By now South Africa is well aware of the debate, which is being spearheaded by the ANCYL (read: Malema), about nationalisation. Recently the ANC in Limpopo has also backed the ANCYL’s call to nationalise certain sectors of the economy particularly the mines. Before I explain to why the debate about nationalisation is not about nationalisation let me give a brief definition of nationalisation.
“…the process of taking an industry or assets into the public ownership of a national government or state.”
History tells us that nationalisation does not work, regardless of how you package it and the ANCYL, I would like to believe, knows that nationalisation has not worked, does not work and will never work. So why does the ANCYL keep punting the big issue?
Government policy does not suggest nationalisation and this is affirmed by various statements made by various ANC leaders, both within the party and in Government. The Minister of Mineral Resources Ms Susan Shabangu said "My position is that there are challenges and I'm convinced that nationalisation, it's not an option for South Africa." On another occasion the Minister said nationalisation would not happen “in my lifetime”. So why does the ANCYL keep punting the big issue?
The way I see this issue, is that the ANCYL is asking “why, with all of South Africa’s mineral wealth are people still struggling?” Our streets should be paved with gold. To quote the Freedom Charter “the people shall share in the country’s wealth.” Whilst the Freedom Charter contains undeniable truths it must also be read and interpreted in the context it was written in. The truths remain.
If we look at Dubai at face value (disregard the population size, and other factors. I am using the Dubai model at the most simple of levels.) Residents in Dubai are reaping the rewards of their oil deposits. Revenue from oil is pumped back (excuse the pun) into the economy—residents pay little to no tax, new cities are being built; infrastructure improvements are made from oil revenue. This is what the ANCYL is asking for. If we bring things closer to home and we look at the Royal Bafokeng Nation, in the North West Province, which is supported by revenue from mining. That is what the ANCYL is asking for.
The chattering class, the social networks and “the media” have chosen to be selective in their hearing and all they have chosen to hear this whole debate is “we want to nationalise the mines.”
The ANCYL has said yes to nationalisation and other parties have said no to nationalisation, without offering alternatives. Here is an alternative: the ANCYL should be lobbying Government to expedite the mandate of the state mining company, the African Exploration Mining and Finance Corporation (AEMFC).
The ANCYL’s calls for nationalisation are not as simple as portrayed. The story of it being a ploy to bankroll struggling black mining firms does not hold water and should not be entertained.
We need to debate the ANCYL’s reasons maturely and not like kids on the playground, who merely point fingers and the one with the loudest voice wins.
Interesting viewpoint. However, I suspect we'll have to leave the ANCYL out of the debate because it's difficult to debate someone who refuses to entertain any positions but their own. Dubai is an interesting case study. Perhaps we can do something similar with the natural gas under the Karoo - just as long as we don't let Khulubuse get his hands on it.
ReplyDeleteThank you! It's not like our current model in mining is working. We need a change and honestly I'm willing to try til we find something that works instead of sticking with something because of scare tactics from people that have no proposals of better models
ReplyDelete