The debate over nationalisation started “wrongly and in the wrong place”, said Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) general secretary Zwelinzima Vavi on Tuesday.
“It has been narrowed and it does an injustice to an otherwise very necessary discussion about the role of the state in the economy,” Vavi said at the launch of Cosatu’s “Strategy for a New Economic Growth Path” document.
The African National Congress Youth League (ANCYL) has been the main proponent of the nationalisation of South African mines, and has catapulted the issue to be included in discussions at the ANC’s upcoming national general council.
“If we can let the demagogues win the discussion which is based on a singular, narrow focus on the mines, instead of looking at the state broadly and nationalisation broadly, then we can only give rise to the criticism that says … that all these people are interested in is to lay their hands on the mineral resources for accumulation,” Vavi said.
He said an important discussion like nationalisation could therefore be discredited.
Strategic role of the state
Cosatu, in its discussion document, proposed that nationalisation be looked at in the context of the strategic role the state should play in key sectors of the economy.
“If you read the documents in relation to all the areas we propose the state must take a strategic interest in, that relates to the economy where there are existing monopolies which we need broken up,” he said.
Cosatu believes that through intervention by the state, resources can be “liberated” or the state can take action to put in place industrial intervention.
“In relation to the area of mining … we are not necessarily for nationalisation of all the mines in South Africa; we don’t think that’s a realistic proposal, but we do say that we need a state that can have a company that can intervene in the strategic minerals.”
He cited as examples the steel and platinum industries in which the state should intervene.
The intervention had to be strategic and it should not be aimed at complete ownership.
Vavi added that Cosatu had helped the ANCYL formulate its document on nationalisation. However, it was the youth movement’s “public articulation” where they “lose the plot”.
He said Cosatu would not “beat the youth league” for its stance on nationalisation.
“We must allow them to push so that the equilibrium, which is strategic intervention, can be reached,” he said.
‘It is a well-considered document’
Cosatu’s fiscal and monetary policy coordinator, Christopher Malikane, said South Africa needed a “mixed economy” with privately owned and state-owned entities.
Strategic sectors where state intervention was necessary included mines, metals fabrication, petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, forestry, construction and finance.
Cosatu’s proposal included a state-owned bank, pharmaceutical company and construction company.
Vavi said state-owned entities should be viewed in terms of the benefits for South African society as a whole, instead of “narrowly from an investor’s perspective”.
“This is not a mad document, it is a well-considered document.”
Cosatu’s vision for South Africa’s future growth included creating decent work, revising the tax system and monetary policy, boosting industrial development, promoting collective and public forms of ownership, and developing the Southern African region.
The growth path would address the “crisis” the country was facing, which centred on the widening gap between the rich and the poor. — Sapa