Most parties have not given much prominence to environmental issues, focusing instead on jobs and crime.
Yet we are already seeing the first frightening heralds of climate change, caused by excessive greenhouse-gas emissions. This could mean crop failure and famine in Southern Africa in the near future. Are any of our politicians paying attention?
Most sound good on paper. They support a review of policy about genetically modified organisms (GMOs), are cautious about nuclear energy, support green taxes and recognise the need to cut greenhouse-gas emissions and find sustainable energy sources. But are they willing to implement policies that might make them unpopular with the markets?
Most people equate African National Congress environmental policy with the bans on thin plastic bags and 4X4s on our beaches. Yet progressive policy has been developed beneath the radar screen of public consciousness, especially with regard to water.
Weak points are in energy and agricultural policy. The government is a signatory to the Kyoto Protocol, but has not invested much in renewable energy. Instead, parastatal Eskom is proposing to spend up to R900-million of tax payers’ money on developing the nuclear Pebble Bed Modular Reactor. The Department of Agriculture has embraced GMOs and promotes environmentally unfriendly, input-intensive farming.
First prize for being on the ball about environmental issues goes to the Independent Democrats, who have a comprehensive policy as part of their election manifesto.
They focus on climate change and the need to cut greenhouse-gas emissions, and reject nuclear power as a solution. An interesting innovation is their plan for a public works programme that services the environment and supports organic farming and coastal care.
Worth a serious critique is the Democratic Alliance (DA) policy, which seems promising initially. Their central idea is to combine the three ministries that deal with environmental issues into a single ministry of natural resources, which would be an “empowered protector of our natural heritage”.
But the terms “private enterprise” crop up a little too often. In essence, once their new ministry has put some basic rules in place, the DA would privatise as much of our natural resources as possible. This has worrying implications for environmental justice since, according to Section 24 of our Bill of Rights, everyone has the right to a healthy environment — not just those who can afford it.
The DA proposes partnerships with private enterprise to “develop” our nature reserves. They are committed to a “competitive, market-related agricultural economy, defined by the freedom to own property and the right to unrestricted trade in agricultural commodities”. This is far from the land reform and support for small farmers that is needed in rural areas.
The DA also supports alternative energy as long as it is profitable.
The Inkatha Freedom Party focuses on our traditional knowledge base and sees the need to protect it, as well as to research and develop traditional African wisdom. While this is important, the rest of the policy is not thoroughly developed.
The schizophrenic African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) is not opposed to nuclear power but openly rejects GMOs, calling for a complete moratorium on their application. They feel that it is extremely dangerous for the government to welcome a technology that has not been fully researched, and which benefits a few big companies.
While on most issues the ACDP believes in minimal government intervention, on the environment they feel that the state should play a strongly protective role. Their commitment to market fundamentalism means they probably won’t have the political will to rein in big business.
Like the Azanian People’s Organisation, the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC) focuses on the need to resolve the land question.
The PAC believes that everyone should have access to the land, which should be used to develop African farmers to explore sustainable agriculture and replenish the soil, and provide food sovereignty and security for all. It is opposed to privatisation and may be a useful voice in opposition.
Bantu Holomisa’s United Democratic Movement realises that the environmental policy needs to deal with living and working environments as well as land reform. They are particularly concerned about soil erosion, which is a big problem in the Eastern Cape, where the party has a lot of support.
Not surprisingly, the Green Party has the most radical and comprehensive — if somewhat naive — environmental policy. They propose banning battery farming and animal testing, phasing out petrol-driven vehicles and legalising dagga.
Policies such as stopping deaths from Aids and cancer by introducing organic food seem a little unrealistic, and it is difficult to see how they plan to implement their ideas.
Western Cape residents have had a little light relief from the unintentional humour of their election posters. Political parties always make wild promises, but the Greens promise, literally, the Earth.
A review of the green content of the election manifestos of the New National Party, the United Christian Democratic Party and the Freedom Front Plus fail to convince that they are serious about the environment.
It is a sign of progress that most parties see the need to sound green. But a good environmental policy is not enough. For most parties, the word “support” seems to mean that they simply won’t actively block green initiatives.
What is missing is the political will to confront the power structures that are the real threat to sustainability, which means that ordinary people and civil society need to keep up the pressure.
Walton Pantland is a researcher with the Environmental Monitoring Group