Archive for August, 2011

Posted in

6

ANC’s life and death battle with Malema

By Ray Hartley | 19 August 2011

AFTER months of prevaricating, the ANC has finally charged its Youth League leader, Julius Malema, for his outrageous behaviour.
In a statement issued on Friday, the chair of the party’s disciplinary committee, Derek Hanekom, said Malema would be charged with “various violations of the ANC constitution, including bringing the ANC into disrepute through his utterances and statements on Botswana and sowing divisions in the ranks of the ANC”.
It is clear that the straw which broke the camel’s back was Malema’s stated intention to interfere in the internal politics of Botswana.
Malema said earlier this month that the neighbouring country was a threat to Africa because it was discussing a possible military base with “imperialists”.
“That puppet government [of President Ian Khama] is going to undermine the African agenda.”
He went on to call for Khama’s removal in a “democratic manner.”
“We know that Botswana is in discussions to open a military base for the imperialists and the present government of Botswana has the potential to co-operate in this manner,” he said.
That a leader of some stature in South Africa’s ruling party should announce plans to topple a neighbouring government is clearly totally unacceptable and the ANC is right to take Malema to task.
What is less clear is which of his other “utterances” will be dealt with.
Will the ANC have the courage to rein in Malema for his bombastic calls for nationalisation which have seriously damaged this country’s prospect of attracting foreign direct investment?
Will the party have the courage to call him to order over his outrageous racist statements which run counter to the party’s philosophy of non-racialism?
Having finally grasped the nettle, the ANC would be wise to go all the way, to mix a metaphor.
This is a fight to the death. If Malema survives unscathed because of weak prosecution or a reluctance to bring the full might of party discipline to bear, he will emerge stronger than ever.
He will then make a very damaging bid to unseat the party leadership at its Manguang conference next year, leading to more uncertainty over leadership and the direction this country is taking.
South Africa is a robust democracy, but the ANC must understand that the messages its senior leaders send out are taken to be the views of the governing party.
The consequences for South Africa of Malema’s attack on the fabric of society have already been severe. Let’s hope this action is not too little, too late.

Posted in

2

As the world awakes to the horror of debt, our nightmare is just beginning

By Ray Hartley | 12 August 2011

THE launch of the National Health Insurance plan has taken South Africa another step down the road to becoming a welfare state which seeks to redistribute resources from its tax base to a population which faces dimming job opportunities.
As the Financial Mail pointed out this week in an editorial under the banner “Welfare state by stealth”, South Africa now pays social grants to 15 million people.
There are countries where this approach has been successful. The Scandinavian nations have a high tax rate in exchange for which all citizens enjoy access to cheap or free health care and education.
They have done so while their economies have been competitive global players that have created employment and kept tax revenues coming.
Then there are other, less salutary examples. Health care in Cuba and North Korea is free, but the price has been industrial stagnation under repressive regimes which have encouraged desperate poverty.
The question which remains unanswered is which direction South Africa will take. There are very loud voices within the ruling party which would like to see the destruction of the free market and “bourgeois” freedoms enshrined in the constitution. They believe in a hegemonic state of the Cuban stripe.
These loud voices are no longer on the “outside”. President Zuma himself believes that the media enjoys too much freedom and that the constitution is overly liberal.
His youth league leader, Julius Malema, is allowed to develop and propagate a doctrinaire Stalinist vision for this country with only the meekest censure.
The ANC’s economic policy approach — a free market model with a firm regulatory hand and a socially responsible state — is being openly challenged and there are very few voices arguing for the status quo.
Even powerful figures such as Cyril Ramaphosa, who have done well for themselves in business, are unable to criticise nationalisation without first subjecting business to a rhetorical tongue-lashing, such is the power of this lobby.
Whichever welfare model South Africa ultimately adopts, it will be a bold experiment because just 10 percent of the population — five million people — pay the taxes that are being allocated to these ambitious projects.
While the super-rich can easily afford this growing burden, the middle classes are under pressure. Rising education, health and security costs are causing those traditionally loyal to the ruling party to seek political alternatives. Perhaps most sobering is the fact that, unless economic growth miraculously takes off, we are setting ourselves up to borrow on a large scale to finance a very expensive state just as the world wakes up to the consequences of accumulating debt.

Posted in

2

So its okay for Pick n Pay to retrench, but not Walmart?

By Ray Hartley | 5 August 2011

THE state is continuing to seek ways of ameliorating possible future job losses which may or may not result from Walmart’s investment in Massmart.
It would like the R100m set aside for this purpose increased to R300m. This newspaper has in the past questioned the wisdom of the state taking its own regulatory authority to court because this will make South Africa even less of a global destination for real investment.
But there is a secondary effect which this tinkering will cause — the distortion of the business environment for retail.
Just last month Pick n Pay — a direct competitor of Walmart’s — announced it was cutting 3000 jobs without a murmur of dissent from government.
There was no demand for the creation of a fund to ameliorate the results of this decision. Apparently job shedding by wholesome South African companies is not frowned on by the anti-imperialist lobby.
What this in effect means is that Walmart is paying a penalty for a possible future transgression while actual job-shedding goes unpunished.
No company should make a decision to shed jobs lightly and the state is entitled to ask serious questions when thousands are to lose their jobs.
But legislating against this or imposing fines in anticipation of it happening is not the way forward. All this does is make South Africa’s labour market less competitive, causing us to lose out on the jobs that further foreign investment would bring.
Distorting the market with piecemeal interventions smacks of ignorance and arrogance.

*This is a draft leader for the Sunday Times