Last Friday, the Thabo Mbeki Foundation held an event to celebrate International Women’s Day. The patron, Thabo Mbeki, reiterated his call for a national dialogue.
He urged the women delegates to prepare themselves for the dialogue which, he said, would be the most important event of this calendar year.
Since the idea was first mooted by businessman Mcebisi Jonas, Mbeki has championed it among his ANC comrades and, importantly, to government. As a result of his push, President Cyril Ramaphosa’s government has agreed that the outcome of the dialogue should be binding to the government of the day.
In brief, the dialogue seeks to envision the SA we want and deserve, and the SA we don’t want and deserve after 30 years of all-race democracy.
Mbeki was upbeat at the event. However, the facts on the ground paint a different, disturbing picture.
Since Ramaphosa’s announcement that the dialogue would be held this year, progress has been painfully slow. There are now real fears that the idea may slip off the radar completely. Differences include the role of the government in organising the dialogue, who appoints eminent people to guide its work, and what constitutes its agenda.
In the past few weeks, the government has made a few concessions. These include agreeing that it will take advice from civil society — including foundations such as Mbeki’s and those named after other luminaries — on the names to be considered for the eminent persons group. This is an important concession. After all, the government doesn’t enjoy trust among the populace. Instead, civil society and business are trusted more by South Africans.
In the past few weeks, however, the dialogue has disappeared from the public’s attention. Other topics are dominating the public discourse. For example, the attention has been hogged by disputes between our government and its American counterpart, and the launch of the G20 and B20 events.
Despite all the controversy stemming from boycotts by the US government, the B20 and G20 were successfully launched early this month. Both events are costly undertakings and most likely to be funded from similar sources: the government and private sector.
The national dialogue, on the other hand, has yet to get off the ground in earnest. This is unfortunate, but not a train smash. It needs to return to the public’s imagination. Its mission is too important to defer. It shouldn’t be allowed to slip into oblivion.
A series of measures is required to rebuild confidence and breathe new life in it.
First, as the main player, the government needs to announce the funds it has earmarked for the dialogue; second, the government needs to announce the names of the eminent people it has agreed to with civil society; and third, the government must make clear that it is participating in, but not driving, the national dialogue.
For the dialogue to be inclusive and national, it has to be properly resourced in terms of personnel and funding. The private sector, government and international donors should ensure this happens.
After 30 years of democracy, South Africans are clear about the SA they don’t want. The dialogue is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to paint a picture of the SA they want and deserve. They should be allowed this say.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.