The road trip from Midrand to Polokwane may only be 284km, but the political round-trip seems far longer for the ANC — and perhaps for the country. The ruling party must move from its policy conference last month to its decision-making conference in December, then back to the halls of government. And all this is paving the way for the ANC’s centenary celebrations on January 8 2012 under a new set of leaders.
The compromises reached will have to last for a very long time indeed.
The electoral campaign that brought Bill Clinton to the White House is famously associated with the phrase, “It’s the economy, stupid!” One is tempted to say, post-Midrand, “It’s the vision thing, darn it!”
For what was lacking beyond the technocratic policy-speak was vision. Those watching the Midrand meeting were not only looking for crafty compromises to succession politics. They were looking for bold vision to take us through a period of change and flux as our young democracy bids farewell to a generation of leaders who served as midwives of the transition.
Alas, neither the ANC policy conference nor the underground succession debate has provided a vision that speaks to South Africans who are feeling increasingly remote from our 14-year-old political process.
This alienation is to be found in the killing of a councillor in Deneysville, in rising social unrest following failures of service delivery, and concern over what the political future may hold. It is no secret that South Africa is beleaguered by poverty, crime, increasing inequality and the heart-wrenching challenge of HIV/Aids.
Where are we heading?
The answer to this question is not only about policy. It is ultimately about convincing people to believe in their society and its trajectory, as opposed to staring at it with a combination of concern and perplexed anxiety. Only vision brings hope. This should be in our DNA given our past. Technocrats and policy-wonks rarely do both vision and managerial stewardship. And we need both.
The Mandela-era carried the hopes and aspirations of the rainbow nation vision. The Mbeki near-decade carried the vision of sound economic stewardship as a catalyst for long-term change.
But where is the vision-thing leading us from now to Polokwane, and beyond to 2009?
Surely it cannot only be the “developmental state” — a woolly concept still requiring ample definition and contemporary real-world economic substance. This can be fleshed out, but there must be more to provide the glue to keep a diverse society together for the long haul as it slowly tries to build its democracy.
And there were a number of grave disappointments that flowed from the Midrand discussions. First, the lack of clarity about the Constitutional Court becoming an apex court and the persistence with the judicial reform bills, against a tide of public opinion led by key legal eagles. These steps can only undermine confidence in an independent judiciary.
Second, the “legislature and governance for a national democratic society” document laid bare the hostility the ANC appears to have to a change to the electoral system that would enhance public accountability. This also exposed the ANC’s hypocrisy with regard to floor-crossing. Another window period is pending in September that will inevitably swell the ranks of the ruling party. Even President Thabo Mbeki criticised this key document for lacking in crucial aspects in his opening address.
Third, the absence of clear undertakings for a social security net review that would be comprehensive as opposed to merely upping the child support grant to 18 to displace the basic income grant debate was problematic. Only some semblance of social security will provide a bulwark against rising inequality. While these processes are underway in government policy — as part of National Treasury’s work — the child support grant question appears to have prejudged a more comprehensive and fiscally thoughtful review.
While the consolidated resolutions and recommendations are still pending, it is clear that the merry war of words and “festival of ideas” needs to get real and deepen the debate at the level of substantive policy discourse and vision.
It is one thing to refer vaguely to the emphasis on a developmental state that leverages regulation and taxation to rope in “monopoly capital”. It is quite another to clearly stake out what form this will take in different sectors of the economy, and to subject these ideas to the unforgiving rigour of the global capital markets, which see South Africa as just another contender, with little regard for its domestic challenges.
It is one thing to call for an industrial policy that is labour-intensive. It is quite another to make this work in a cut-throat global environment where our labour is not cheap, and in which China and India have carved out labour-intensive niche areas in manufacturing.
South Africans have to become much more discerning “consumers” of the ideas of political parties. Over the next five months and leading up to the 2009 poll the most important political question in South Africa, addressed to anyone looking for support from any political party, must be: “Tell us how.”
The Midrand conference did give South Africans an interesting glimpse into the contemporary dynamics of the ruling party — the extent to which it is becoming a site for a class battle of the present and the future; the promise that democratic policy-making and policy-discourse can function, albeit in limited form; and the fact that old-style socialism is thoroughly off the policy agenda in our contemporary society.
But the Polokwane meeting is likely to be a very different meeting.
First, the delegates will be very different: the technocrats will be replaced by rank-and-file party members with very different ideas on direct democracy; many of them will be angry about failures of service delivery and economic transformation; and many of them are likely to have little time for technocrat-speak and policy musings. It will be a challenge to ensure that frustration does not become the key vote-motivating force.
Second, the modus operandi will differ and the commissions that discussed options will see these options voted up or down from the floor. June was about consulting and compromise; December will be about decisions, winners and losers.
Third, the strategy and tactics document will move from draft to final form, setting the stage for relations within the tripartite alliance (assuming it remains intact) and for the ANC’s attitude towards opposition parties and civil society over the next five years.
The decisions in Polokwane will, therefore, not only set the policy agenda under a newly elected ANC leadership, but will also craft the arena for the 2009 electoral battle between the government and the still largely un-realigned opposition forces.
Meanwhile, the SACP’s deliberations at Port Elizabeth this week will help decide whether the party will make good on its various threats to fly solo or remain in its alliance shackles.
It says a lot about the state of opposition that two other significant party congresses — those of the Independent Democrats and the Inkatha Freedom Party — passed with little fanfare and status-quo outcomes, while media attention focused on the strange dance of the ANC and SACP.
Perhaps South Africa’s challenge of vision boils to down this question: can we create a chessboard of social democracy and democratic liberalism? Can the central ground of this democracy outflank those forces on the left and the right that second guess core tenets of our transition and democratic constitution?
Keeping this debate alive is one of the most important challenges on the road to Polokwane, and beyond. We must keep asking questions about where we are going as a country, and how we’ll get there, regardless of who emerges as the “chosen one” in December.
Raenette Taljaard is director of the Helen Suzman Foundation