provide consulting services in the water sector in Nigeria. As a World Bank financed project, the proposals would be evaluated in terms of the World Bank procurement policies. To suggest I was soliciting business in Nigeria on the back of Umgeni Water is not true.
I have no knowledge of Thelani’s intention to form a company with a similar name to Umgeni Water. I can confirm that MSGM was not engaged to register such a company.
The so-called unauthorised payments of R45 846 to me refer to payment for excess hours that requires Department of Water Affairs and Forestry’s approval in terms of the ministerial guidelines on remuneration for board members. This amount related to a period of seven months in the years 2000 and 2001. The practice is to seek retrospective approval every six months. Given the changes in the position of finance director at Umgeni Water the approval process was delayed. The internal audit report pointed this out and the matter was rectified.
The issue of Watertite has been in the media before. The factual situation is that KPMG conducted a due-diligence and valuation of the 26% investment. The board of Umgeni Water Services accepted the valuation of R2,3-million for the investment but structured the transaction by splitting the amount into R700 000 for shares and R1,6-million in the form of an interest free loan. Of the R700 000 paid to the seller, R400 000 had to be loaned to the company interest free. This ensured that the funds UW was putting up provided Watertite with the necessary liquidity to achieve its objectives and that the seller was also committing funds to the company.
The requirement that repayment of these loans needed unanimity was therefore not prejudicial to UW at the time. The appointment of MSGM to record the relationship in a shareholders agreement was made in a meeting where my interest was recorded and from which I had recused myself. — Omar Latiff
GE crops aren’t Frankenfoods
Having read Glen Ashton’s article, “Game of smoke and mirrors” (August 2), I am left with a sense of disbelief that such drivel could receive space in the Mail & Guardian.
I am saddened that perceptions such as the imperialist domination of world markets by the United States, the evil capitalistic influence of multinational seed companies that seek to exploit the wealth of African biodiversity and their collusion with NGOs such as AfricaBio pervade his article.
I am left with a sense of disbelief when I read statements such as “drought is being used cynically and contemptuously as a marketing tool for genetically engineered [GE] food”, “genetic engineering is a far cry from our understanding of biotechnology” and “a new kind of biological serfdom beckons with the introduction of GE seed into Africa”.
Ashton grossly misrepresents the motives of various stakeholders in introducing GE foods to Africa, but to what purpose? Could it be that he and his followers are orchestrated and supported by those in Europe who are fighting a trade war with the US, by companies who may have their own trade agendas?
Your readers should note that:
” Our government has adopted a National Biotechnology Strategy;
” The responsible development, production, use and application of all GE crops is regulated by the GMO Act 1997 (Act No. 15 of 1997);
” In South Africa all food items are subject to the Foodstuffs, Cosmetics and Disinfectants Act (1972);
” In a recently released poster the Department of Health states that “genetically modified foods are safe. Government only grants approval after extensive biosafety assessments.”
” South African farmers have been able to plant a number of approved GM crops for more than a year. Their rapid acceptance of these improved crops is a clear testimony to the advantages they offer. –Dr DP Keetch, president, AfricaBio
I object to the assertion by Ashton that the US government and industry are coming to the World Summit to sell GE food.
It is a gross insult to the integrity of governments worldwide, all relevant United Nations agencies and the more than six million farmers who have embraced this innovative and most technologically advanced scientifically developed food production tool in the history of agriculture.
Genetically modified (GM) organisms are being embraced worldwide, revolutionising food production. There is no need to hawk this technology at the summit.
The acceptance and the increase in the application of GM technology since its introduction in 1966 is unprecedented in the history of agricultural development. Between 2000 and 2001 the area under GM cultivation increased to 52,6-million hectares involving nearly six million farmers on all continents. Six million farmers and the consumers of food they produce cannot be wrong.
In China alone, a developing country, $112-million is spent annually on the development of GE crops, and more than two million hectares is planted with GM cotton. India has indicated that next year it will plant more than one million hectares of GM cotton. In August Japan approved three more GM maize varieties as safe for human consumption.
This coming season more than 100 000 hectares of GM maize will be planted in South Africa, compared to only 30 000 last year. The government has earmarked R182-million for research and development of GM crops.
Does Ashton wish to deprive these farmers of the better standard of living they are now enjoying with the aid of GM crops?– Kinyua M’Mbijjewe, corporate affairs director, Monsanto
Political leadership is as important as journalism
Your attack on Jeremy Cronin (“A yellower shade of red”, August 23) had all the passion of the ex-communist. But in the real world, anti-communist and non-communist parties also get nasty when anyone, except their leader, tells the media about heated exchanges in committee in their national executives. Diaries of British Cabinet ministers are published posthumously.
Press reports claim that Cronin was given the choice of resigning or apologising. So his alternative to an apology was the end of any further influence on the African National Congress leadership. Political leadership is as important as journalism.
PS. Koestler’s novel Darkness at Noon is refuted by the thorough, and thoroughly anti-communist, history written by Robert Conquest. The 1936 “confessions” were extracted by the usual GPU/special branch tortures of sleep deprivation and beating. They were threatened that if they retracted in public, their wives and children would be shot, in addition to themselves being shot. –Keith Gottschalk, Claremont
I was sickened by Cronin’s craven retraction, but the analogy with Rubashov hadn’t struck me.
Howard Barrell’s piece is superb. –Andrew J Bruce-Chwatt
In brief
Fewer pages, more ads, no Read and an unreadable TV guide. And now we are going to pay more for less! Are we subsidising Zim’s papers? — Pat Hill, Braamfontein
I am disappointed you have decided to sacrifice Margaret Legum’s brilliant column, and that Sipho Seepe’s articles are coming to an end. I may have to think twice before buying your paper in future. –Dr Y Chetty
I wish to protest against the new format of the M&G. I urge that Friday revert to its former set-up as a seperate part of the paper. — AS Gilfillan
There is something suspicious about a newspaper opposed to capitalism and the profit motive that raises its prices and perpetuates the global hegemony of selling a good for more than it costs to produce. — Gavin Chait
Daily papers cost around R3, but I will happily pay more than twice the price for the M&G. I appreciate the costs of producing a quality newspaper. I wish you continued support. –Ron McGregor, Cape Town
Please don’t drop the cantankerous Robert Kirby. His piece on Pieter van Zyl was, as usual, brilliant. –Gus Ferguson
Your eulogy on Sipho Seepe in your editorial was, frankly, emetic. — Thuli Mokakala
Please include your name and address. Letters must be received by 5pm Monday. Be as brief as possible. The editor reserves the right to edit letters and to withhold from publication any letter which he believes contains factual inaccuracies, or is based on misrepresentation. Mail & Guardian Online Talkback: The African Union … new hope for the continent or pointless posturing? Have your say at www.mg.co.za/talkback