South African black business should rise above petty squabbles and build a developmental state.

South African black business should rise above petty squabbles and build a developmental state.

Nyiko Floyd Shivambu

The squabbles encountering black business formations and their white counterparts in the aspiring Developmental State of South Africa is a reflection of the class and racial contradictions that continue to underpin South African society as atavistic remnants of apartheid and its ideologies of white supremacy and African subjugation. In the process of squabbling, what is supposed to be progressive black business is missing the point on what should be its role in the aspiring Developmental State of South Africa. It appears that the contentions of the Black Management Forum breakaway are centred on the emphasis of black inclusion into the colonial economy of South Africa.

All honest people, including conservative analysts should agree that the South African economy bears very vivid features of colonial economies. Colonial economies were positioned by the coloniser, now the imperialist, as suppliers of natural, raw and semi-processed materials and insignificant importers of finished goods and services. 17 years into democracy, South Africa’s top 10 exports to the United Kingdom, European Union, United States and China are natural, raw and semi-processed goods, more especially mineral resources and metals. Conversely, South Africa’s top 10 imports from these countries are finished goods and products, some of which are produced out of the raw materials South Africa exports.

Now this is how colonial economies were designed to do and this is what colonial conquest of the African majority meant. It is therefore a responsibility, actually an obligation of emergent black businesses to overturn this situation by decolonising the South African economy. It is only black business that can reliably decolonise the South African economy because those who were empowered by the past system continue to benefit from the status quo. They have then chosen to co-opt some amongst the black majority to rapaciously reap the fruits of the South African colonial economy through Black Economic Empowerment. What BEE has achieved is creation of shareholder capitalists, instead of the industrial capitalists needed for labour-absorptive industrialisation and diversification of the South African economy.

The democratic dispensation has therefore created predominantly two components of black capitalists, whose contribution to the total onslaught against unemployment and poverty is insignificant. It is the shareholder capitalists, who were co-opted into existing capital by those empowered by apartheid and contract capitalists, mistakenly referred to as tenderpreneurs in other circles. The latter group cannot be referred to as tenderpreneurs because such suggests they are entrepreneurial in their efforts to maximise profits, sometimes at the expense of quality services to the people. The term contract capitalists, is more suitable because not all capitalists are entrepreneurs, and contract refers to the un-sustainability of the manner in which they accumulate wealth and profits.

What South Africa needs are industrial capitalists who will not only initiate businesses to manufacture goods and services, but will create workable, sustainable partnerships with established industrialists from the developed and developing countries to invest in South Africa. This will lead in massive transfer of skills, education and expertise on how most of the minerals are beneficiated and industrialised into finished goods and services. In the process, many job opportunities will be created because almost everywhere, manufacturing and beneficiation are highly labour-absorptive and less skill intensive. Most employees in beneficiation and manufacturing do not need three year diplomas and qualifications, and more than 80% of South Africa’s unemployed population does not have three year diplomas and degrees, despite the fact that they are employable.

These are the issues the progressive black businesses should be debating and fighting about, and additionally lobby government to put in place legislations that will enable domestic beneficiation, manufacturing and industrialisation to thrive. This can happen minimally through amendment of the State procurement policies and requirements, and maximally through substitution of imports on areas the State intends to grow and develop through higher tariffs. These can be complimented by the social mobilisation campaigns of buy-local, such as Proudly South African and what COSATU sometimes does. Import substitution is not alien to the politics of developmentalism, because all the countries that massively developed since the end of World War II had to protect their domestic industries and markets from aggressive foreign competition. A Developmental State should in essence play such a role.

In the case of South Africa, the so many trade agreements which our government signs almost every fortnight should almost emphasise the necessity of local beneficiation, manufacturing and industrialisation. Instead of facilitating questionable BEE deals, the South African government should provide practical support politically and financially to entrepreneurs who have viable plans to form massive manufacturing and industrialisation partnerships with established industrialists. In such a way, the State will be playing a developmental role and contributing to creation of many job opportunities and therefore reduction of massive unemployment and poverty. South Africa needs formidable black industrial capitalists, who will supplement public service in the creation of so many job opportunities.

Importantly and because the 17 year old ANC democratic government has learned bitter lessons, such an environment of massive industrialisation and diversification of the South African economy cannot happen if the State is only playing a facilitating role. The State facilitated all the transformation and redress charters in almost all sectors of the economy and none of the set objectives were ever met. Painfully, no one was held accountable that the ownership and management redress targets agreed upon by all sectors were not fulfilled. Why did South African government waste resources and time drafting and establishing consensus on empowerment charters and Acts of parliament which were never implemented nor complied with by anyone? Is the South African State a banana republic that cannot enforce its own laws?

In the proposed strategy, the State should own and control strategic sectors of the economy, particularly those that provide industrial inputs. In such a way, the State will be able to incentivise new industrialists to invest in South Africa, because of guaranteed access to cheaper and easily accessible industrial inputs, particularly minerals, water and energy. The State should continue its ownership and control of transport and logistics services provided by Transnet currently and in a such a way be in a position to prioritise business that will trickle down to develop South African communities though job creation and therefore poverty reduction. This is important because businesses that undermine their commitments to State entities like ESKOM still use South Africa’s harbours to export coal, which legally belongs to ESKOM. Everyday South Africa’s natural resources are drained through our harbours without meaningful contribution to real development of the people.

State ownership and control of strategic sectors of the economy is not only economically sound, but socially, politically and morally meaningful. The reality of mining in South Africa today is that it brings more suffering and diseases to the people than benefits. It is an understatement to suggest Mineworkers are treated like slaves, because slaves had longer life-expectancy and therefore a possibility to be liberated in a lifetime. The life-expectancy of mineworkers in South Africa is reducing everyday due to unsafe working conditions, occupational injuries and massive spread of diseases. The State should make a long overdue intervention and save humanity, before it is too late. 

This is conclusively an economic development model that can rescue South Africa from the high levels of unemployment, therefore poverty, starvation, diseases, crime and many other social ills. This model should be complimented by massive investment in education and training of all people. Post secondary training and education should be compulsory, and this should include the vocational training of those who drop out at Grades 10, 11 and 12. Subsidisation of labourers will not benefit society, because private companies will in the cause of chasing profits, substitute real employees for government subsidised employees and dump them once the subsidy is finished. There are so many youth developmental programmes the subsidy money can be channelled to, instead of provision of free labour to rapacious accumulators of wealth.

In the process of squabbling and throwing mud at each other, those who refer themselves as black businesspeople should think out of the box and begin to create real wealth and not fight over who is co-opted into the existing wealth which the State should ultimately own and control. They should ask amongst themselves of how many people have they employed in new industries, firms and factories. They should ask themselves of where do all the electronics, fridges and so many gadgets that almost everyone owns come from and how many job opportunities would be created if those were manufactured in South Africa. They should ask themselves why South Africa continues to import food, despite massive agricultural capacity. Only when black business begins to ask these questions will they gain our genuine sympathy, but as things stand, they are embroiled in petty squabbles of who is closer to big business than the other.

Nyiko Floyd Shivambu

The SACP Neo Liberal?

The SACP’s inconsistencies deprive it of an opportunity to provide ideological leadership on economic policy.

Floyd Shivambu

The South African Communist Party’s original reaction to the notorious Growth, Employment and Redistribution Strategy released on the 14^th of June 1996, was as thus, “The South African Communist Party welcomes the government's Growth, Employment and Redistribution Macro-Economic Policy. We fully back the objectives of this macro-economic strategy and note, in particular, the following key features: Contrary to certain attempts to use the macro-economic debate to shift government away from its electoral mandate, the strategy announced today firmly and explicitly situates itself as a framework for the RDP”.

When the Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative of South Africa was unveiled in 2006, the SACP welcomed the initiative and said, “ASGI-SA calls for an active developmental state, for a comprehensive industrial policy and for integrated local development planning”. On the New Growth Path in 2010, the SA Communist Party said, “A key achievement of 2010 has been government`s consolidation and public release of a New Growth Path perspective. Minister for Economic Development, Cde Ebrahim Patel, presented government`s NGP document to the CC. The CC warmly welcomed the major paradigm shift represented by the NGP and government`s earlier announcement of the Industrial Policy Action Programme 2 (IPAP2)”.

From these cheerful statements, it is evident that the SACP had genuinely, or rather naively believed that they constituted revolutionary socio-economic developmental programme, which had to be embraced by the entire National Liberation Movement in the course of the National Democratic Revolution. This is odd because the social science the SACP claims to use as tools of analysis and guide to action should assist the Communist Party to foresee the massive inequalities, unemployment and poverty that proclaim growth first (increase profits) and the rest shall follow. It is objective reality that the common and underpinning feature of GEAR, ASGISA and NGP is that they move from a premise of growth first and the rest shall follow.

It was only in 1998 where the SACP believed that “the budget deficit reduction targets are arbitrary, based as they are on macro-economic models derived from a largely unreconstructed Reserve Bank. GEAR embodies, in its core fiscal and monetary policies, a neo-liberal approach that is at variance with our reconstruction and development objectives. Much of GEAR and indeed much of government's evolving economic policy has shifted progressively away from ANC economic policy in the first half of the 1990s, which underlined the interconnectedness of growth and development, which envisaged a major emphasis on growth led by domestic and regional infrastructural development. More and more, there has been a shift towards the assumptions of an export-led growth, based on the myth that deregulation and liberalisation, more or less on their own, will make the South African economy "globally competitive”.

Now these features of GEAR, which the SACP noticed two years after its adoption, was in the original text of the strategy identified as point of departure, “Sustained growth on a higher plane requires a transformation towards a competitive outward oriented economy” and further committed to deregulation and liberalisation of trade in its original intention and programme. The assumption is that if the SACP had noticed this component of GEAR earlier, it would have not welcomed the perspective with the exuberance it displayed on the 14^th of June 1996. Since the late diagnoses of the ills brought forth by GEAR, the SACP did not only criminalise those who were associated with its implementation, but became the most aggressive opponents of GEAR, derogatively referred to as the 1996 Class Project. It is apparent that the Communist Party’s opposition to the 1996 Class Project was more aggressive than the opposition to Capitalism.

Despite the exuberance that defined the introduction of ASGISA, it was short-lived due to political developments in the Alliance, particularly the outcomes of the 52^nd National Conference of the ANC in Polokwane, which was described as watershed by the SACP. The SACP characterised the ANC 52^nd National Conference as “democratic wave [that] must be seen against the backdrop of a decade in which the ANC and its alliance partners have been subjected to attempts at marginalization in the interests of using the state to drive through a pro-big business policy package characterized by a blend of neo-liberalism and a subordinate, paternalistic, top-down welfarism directed to the poor”. Now that is a profound observation, particularly due to the fact that SACP’s reaction to GEAR and the policy packages it deplores were not anti neo-liberalism, they were instead reactionary and lacked foresight.

When announcing the New Growth Path (NGP) in the Medium Term Budget Policy Statement, Minister of Finance Pravin Grodham said that “Our central goal is unequivocal: we have to accelerate growth in the South African economy, and we have to do so in ways that rapidly reduce poverty, unemployment and inequality”. South Africa’s first 17 years of democracy are a perfect illustration that economic growth can simply mean bigger profits for big business, with no plausible sense of sustainable development for the people of South Africa, even when government’s intention was to create jobs. Virtually all developmental indicators, particularly the official 10 and 15 Years Review of Democracy and Freedom in South Africa verified that sustainable development to majority of our people happened where and when the State was playing a leading and more decisive role. This is in recognition of the reality that the private sector (capitalists) does not have developmental interests and intentions for the people of South Africa.

Whilst the New Growth Path and more recently, the 2011 State of Nation Address spelled out clear intentions and programmes to mobilise the private sector (capitalists) behind the noble vision of job creation, including through tax rebates, reality is that capitalists’ interests is not about job creation. The SACP should by now be aware that if it were in the private sector’s interests and wishes, they would admire free labour in the literal sense or government fully subsidised workers with no hope and home. If the NGP identified job drivers will continue to be predominantly in private hands, the decent work agenda will gradually be undermined and perhaps eroded because capitalists thrive on the sweat and blood of the working class. The basis of Marxism is a recognition that in a class divided society, the interests of the two opposing classes are irreconcilable, and they are actually antagonistic. This applies to the South African capitalist State as well.

These are the fundamental political and ideological diagnoses the SACP should notice even when new developmental/growth strategies and paths are being introduced. The enthusiastic acceptance, without robust critique of these interventions does not assist in sharpening their focus. With the pattern that defined the SACP’s approach and response to GEAR in 1996 and ASGISA in 2006, the most foreseeable possibility and practicality is that the Communist Party will after 2 to 3 years be the biggest and most aggressive opponent of the New Growth Path, and possibly give it a new name, “the 2010 Class Project”. This is called hindsight analysis, embedded on a notion of “only if we knew”. This does not do any good in reviving the integrity of the SACP as a Marxist-Leninist formation, whose analysis of society and provision of ideological leadership should forever be grounded on science. If the saying “A wise man always changes his mind” is true, then the SACP is very wise.

On our side, the politics of a New Growth Path are quite simple, i.e. creation of decent work and many jobs in South Africa needs the economy to be labour-absorptive through massive industrialisation, development of infrastructure, agriculture, expanding of the minerals extraction and beneficiation, and various other interventions identified before. This requires the State to be in control and ownership of key and strategic industrial inputs in order to attract industrial investors into South Africa to manufacture goods and services closer to areas of extraction. Tax rebates for big business, like wage subsidies will basically enrich capitalists and not create sustainable jobs. These are some of the systemic and systematic weaknesses of the New Growth Path the SACP will realise in hindsight and like before demonise those who will be its adherents in 2 to 3 years. Maybe that is not surprising for a Communist Party that opposes common ownership of the key means of production like Mines and Land, even when the material conditions for such to happen are existent and the balance of forces in favour of change.

Floyd Shivambu—ANC Youth League Head of Policy, Research and Political Education + Spokesperson

Revolution in Egypt was not caused by Facebook and Twitter:

Revolution in Egypt was not caused by Facebook and Twitter:

Floyd Shivambu

Most social and unseasoned political commentators across the world opine that the revolution that happened in Egypt was caused by social network sites, Twitter and Facebook or any other form of network which Egyptians might have used to communicate with each. This misdiagnoses of what are the real causes of the revolution do not only apply to social and unseasoned political commentators, but was oddly believed by the Egyptian government which shut down the network immediately after the revolution begun. Even after the closure of twitter and facebook access, the revolution/protests in Egypt intensified and succeeded in achieving its most immediate and tangible victory, i.e. toppling of Hosni Mubarak’s kleptocratic regime.

History and well reasoned progressive social science have proven overtime that fundamental change in political, social and economic realities (revolutions) are far much more complex realities than exchange of text messages and updating of status via twitter and facebook. For any revolution to happen, there necessarily should be conducive social, political and economic conditions for such revolutions to occur. These include, but not limited to a society where there is illegitimate dominance of one political elite or clique to the exclusion of others. Other conditions for a revolution are socio-economic conditions of mass poverty, unemployment and starvation of great majority and inequalities between the rich and poor. The third material condition for a revolution could be massive social problem of racism, tribalism, regionalism or any form of social exclusion based on class, colour, ethnicity, place of origin, religion, etc.

In Egypt, the past 30 years have been dominated by single secular political elite (National Democratic Party under Hosni Mubarak) which succeeded through exclusion of other political forces in a country whose 90% of the population is Muslim. For those 30 years, the NDP and political elite in Egypt enjoyed political, military and economic protection of the Western forces, in particular the United States and some parts of Europe. They were then able to suppress political dissent for those years, because they used the cohesive forces of the State to suppress dissent and paraded as a developing economy because of the West’s economic interests in Egypt and therefore economic protection. The Egyptian government even banned a massive political force, the Muslim Brotherhood for many years and justified such by playing with the West’s innate fear of Islam inspired political movements, which they generally believe are terrorist in character.

Now the real material conditions for the Egyptian revolution included but not limited to the growing impatience with political repression by the political elite, kleptocracy (government of thieves) of a political elite that did not want to hand over power to others except themselves and close family members, suppression of political movements which represented the interests of majority, massive inequalities, growing poverty and many other varied interests. Now the confluence of these genuine concerns, challenges and problems in Egypt provided ready material conditions for the political revolution to occur. Like the Iranian revolution in 1979, the revolution was sparked and happened without a commonly defined political or ideological programme on what should concretely happen after the revolution. Such a common programme will not be found anytime soon, and could easily result in an Islam guided, anti-West political force emerging as government.

The spark to the Egyptian revolution was conspicuously the successful protests in Tunisia, which inspired hope, particularly within Egypt’s youth, who realised that with the necessary determination, illegitimate, kleptocratic political elite can be toppled by the people. Now, because the means of communication in the contemporary world include twitter and facebook, the youth who have access to these social networks used them to spread the word that it is possible to topple a regime and all Egyptians should rise to remove the regime of Hosni Mubarak. Twitter and facebook were definitely not the only channel of communications used to spread the word in Egypt; many other channels of communication were employed. These included local media, but most importantly word of mouth. This explains why the revolution/protests continued and actually intensified even after the Egyptian government had blocked access to these social networks, and other forms of media which could spread the work faster than the word of mouth.

As channels of communication, the social network sites were most definitely useful to spread the word because an estimated 55 million out of the 80 million Egyptians have access to mobile telephones and 20 million have access to internet. These were however not the reason why the revolution happened, the reason as illustrated above includes but not limited to the reality of repression of political dissent, social exclusion/non-recognition of religious majority, massive inequalities and growing unemployment (which are relatively lower compared to other countries), and a the kleptocracy of the illegitimate political elite that did not want to hand over power to anyone outside its circles.

Now this is an important observation because social and unseasoned political commentators and some of the political leaders were beginning to believe that just the access to twitter and facebook can lead to a revolution, even when material conditions are not ripened. For example, the causes of a mass political revolution in South African will never be twitter and facebook, but the socio-economic conditions of the people and a growing perception/observation that the political leadership is doing nothing to improve the lives of the people. Now, the ANC government is doing everything in its power to better the living conditions of the people through provision of basic services such as water, electricity, education, healthcare, sanitation, houses and social grants for the needy. Year after year, government provides more and more services, including food for free to indigents.

An acknowledgment is however made within the ANC that South Africa’s biggest challenge is not service provision, but crisis levels of unemployment and therefore poverty. Now the emphasis on job creation is vital and should be adequately accompanied by dedication of most resources to job creation. This should necessarily include government’s increased role in the control and ownership of strategic sectors of the economy in order to stimulate and spur growth and development of labour-absorptive sectors of the economy and regenerate wealth for the benefit of all people. State ownership of strategic sectors will also contribute to reducing the widening gap between the rich and the poor, because majority of those who are getting exponentially rich currently are those who do work which would otherwise be done in a labour-absorptive manner by the State.

Nyiko Floyd Shivambu—ANC Youth League Spokesperson

Some reflections on the new growth path—

Some reflections on the new growth path—

Floyd Shivambu—

November 2010

The celebrated new growth path was in a manner reminiscent of GEAR unveiled by the Minister of Finance on the 27^th of October 2010 after a special cabinet meeting which deliberated and adopted the strategy. There were of course many expectations on what was going to be new in the growth path, which cabinet had to convene a special meeting to adopt. The Medium term budget policy statement presented by the Minister revealed that there is completely nothing new in the new growth path, because the same neo-liberal ideological underpinnings of South Africa’s economic planning are once again parroted in the growth path. This should concern all of us because since the adoption of the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy in 1996, there continues to be refusal to accept that economic policies of “growth first and the rest shall follow” have failed South Africa and widened the gap between the rich and poor.

The not so new growth path says, “Our central goal is unequivocal: we have to accelerate growth in the South African economy, and we have to do so in ways that rapidly reduce poverty, unemployment and inequality”. The jargon laden GEAR was introduced in 1996 as a form of an integrated economic strategy, which would accelerate economic growth, institute measures to reduce the budget deficit, whilst attaining “6 percent per annum and job creation of 400 000 per annum by the year 2000”. In 2006, government introduced ASGISA as a set of interventions to economic growth constraints. If these constraints are addressed, ASGISA presupposed that government and society in large will be able to meet the social objectives. Consistent with GEAR’s neo-liberal ideological underpinning, ASGISA asserts, “Government’s investigations, supported by some independent research, indicate that the growth rate needed for us to achieve our social objectives is around 5% on average between 2004 and 2014”.

The fundamental problem with economic policies that are obsessed with growth first and the rest shall follow is that they sacrifice everything else on the altar of economic growth. This is inconsistent with what the Reconstruction and Development Programme (RDP) propositioned. The RDP says, “Growth, the measurable increase in the output of the modern industrial economy - is commonly seen as the priority that must precede development. Development is portrayed as a marginal effort of redistribution to areas of urban and rural poverty. In this view development is a deduction from growth. The RDP breaks decisively with this approach”. It is possible and in fact advisable to drive growth through developmental interventions, which should in South Africa’s context, should be highly labour-absorptive.

The RDP took broke decisively from the growth first and the rest shall follow strategy because such has inherent weaknesses. Obsession with economic growth means that you should amongst other things dedicate your energy towards reducing the cost of doing big business through getting your macro economics right, shifting energy tariffs for big business to the people with the hollow hope that such will bear fruits. What distinguished the RDP from GEAR was conspicuously the fact that the RDP emphasised development and reconstruction as means to growth the economy and GEAR preached the neo-liberal gospel that growth first and the rest shall follow. Now, the new growth path is founded on GEAR principles, which have failed our people dismally.

The rest of the propositions are honestly rhetoric meant to deceive society that there is something new, whilst there is nothing. The history of industrialisation and all practical evidence attests to the fact that beneficiation and industrialisation of minerals will not succeed if minerals extraction remains the forte of private multi-national corporations. This does not only apply to minerals beneficiation and industrialisation, but to all other sectors which should be industrialised in a sustainable labour-absorptive fashion. For South Africa to successfully industrialise in a highly competitive global economy, the State should be in control and ownership of key industrial inputs in order to stimulate industrial growth.

Overall, our assessment is that the new growth path is neo-liberal and like GEAR and ASGISA will not achieve all those goals it sets. The State should heavily invest in employment multipliers on services it provides. Like all neo-liberal perspectives, the new growth path is very seductive and will for the coming two to three years make everyone believe that we are on the correct path and we are not. In a perspective titled “The History of Development: From Western Origins to Global Faith”, Gilbert Rist (1997) says of neo-liberal economic strategies, that they are characterised by “power of their rhetoric to seduce, to charm, to please, to fascinate, to set dreaming, but also to abuse, to turn away from the truth, and to deceive”.

Despite these observations, ANC government economic policies cannot continue to be an elite affair, where top level leadership deliberates on key economic challenges inconsiderate of what the ANC and its allies say. Some of the proposals of COSATU’s new growth path for instance are valid and government did not dedicate any attention to those proposals. The proposition that there should be public ownership and control of strategic sectors of the economy should never be dismissed, because all evidence and scientific history of economic development points to the reality that the State should play a leading role. This should not only happen through legislations, because the dismal failure of empowerment charters in South Africa are a great lesson that real economic transformation cannot and will not be realised through toothless legislations. From the experiences of GEAR and ASGISA, the ANC government should by now have learned that economic policies that are not embedded are never durable. The ANC 53^rd National Conference should give guidance on these central questions of development and economic growth, because what we presently have is politically apocalyptic due to the hollow hopes it generates in society.

RESPONSE TO COMRADE JOEL:

Response to Comrade Netshitenzhe on Nationalisation

Floyd Shivambu

Since the release of the discussion document on Nationalisation of Mines at the end of January 2010, the ANC Youth League has received satisfactory levels of constructive engagement with the entire perspective. The inputs, particularly from renowned academics, public intellectuals, members of the ANC, the alliance, and importantly ordinary people at grassroots level are particularly appreciated. They are appreciated because most did not only identify the problems and weaknesses in the perspective, but provided concrete solutions on how a better and more effective method of mines’ nationalisation should be ushered in by the democratic State. This does not however mean that there were no detractors, who sought to divert our attention from the strategic questions raised in the perspective.

Now the input by Comrade Joel Netshitenzhe is not part of detractors, but represents a conservative ideological wave in the ANC. This ideological wave oddly believes that some of the tactical retreats taken upon transition by the ANC-led liberation movement constituted total capitulation. The wave has been dominant in the state since the democratic breakthrough in 1994, and pretends oblivion to the reality that whilst commendable, ANC’s efforts to transfer wealth to the ownership of the people as a whole have not been adequate to decisively break the racial, class and gender dialectic of colonial-cum-apartheid repression. This ideological wave begun from the premise that the colonial economy and spatial development patterns did not need to be radically changed, but polished with a hollow hope that it might make today better than yesterday.

This ideological wave underpinned the adoption of the Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) strategy, which achieved some level of fiscal stability, yet dismally failed to achieve its own strategic objectives—mainly economic growth levels, investments and creation of jobs. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), recently observed that “at least between the years 1995 – 2000, for which there is adequate data—economic growth was associated with declining incomes across households at all income levels, but with the sharpest income declines occurring among the least well off” (1). The ideological wave further underpins a national spatial development perspective that basically says much attention, efforts and resources should be dedicated to apartheid centres of economic potential, whilst other areas are reserved as suppliers of labour and natural resources.

In its official input to the ANC Youth League’s perspective on Nationalisation of Mines, the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) observes this ideological wave and says it had “sought to present the historical approach of the ANC as some form of social democracy, inserted to address a colonial situation. The economic ideology that underpins this tendency finds expression in a watered down version of the interpretation of the Freedom Charter. They present to the current generation of the membership of our movement, and the people of South Africa as a whole, what can be characterized as Freedom Charter Lite—a Freedom Charter without class content. We therefore congratulate the ANC Youth League for re-affirming a consistently democratic interpretation that people who gathered in Kliptown in 1955 gave to the economic clause of the Freedom Charter” (2). The ANC Youth League welcomes the congratulations and re-affirms that the Freedom Charter will never be hijacked by anyone for whatever narrow purpose.

Consistent with the broader thrust of the ANC’s strategic vision as contained in the Freedom Charter, the ANC Youth League’s perspective on Nationalisation of Mines represents a decisive break from the not so neutral ideological disposition, which underpinned the first 16 years of democracy. Why? Such has to be the case because efforts to decisively break the unemployment and poverty challenges have not substantially succeeded under the policy trajectory which Comrade Joel argues should be retained. It is not an overstatement that whilst a considerable progress has been recorded in the empowerment of historically disadvantaged individuals, the broader thrust of the Freedom Charter’s objective for the people to share the country’s wealth has not been attained.

The ANC 52nd National Conference in Polokwane proclaimed that “Our vision of the economic transformation takes as its starting point the Freedom Charter's clarion call that the People Shall Share in the Country's Wealth!”. The conference further resolved to build “a developmental state [which] must ensure that our national resource endowments, including land, water, minerals and marine resources are exploited to effectively maximise the growth, development and employment potential embedded in such national assets and not purely for profit maximisation”. Now as part of giving practical meaning to these resolutions, the ANC Youth League proposes the democratic government’s nationalisation of Mines in order to achieve what Polokwane said we should strive for.

Comrade Joel Netshitenzhe could give a conservative interpretation and meaning to Polokwane resolutions, yet the ANC Youth League’s understanding is that they call upon the ANC government to make sure that the mineral resources are used to benefit all people, not few corporations. The ANC Youth League’s straightforward interpretation of the Polokwane resolution is that there ought to be greater State participation in the economy. Polokwane took these resolutions in appreciation of the reality that the status quo is not desirable and should be changed. We are also aware that attempts to misinterpret the Freedom Charter have recurrently failed and will never succeed under our guard of the revolution. The perspective on Nationalisation of Mines dedicated adequate time and space on how the ANC understood the transfer of mineral wealth to the ownership of the people as a whole and such has not changed.

In the first public lecture on nationalisation of mines organised by the ANC Youth League in Atlas studios, Auckland Park in October 2009, two members of the audience, Mining & Metallurgy students from the University of Johannesburg made two outstanding observations. The first student remarked that it is so strange that a security guard in the coal mines of Emalahleni got arrested for taking 25 kilograms of coal, whilst the mines steal coal everyday in loads and loads of trucks and transport it to Richards Bay, whilst ordinary people around the coal mines do not benefit from the coal. The second student remarked that she decided to study Mining Metallurgy because her home town, Sekhukhune had lots of mining opportunities, yet she could not get any access to opportunities from the mines just across where she resides, as those who worked at the mines said she should travel to Rustenburg or Johannesburg if she wanted opportunities.

Unlike those who were around Mpanza, ingwenya in Makeni, Lusaka, our concerns are not about abstractions of whether nationalised mines will lead to socialism or not, but inspired by the objective suffering of our people and the opportunities which young people do not get in the democratic dispensation. Our concern is the reality that the colonial features of the South African economy are still vivid, exporting virtually all natural resources and importing finished goods and products, but also enriching the white minority at the expense of the black majority. As youth, we know that South Africa produces platinum group metals and is home to more than 70% of the world reserves, yet most of us do not know how platinum looks like and what it is used for. Statistics recurrently point to the reality that black people and Africans in particular do not own anything above 5% of South Africa’s wealth, yet they constitute more than 80% of the South African population. As we have argued in the ANCYL document, this does not mean that this wealth should be transferred to a few black elite. On the contrary, the public ownership and control, institutionalised through the state will enable the people to determine the production and distribution of our wealth.

Comrade Joel Netshitenzhe observes that the ANC’s interpretation of the Freedom Charter has neither been static, nor homogeneous, yet argues that the ANC Youth League’s view on Nationalisation is inconsistent with the latter day interpretations of the Freedom Charter. It can never be correct that anything that does not agree with Comrade Joel Netshitenzhe’s interpretation of the Freedom Charter is counted outside the ANC’s official positions. It is a misleading and sad reflection because our reading of the Freedom Charter is consistent with how the ANC viewed it upon adoption in 1955 by the real Congress of the People and in 1956 by the ANC, wherein there were racialised inequalities alongside massive mineral wealth controlled by few conglomerates. Indeed the Freedom Charter was adopted in 1955 amidst massive inequalities and economic subjugation of the black majority and Africans in particular, and the reality is that 55 years later, such has not changed. Attempts to substitute the Freedom Charter have always existed in the ANC and our generation vows that such can only be considered once the entirety of the Freedom Charter objectives and aims are realised.

It is our considered view that an absolute majority of South Africans agree with the nationalisation of mines, which should be directed towards the betterment of people’s lives and creation of decent employment for all. What seems to worry many commentators is the question of State capacity to manage and administer mines as state owned enterprises. Recurrently, a concern is raised around the perceived and/or real administrative challenges and glitches in ESKOM, SAA, and SABC. Worrying though is that a rather lame conclusion is made that because these institutions had problems, glitches and sometimes board squabbles; the state is generally incapable of managing corporations. This observation is sad and ignores the substantial factors relating to the management of state owned enterprises and their relationship with the state as a principle.

What is relieving amidst these observations is the fact that that the discussion document on nationalisation of mines foresaw the potential opposition to nationalisation on the basis of a supposition that the state is inherently incapable of managing corporations. In the document, the ANC Youth League said, “The State capacity to manage enterprises is doubted, often in comparison to the State’s oversight or lack thereof of key State owned enterprises such as the South African Airways (SAA), ESKOM, SABC and Denel. The comparison is not fair because in most instances, these have failed due to sheer criminality, mismanagement and patronage which characterised the most of these entities and very weak accountability systems. The capacity of the State to decisively intervene in SAA and ESKOM for instance was inhibited by lack of proper systems and legislative framework concerning the extent of interventions the State can make alongside Boards of Directors”. More often than not, the State’s only role in these enterprises is appointment of Boards with no clearly defined developmental mandates.

Further than that, all the state owned enterprises that are said to have failed were purely run on private sector principles, wherein progress and success is measured as per the profit margins, instead of concrete developmental outcomes such as employment creation and infrastructure investments. Concerning this aspect, the discussion document on nationalisation says that “the State Owned Mining Company’s progress should be measured as per its ability, capacity and coherent determination to create jobs, maximisation of the country’s gain from mineral resources, contribution to socio-economic development and assistance of communities where mining happens”. This is one principle that should guide all state owned enterprises and it finds adequate resonance in the ANC’s 52nd National Conference resolution that commits to “strengthening the role of state-owned enterprises and ensuring that, whilst remaining financially viable, SOEs, agencies and utilities - as well as companies in which the state has significant shareholding - respond to a clearly defined public mandate and act in terms of our overarching industrial policy and economic transformation objectives” (3).

In the process of questioning the state’s capacity to manage and oversee corporations, there is also some level of neo-liberal hypocrisy that is defined by a deliberate oblivion to the successes recorded in the SOE established by the post 1994 democratic government . The Petroleum, Oil and Gas Corporation of South Africa (Pty) Limited (PetroSA) owns, operates and manages South Africa's commercial assets in the petroleum industry. Whilst legislated in the 1940s, PetroSA was officially established and given strategic leadership by the democratic government, run at board and management level by historically disadvantaged individuals, and is currently the country’s most successful petroleum corporation, even in comparison to privately owned petroleum corporations.

Despite infiltrating a highly competitive market, PetroSA is in the forefront of expanding South Africa’s capacity to refine oil. The 100% State owned PetroSA is currently using cutting-edge technology to establish a 400 000 barrel per day oil refinery (Project Mthombo) in Coega Industrial Development Zone in the Eastern Cape. The oil refinery has potential to create than 10 000 jobs for the people of the Eastern Cape and open lots of other upstream and downstream economic opportunities. Neo-liberals opposed to state ownership will not mention this reality because in their neo-liberal text books, innovation is solely a function of private ownership.

If there is ever any balanced comparison on how successful a State Owned Mining Company should be run, that comparison should be with PetroSA, because PetroSA trades with commodities in a highly competitive environment. The SOEs that are said to have failed are often said to have failed because of their internal management squabbles. But also the failed SOEs operate on private sector principles of narrow profit maximisation at the expense of everything else. Then the detractors of nationalisation of mines will raise false alarms and forever make lame attempts to link state ownership with inherent inefficiency and corruption. The collapse of the economy globally happened as a result of narrow capital accumulation models pursued by privately owned corporations, and they all relied on public finance for revival and sustainability. It appears that the neo-liberals who want to rubbish the role of the state in the economy only choose a handful of state owned enterprises that encountered difficulties and ignore the successes of ACSA and PetroSA. Efficiency of enterprises is not a function of shareholding, but a consequence of a variety of both subjective and objective conditions under which businesses operate.

The ANC Youth League accepts that in the management of vital economic resources such as minerals, a need will certainly arise for strong accountability systems and legislative guidelines of how mines are operated, buttressed by strong public accountability mechanisms. With the lessons derived from SAA, ESKOM, DENEL, and countries that are in minerals extraction partnerships, South Africa is suitably located to institutionalise a more effective, efficient and durable mechanism, systems and legislative framework to manage mines more efficiently. So the challenges of SAA and ESKOM should not serve as a discouragement to the State’s control and ownership of mines, but as a lesson of what should be done moving forward, particularly that mines nationalisation has lots of other benefits as argued in the document.

In a previous intervention and response to this conservative ideological current in the ANC, we argued that the question of when we nationalise Mines should be interrogated within the context of dialectical materialism, not through raising of false alarms intending at causing panic amongst revolutionaries in the cause of a National Democratic Revolution. In Philosophy and Class Struggle, Dialego says, “if we stress the materialist component of our philosophy at the expense of the dialectical, the result will not be ultra-leftism but its twin opposite — right-wing opportunism: the tendency to overestimate the strength of the enemy so that the superficial appearances of the moment are mistaken for the deeper trends at work in historical reality. Indeed, legalistic illusions which stem from an insufficiently dialectical approach to politics, may even lead to the kind of unprincipled compromises which make short term gains, but weaken the movement as a whole” (4).

Encountered with a bigger difficulty of a per se underdeveloped nation and almost non-existent socialist consciousness amongst the few workers in Russia in the early 1900s, Vladimir Lenin never raised false alarms. He was instead inspired by the existent conditions and documented a clear programme titled “What is to be done?” Lenin never asked “Should we do something”; nor did he ask “whether conditions are favourable for something to be done”. As a revolutionary, he documented a clear programme on what was going to happen and virtually all of the things he said were to be done happened. He understood that as a revolutionary, you do not fold your arms and wait for the balance of forces to be in your favour, but should work towards ensuring that balance of forces are in your favour.

The conditions in our country are currently favourable to a revolutionary programme and that is conclusively objective. Affirming this observation, the ANC Strategy & Tactics says, “Overall, since 1994, the balance of forces has shifted in favour of the forces of change. It provides the basis for speedier implementation of programmes to build a truly democratic and prosperous society. The legal and policy scaffolding for this is essentially in place. Most of society wants this to happen”. Various other objective conditions provide reason why we have an adequate space to could move decisively on altering property relations. The people are already on the streets protesting for better lives, the ANC should mobilise the whole of our people and refocus their struggles to be directed towards real economic emancipation.

The ANC Youth League’s recent visit to Venezuela discovered amongst other things that the people can immediately benefit from the State’s democratic ownership and control of key sectors of the economy, and oil in this case. Venezuela’s democratic control and ownership of oil refutes a neo-liberal scarecrow that any form of State ownership will repulse foreign investors. The United States, which has recurrently failed to remove the revolutionary leadership of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, continues to be the biggest consumer of Venezuelan oil, and most of its corporations and brands continue to do business in Venezuela.

Forward to nationalisation of mines forward!

REFERENCES AND ENDNOTES

Pollin, R. Epstein, G. Heintz, J. and Ndikumana, L. (2006) An Employment-Targeted Economic Program for South Africa. New York: United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).

COSATU (2010) “Towards the Nationalisation of Mines and Monopoly Industry”. February 2010.

ANC 52nd National Conference resolution of Economic Transformation, December 2007.

Dialego (1975) Philosophy and class struggle.

THE STATE CAN EFFICIENTLY RUN STATE OWNED MINES

THE STATE CAN EFFICIENTLY RUN STATE OWNED MINES

Floyd Shivambu

Since the release of the discussion document on Nationalisation of Mines at the end of January 2010, the ANC Youth League has received satisfactory levels of constructive engagement with the entire perspective. The inputs, particularly from renowned academics and public intellectuals are particularly appreciated as most did not only identify the minor problems and weaknesses in the perspective, but provided concrete solutions on how a better and more effective method of Mines’ Nationalisation should be ushered by the democratic State. This does not however mean that there weren’t detractors, who sought to divert our attention from the strategic questions raised in the perspective.

It is our considered view that an absolute majority of South Africans agree with the Nationalisation of Mines, which should be directed towards the betterment of people’s lives and creation of decent employment for all. What seems to worry many commentators is the question of State capacity to manage and administer Mines as State Owned Enterprises. Recurrently, a concern is raised around the perceived and real administrative challenges and glitches in ESKOM, SAA, and SABC. Worrying though is that a rather lame conclusion is made that because these institutions had problems and glitches; the State is generally incapable of managing Corporations. This observation is sad and ignores the substantial factors relating to the management of State Owned Enterprises and their relationship with the State.

What is relieving amidst these observations is the fact that that the discussion document on nationalisation of Mines foresaw the potential opposition to nationalisation on the basis of a supposition that the State is inherently incapable of managing Corporations. In the document, the ANC Youth League said, “The State capacity to manage enterprises is doubted, often in comparison to the State’s oversight or lack thereof of key State owned enterprises such as the South African Airways (SAA), ESKOM, SABC and Denel. The comparison is not fair because in most instances, these have failed due to sheer criminality, mismanagement and patronage which characterised the most of these entities and very weak accountability systems. The capacity of the State to decisively intervene in SAA and ESKOM for instance was inhibited by lack of proper systems and legislative framework concerning the extent of interventions the State can make alongside Boards of Directors”.

Further than that, all the State Owned Enterprises that are said to have failed were purely run on private sector principles, wherein progress and success is measured as per the profit margins, instead of concrete developmental outcomes such as employment creation and infrastructure investments. Concerning this aspect, the discussion document on nationalisation says, “the State Owned Mining Company’s progress should be measured as per its ability, capacity and coherent determination to create jobs, maximisation of the country’s gain from mineral resources, contribution to socio-economic development and assistance of communities where mining happens”. This is one principle that should guide all State Owned Enterprises and it finds adequate resonance in the ANC’s 52^nd National Conference resolutions on the developmental state.

In the process of questioning the State’s capacity to manage and oversee Corporations, there is also some level of neo-liberal hypocrisy that is defined a deliberate oblivion to the successes recorded in the SOE established by the post 1994 democratic government . The Petroleum, Oil and Gas Corporation of South Africa (Pty) Limited (PetroSA) owns, operates and manages South Africa's commercial assets in the petroleum industry. Whilst legislated in the 1940s, PetroSA was officially established and given strategic leadership by the democratic government, run at Board and Management level by Historically Disadvantaged Individuals, and is currently the country’s most successful petroleum corporation, even in comparison to privately owned petroleum corporations.

If there is ever any balanced comparison on how successful a State Owned Mining Company should be run, that comparison should be with PetroSA, because PetroSA trades with commodities in a highly competitive environment. The SOEs that are said to have failed are often said to have failed because of their internal management squabbles. But also the failed SOEs operate on private sector principles of narrow profit maximisation at the expense of everything else. Then the detractors of Nationalisation of Mines will raise false alarms and forever make lame attempts to link State Ownership with inherent inefficiency and corruption. The collapse of the economy globally happened as a result of narrow capital accumulation models pursued by privately owned corporations, and they all relied on public finance for revival and sustainability.

The ANC Youth League accepts that in the management of vital resources such as minerals and Mines, a need will certainly arise for strong accountability systems and legislative guidelines of how Mines are operated, buttressed by strong public accountability mechanisms. With the lessons derived from SAA, ESKOM, DENEL, and countries that are in Minerals extraction partnerships, South Africa is suitably located to institutionalise a more effective, efficient and durable mechanism, systems and legislative framework to manage Mines more efficiently. So the failed cases of SAA and ESKOM should not serve as a discouragement to the State’s control and ownership of Mines, but as a lesson of what should be done moving forward.

Floyd Shivambu-ANC Youth League Spokesperson and Head of Political Education, Policy and Research

THE ABUSE OF DRUGS, ALCOHOL AND SUBSTANCES A COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY PHENOMENON:

THE ABUSE OF DRUGS, ALCOHOL AND SUBSTANCES A COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY PHENOMENON:

NYIKO FLOYD SHIVAMBU

On the 11^th of November 2009, the ANC YL convened a broad front of concerned formations in South Africa to develop a clear and concerted strategy to fight the abuse of alcohol, drugs and substances. We did so because the 23^rd National Congress of the African National Congress Youth League mandated all structures of the organisation to, “establish programmatic relations with Non-governmental organizations, Community-Based organizations, Trade Unions and religious formations in the campaign against drugs, alcohol and substance abuse”. Congress specifically mandated ANC YL organisational structures to “advocate for the illegalisation of alcohol advertisements in all media channels; and further advocate for and ensure the adoption of a single national legislation on the regulation of alcohol trade, distribution, and consumption in communities”.

These resolutions were guided by an understanding in Congress that drugs, alcohol and substance abuse are in essence a counter-revolutionary feature, which if not curbed in society, could reverse the gains of our democratic dispensation and progress. It does not require rocket science to notice the extent at which the abuse of drugs, alcohol and substance negatively impacts on the struggle to politically and economically emancipate the black majority and Africans in particular in our construction of a non-racial, non-sexist, democratic and united South Africa. The abuse of these intoxicating substances and alcohol in particular does not only negatively impact the wellbeing of the individuals consuming them, but distorts society and leads to other grave social ills such as crime, rapid spread of HIV/AIDS, poor health, low success rates in education, sports, work, etc.

The society we are living in experiences serious social ills; these are mainly interlinked and attributable to irresponsible consumption of alcohol and abuse of drugs and substances. The 2007 ANC 52^nd National Conference political report noted that “in the past five years the areas with the greatest number of violent crimes were identified as those that are poor and economically depressed. These areas, which account for more than 50% of violent crime in South Africa comprise only 169 police station-areas out of 1 136 police station-areas in the country. The socio-economic profile of these areas is similar. There are few recreational facilities. Unemployment is high. There are many dysfunctional families. There are many shebeens and other alcohol outlets and the levels of substance abuse are very high. Therefore, the objective of our government's Integrated Socio-Economic Development Programme is also aimed at combating crime”.

It appears from this observation that the involvement of communities and youth in criminal activities is largely a consequence of various other socio-economic realities, but also the usage of alcohol, drugs and substances. A recent study by the Medical Research Council pointed to various sad realities about alcohol abuse in South Africa. This includes the fact that “drinkers are 57 percent more likely to be HIV positive than non-drinkers”. Further than that the MRC has scientifically proven that “alcohol leads to violence and it makes one aggressive”. This is additional to the fact that many other sordid realities are alcohol related, including the facts that:

· Alcohol misuse is causally implicated in a range of chronic health problems (e.g. cirrhosis of the liver). However, many of the primary effects of alcohol misuse occur from episodes of acute alcohol intoxication.

· Acute alcohol intoxication is associated with increased mortality and morbidity arising from intentional and non-intentional injuries.

· Acute alcohol intoxication is also associated with unsafe sexual practices and increased risk of contracting a sexually transmitted disease.

· Alcohol misuse, combined with poor nutritional status, increases susceptibility to opportunistic diseases by compromising the immune system.

· The misuse of alcohol during pregnancy has been linked to fetal alcohol syndrome in infants.

· Alcohol misuse also impacts on the criminal justice system, with evidence of associations between drinking at risky levels, committing crime, or being a victim of crime.

Economically, Red-Line Marking estimates that alcohol related cost to the South African economy is around R9 billion annually due to low productivity, conflicts, injuries, and damage to property including heavy machinery. The number of lives lost due to alcohol in South Africa is not insignificant, particularly when considering the reality that more 50% of car accidents are alcohol related and 60% of pedestrians treated at hospital trauma unit after collision are found with alcohol above the permissible limit. Various other counter progress realities in South Africa are indirectly and often directly linked to the abuse of alcohol.

This happens against the fact that alcohol regulation legislations and laws in the South Africa are rarely enforced, including on the limit number of years for people who are permitted to buy alcohol. South Africa’s largest brewery admits to the fact that more than 80% of Liquor Traders and Outlets in South Africa are unlicensed and little or nothing is done with enforcement of the existent Liquor trade regulation laws. South Africa’s democracy and rule of law will gradually loose legitimacy if the laws and legislations the country passes are violated without any repercussions. What is the use of law if it will not be enforced.

These realities and many others are at the centre of the ANC YL’s campaign against the abuse of drugs, alcohol and substances, with specific emphasis on alcohol abuse. Over the next months, the ANC YL will together with other social partners advocate for the reduction of alcohol available in our communities. The campaign will include but not limited to the following:

• Community awareness campaign on the dangers of alcohol abuse.
• Call for much stricter enforcement of alcohol regulations and laws.
• Call for the illegalisation of all alcohol advertisement in all media channels.
• Call for alternate activities and programmes that will preoccupy young people in communities, particularly sports, arts and recreational activities.

This multi-pronged approach to the campaign against the abuse of alcohol will be given the necessary attention without compromising any of the components over the other. This is vital because a narrower focus on the abuse of alcohol might miss the point and not resolve the challenges and problems associated with the abuse of alcohol. Of cardinal importance in the campaign is the fact that the ANC YL has already begun to mobilise various stakeholders, including Non-Governmental Organisations (Soul City), Community Based Organisations (Ulutsha Trust), Religious formations (South African Council of Churches, National Interfaith Religious Council, Al Burhaan) and Youth Political Organisations (COSAS, SASCO and Young Communist League). In a campaign of this magnitude, we need all social partners to join hands and fight against the abuse of alcohol in our communities.

The community awareness campaign the action group against alcohol abuse will engage in will include making communities aware of the social, biological and economic dangers of alcohol abuse. These should specifically be targeted on young people as they are easy preys of alcohol abuse. All structures of the ANC YL and organisations in the action group should ensure that as many young people as possible are aware of the dangers and detriments of alcohol abuse. Unfortunately the most common public spaces in South Africa’s townships and rural villages are alcohol outlets. Such should be openly confronted by communities and alternate means of public gathering be established to accommodate everyone.

As an immediate focus to stricter enforcement of alcohol regulations and laws, we call for police action on Liquor Traders who knowingly sell alcohol and all intoxicating substances to people under the age of 18. All illegal Liquor Traders should be stopped not only through police action, but by concerned communities. As mid and long-term interventions, the stricter regulation of alcohol trade and consumption should include regulation on the hours within which alcohol should be sold. Further than that, the number of years for people permissible to buy and drink alcohol should be increased to 21, and stricter sentences reserved for those who do not comply. The regulations should include illegalisation of Liquor outlets within 500 metres of learning and teaching premises such as Crèches and Schools. Alcohol legislation should in this instance be made a national competency, because Provinces and Municipalities have neglected this vital component of social transformation.

Advertisement of alcohol in South Africa is rife and somewhat led to the development of a social norm that celebrates alcohol usage. Almost all top South Africa’s sporting codes are used by the major brewers to promote alcohol. A significant number of advertisements outdoor, on television, radio, newspapers, and magazine are alcohol related. These advertisements do not even have warnings on the dangers of alcohol and screened during family viewing periods. Most of the advertisements associate alcohol brands with success and social progress. This can never be in a society where alcohol is responsible for most of our social ills. There should be a brave, but correct political decision to illegalize all alcohol advertisement and stricter penalties set for those who do underground illegal advertisements.

In instances where young people are addicted (hooked into) to alcohol, drugs and substances, government should build and increase the capacity of State rehabilitation centers around localities with the aim of renewing addicts back to normal society. The “Sin taxes” should be directed to the rehabilitation programmes. We should utilise various sectors and departments of the State and society, notably social development, education and health to train more youth as counselors to assist in counseling programmes of young people who irresponsibly consume alcohol and abuse drugs. This could lead to effective and sustainable mentorship programmes for those who might be identified as substance abusers, especially from dysfunctional families. At all levels, structures of the ANC YL should form a programme to dissuade abuse of drugs, alcohol and substance, while placing mechanisms and methods to rehabilitate those that have been addicted.

Overall, the campaign against the abuse of alcohol should be concurrent to the campaign for the development and support of sustainable recreational activities, which will occupy young people’s free time. The introduction of new sporting codes in particularly poor communities should be intensified, whilst emphasis placed on developing the sporting and creative potential of all young people. A variety of other programmes for young people to develop and explore their creative potential could be realised through formation of Youth, Poetry and Music Clubs, Reading/Study Groups, and various other programmes.

State departments, mainly on Sports, Arts and Culture, and sporting associations should be engaged to increase more resources on sports and creative industries to assist in keeping youth occupied with recreational and creative activities. This could include a concerted programme to support the development of Soccer, Netball, Rugby, Tennis, Cricket and broad recreational and creative activities. This could divert youth from other unhealthy activities such as drugs, alcohol, crime, etc.

The ANC YL has publicly vowed to stop at nothing in ensuring that the non-racial, non-sexist and democratic society under construction is not a society of drunkards, alcoholics and drug-addicts. We therefore call on all responsible citizens, structures, organisations, trade unions, non-governmental organisations, community based organisations, religions formations and political parties to join hands in the campaign against the abuse of alcohol, substances and drugs. South Africa’s progression into a better future requires that we work together in combating the abuse of alcohol, substances and drugs. Aluta!