The Congress of South African Trade Unions held a scheduled meeting of its Central Executive Committee (CEC) from 23-25 August 2010, attended by National Office Bearers, the leadership of affiliated unions and provincial structures.

Public service workers' strike

The CEC committed its full support to the public service workers' strike and agreed to mobilise all COSATU unions in solidarity action. See the statement (below). The National Office Bearers will be joining the workers' marches, which are taking place today around the country. Meanwhile we continue to urge the government to return to the Bargaining Council with a new offer capable of settling the dispute that has led to the strike.

Today, 26 August 2010, our affiliated unions are submitting notices for permission to take secondary strike action, a process which takes seven days, and will be on strike a week today, unless a settlement has been reached by then, as we all hope.

The political situation

The CEC held an in-depth discussion of the current political situation. It assessed what progress has been made in implementing the resolutions of the ANC 2007 Polokwane Conference and the ANC 2009 election manifesto, in particular its commitments in the five priority areas:

• Decent work as the basis for all economic policy

• Rural development agrarian reform & food security

• Universal, quality, affordable education

• Health care for all through a National Health Insurance

• Combating of corruption and crime

The Polokwane Conference was nothing short of a revolt by ANC delegates against practices, policies and a leadership, which had deviated from the movement's historic policy perspectives, democratic organisational culture and collective traditions. The outgoing leadership's organisational style was regarded as individualistic and elitist, abusive of government power and as having imposed inappropriate policies, which had failed to take into account the views or needs of the people.

Organised workers, as ordinary members and leaders of ANC branches, played a leading role in this revolt. Delegates articulated views which had long been advanced by many in the ANC, COSATU and the SACP.

At a political level, Polokwane was a basic battle against:

- The closing of political space, and shifting of power from the ANC to government leaders and bureaucrats, and the marginalisation of the ANC in policy formulation

- Marginalisation of Alliance and suppression of the views of COSATU and the SACP

- Parliament being used as a rubber stamp by the Executive

- Marginalisation of the people, reducing them to voting cattle, and "wheeling them out for the celebration of historic dates" (Fanon)

- Abuse of state institutions to advance factional interests and illegally pursue opponents of the power elite

- Politics of fear and ‘big brother'. Inability to have open discussions in meetings. Intrusion into people's privacy.

- Corruption and nepotism, abusing positions of power for the accumulation of wealth, especially through government tenders, blurring the lines between political leadership and business interests

- Use of state power to distribute patronage and appointment of people without capacity to lead transformation, toleration of mediocrity and sidelining of talented individuals for factional reasons.

- Culture of using media, including the SABC, to selectively leak information to sideline and publicly try opponents

At the socio-economic level, Polokwane delegates sought to reverse the impact of:

- Neoliberal economic policies promoted by Gear, and an elite pact with big capital which deliberately excluded labour and mass movements

- The job loss bloodbath in the public and private sector

- Narrow BEE politics which affirmed the elite, but left the masses as disempowered as before

- Undermining of the state's role in economy, and pursuing the mantra of a slim state.

- Cutback in services and personnel

- Slow progress in addressing poverty

- Deepening inequality

- Casualisation and the worsening quality of employment.

- Redistribution to the rich, which we said made the first ten years of freedom a decade which primarily benefited capital.

- 350 000 people had died whilst the head of government and Minister of Health adopted a denialism approach towards HIV/Aids and sending mixed signals against the policies of the ANC.

On International policy there was unhappiness that:

- South Africa had not been taking a sufficiently principled stand on various issues, of both human rights, and economic justice

- Our role in the region and Africa was problematic and we were attempting to export government's neoliberal policies through NEPAD

- We were being seen to be too closely aligned to the imperialist powers, c.f. Bush's statement- ‘Mbeki is our point man in Africa'

The Polokwane Resolutions sought to address a number of these issues, and the new leadership was given a mandate for change, under the banner of "iANC ibuyile" (ANC has returned to its members). Following Polokwane, the Election Manifesto took up a number of key proposals, and prioritised the 5 areas for the new government.

The CEC discussed each of the challenges and made an assessment of where we are in relation to each of them. The CEC concluded that the post-Polokwane period has been highly contested and that despite some important gains, we are far from achieving the bold vision set out by ANC delegates in the 52nd conference, and that we run the risk of moving even further away from that vision in some areas mentioned above.

The CEC further concluded that if we, as the broad liberation movement, don't act decisively, we are heading rapidly in the direction of a full-blown predator state, in which a powerful, corrupt and demagogic elite of political hyenas increasingly controls the state as a vehicle for accumulation.

On paper, Polokwane and the manifesto promised key advances towards an economic policy based on decent work, proposals for a new growth path, a new industrial policy, national health insurance, comprehensive social protection, comprehensive rural development strategy and an assault on crime and corruption.

But progress on these areas has been very mixed, and on the whole disappointing. The centrepiece of the new economic policy, the Growth Path document, couldn't be agreed at the July Cabinet Lekgotla, and has been referred to a Cabinet Committee. There are no time frames sets for this process; we fear that it may hang in there forever.

The main advances have been:

• Extensive consultations on a number of critical areas, including joint management of the transition and around cabinet appointments,

• Encouragement of a robust engaging parliament that holds accountable,

• An agreement to extend the Child Support Grant from 15-18 years and to reduce the Old Age Pension from 65 to 60 for men;

• Introduction of a progressive industrial strategy, IPAP2;

• The acceptance, at least in principle, of the adoption of a new growth path to guide economic policy and

• The efforts to unite society in a new battle against HIV/AIDS.

There was a Honeymoon period post-Polokwane, particularly in the Alliance, but a range of problematic agendas, particularly on economic policy, has countered the gains. The emergence of a ‘new tendency' focused on taking over the ANC and using access to the state for a selfish accumulation agenda, disrupted the emerging unity of purpose, which has led to a paralysis in both the Alliance and government.

The Alliance is unable to convene an Alliance summit for fear of an implosion, as a result of fundamental differences on the question of where the power lies. This is seen in the political centre debates and government's inability to adopt an overarching development strategy or growth path, or sufficiently support its new industrial strategy as a result of disagreements, including on macroeconomic policy, which are worsened by lack of decisive leadership. This puts both the Alliance and country at a cross roads.

.

The concrete impact for working people, post-Polokwane, has been far from encouraging. The loss of 1.1 million jobs since the beginning of 2009 has led to deepening poverty for the 5.5 million family members of those who have lost their jobs.

The COSATU General Secretary's Ruth First Memorial Lecture last week captured all the damning statistics, which showed how inequalities continue to deepen, reflected in all areas of society, while we continue to see a growing level of profits and benefits to the capitalist class in both absolute and relative terms.

In the short term no major recovery in job creation is likely. IPAP2 is likely to be frustrated by a conservative macroeconomic policy framework that has not been adjusted to the new realities. As a result IPAP2 will remain a paper tiger, as it will lack support and resources and will in any case take some time to bite.

As a result of all this, amongst our working-class constituency, there is a degree of despondency. People are beginning to question our strategies. There is the danger that the 2nd decade of freedom, like the 1st, will belong to capital and not the workers and the poor in economic terms.

We face a serious crisis of legitimacy amongst workers if we can't demonstrate concrete gains in worker rights and socio-economic progress ahead of next year's local government elections. Not only COSATU but also the Alliance as a whole will be in serious trouble. A shift towards the opposition in local government elections could be used as a platform to make gains nationally in 2014.

The paradox is that despite these pressures, and this looming crisis, COSATU is an organisation, which is admired by more South Africans than at any time in our history.

We wield considerable moral authority amongst the working class and middle strata, increasingly even in the capitalist class and some opposition parties, albeit for opportunistic reasons at times. This gives us a degree of leverage and power in society.

But we can't rely on moral authority alone; otherwise we will gain influence but lose power. This influence is society needs to be bolstered both by our own organisational power, and broader organisational coalitions, which address the challenges outlined.

This moral authority is not uncontested. The media is full of negative propaganda about the role of trade unions in marginalising the unemployed, making unrealistic demands, blocking the wage subsidy, undermining inflation target policy, etc. No doubt the tempo of these attacks will increase as always with the public sector strike.

What is to be done?

1. Build a strong and focused organisation. We are currently undertaking an assessment of COSATU, which reveals significant weaknesses, including the lack of internal capacity to drive a systematic Organisational Development (OD) strategy in affiliates. Many manufacturing unions are unable to breach the 40% ceiling of membership as a basis to consolidate into one federation. We shall establish a dedicated capacity in the secretariat of COSATU to drive the OD and build the federation's engines. This capacity will help us with much needed capacity to sustain our political intervention in the affiliated unions.

2. Our new Growth Path document will be launched on 14 September at the University of Johannesburg. This will not only be about showing the unsustainability of the current apartheid-inherited growth path but to put serious policy proposals that we hope will be engaged on to enrich our document.

3. The COSATU post-World Cup Declaration is gaining broad support, and we need to create a bigger profile for this by convening a platform of organisations to focus on the issues raised in the Declaration. We can use this to unite South Africa around a positive campaign for social renewal.

4. We will launch a dynamic ‘mother of all living wage campaigns', which will capture the imagination of the country on an unprecedented scale in 2011. The shape and structure of income, wages, and inequality must look completely different to the ones contained in the growth path statistics once this campaign has taken effect.

5. On the other hand, we are going to come under pressure from growing sentiment in government that employers and ourselves must sign a social accord - a social contract on wages and prices, as is often the case in societies facing economic crisis. This raises some key issues which suggest that such an agreement would be a non-starter:

• Who would we sign with? Labour is relatively organised. But who sits on the other side? Business is too fragmented. The MLC can't cut a deal and bring all business to the party. BUSA doesn't hold weight. BLSA is seen by some as a clique of Anglo American.

• Business and government will make us deliver on wages, and abuse labour broking to drive wages down further. But they won't be able to deliver on prices - given the extent of price collusion in the economy. Any deal on wages, suppressing wages to the level of inflation, will constitute class peace and entrench the wage structure, existing inequalities and wage gaps. We won't be able to reverse that trend, if we abandon our battle to fight it now.

• If we did sign such an agreement, five years down the line, workers would create a new Federation, once they saw the impact it had on their lives.

• How does the ANC or government hope to drive a social accord, when they are unable to negotiate a pact and a programme for transformation in the Alliance?

• If we are clear that such a proposal is a non-starter, we need to be able to clearly explain our objections, and put forward a coherent alternative. This means inter alia that we need to be able to put forward a comprehensive proposal for the reorganisation of wages and incomes, within the parameters of an alternative macroeconomic framework, and development strategy. These elements of our growth path proposal should therefore be developed.

In terms of our political strategy, we are in a ‘rather hard place'. If our 2015 strategy has not worked for us, do we have other tools to take us forward? In the run up to 2011, we must avoid being too predictable: articulating our criticisms, and mobilising the masses, then calling on members to vote. We need an alternative approach. But what is that alternative approach? Our members will discuss these questions moving towards the Central Committee in March 2011.

We must look at what combination of levers we can use to engage, but also how we can do this differently. We require a strategy which combines our tried and tested approach of engaging in all the different sites of power, and mobilising our mass base, with a much more assertive drive to build powerful social coalitions, which mobilise constituencies which are our natural allies, but have been relatively dormant for various reasons, linked to an engagement with our strategic allies. Moving forward we shall:

• Hold a bilateral meeting with the SACP to share with them our thoughts on the current situation and what we believe should be done. In addition we shall demand of our vanguard party of the working class, the SACP, that it address weaknesses we identified in our discussion including its visibility and capacity.

• We shall hold a major conference with the civil society formations, on a date to be agreed, to share with them our thoughts of the current situation and what we believe should be done. In addition we shall open space on civil society to improve both our proposals for a growth path and the post-FIFA World Cup declaration. Further we shall hold major meetings with the South African Football Association and the religious formations to discuss issues of common concern.

6. Anti-corruption campaign

We shall intensify the anti-corruption campaign, going beyond moral condemnation to dealing with the systemic issues, which reproduce corruption. We need a systematic programme to fight this cancer.

We must develop a programme with civil society and allies and host a Summit to put the predatory elite on the back foot, delivering a strategic blow against them, including for example taking legal action to reverse the outrageous Arcelor Mittal deal. We will build a powerful anti-corruption institution of civil society ‘corruption watch', with a team of lawyers, accountants and auditors to conduct preliminary investigations, and process these with the relevant authorities.

7. The struggle for socialism

We must build a platform on the struggle for socialism and must clarify theoretically what this means? Our response can't be the same as that of the ultra left that says forget about conditions today - "storm the Bastille".

In our last congress we theorised the relationship between the NDR and the struggle for socialism. We believe that the NDR is the most direct route to socialism, meaning that only a successful NDR holds the possibility for a socialist future. This we say without believing in a mechanical two stageism.

We must continue push back the capitalist domination in delivery of basic services today, in line with the SACP slogan that says ‘socialism is the future; build it now'. Our assessment is that the NDR is at a crossroads itself, and therefore all socialists need to contest the direction of this NDR if we are to advance the prospects for socialism. But we need a coherent programme to take the connections between these two struggles forward.

8. Where to for the Alliance?

The Congress mandate is for an Alliance Pact now. But we have reached a stalemate on the Pact and the issue of the Alliance as strategic political centre. These conditions will lead to a return to the marginalisation of the Alliance. Conditions are different from 2001, when the dominant centre in the ANC was trying to force the left out of the Alliance. But the one common feature with that period is that the Alliance is again dysfunctional: the centre cannot hold, and Alliance Summits are ‘no longer possible'. What is the way out of this? Our members again are called upon to discuss this state of affairs including strategies to unlock the stalemate.

We shall hold special meetings of COSATU locals, socialist forums and provincial shop stewards councils throughout the month of September to discuss these challenges.

9. National Health Insurance

We are mobilising for the immediate introduction of the NHI. We shall join forces with civil society and alliance to demand addressing of the current two-tier health system - one for the rich and the powerful who enjoy first class services in the private clinics and hospitals and the other for the overwhelming majority who must face the humiliating third-coach conditions in the public hospitals.

Local government elections

The CEC reaffirmed its support for the ANC in the 2011 local government elections but acknowledged that there will be major problems in some of our poorer communities to convince voters to stay with the ANC. The CEC adopted a programme of action to mobilise our membership. It was agreed however that we would not give the ANC a blank cheque and would refuse to campaign or support candidates known to corrupt or lazy or just because they succeed in manipulating the ANC internal processes.

ANC National General Council

We shall seek a further bilateral meeting with the ANC to iron out some of the outstanding issues, including those discussed at this CEC meeting. We are encouraged by the frankness of the draft discussion papers but we believe that none of the papers go far enough in confronting the challenges the ANC is facing. The COSATU CEC Political Commission is to meet on 8 September to discuss the ANC's NGC discussion papers and formulate a programme around which delegates can intervene.

Labour brokers

The CEC confirmed its resolution to mobilise for a strike under Section 77 of the LRA on 7 October 2010 - International Day on Decent Work - if the proposals of the Minister of Labour do not sufficiently address our demand for a total ban of the labour brokering system. On this day, irrespective of the conclusion of this discussion on what happens to labour brokers, we shall be holding mass demonstrations throughout the country joining our labour colleagues everywhere in the world demanding decent work.

At recent meetings the Minister of Labour appeared to suggest that his intention was to "effectively" ban labour brokers without actually stating this explicitly. However, drafts of the LRA and other labour law amendment bills reveal serious drafting errors, which could in many instances seriously undermine gains made previously.

According to information leaked to City Press, the Bills were tabled in Cabinet only for them to be rejected for substantial redrafting. This has implications for the likely content of the legislation but also for time frames, since it is clear that the Bills are not likely go to Parliament in 2010. Some key substantive problems include:

1. Section 198 regulating "temporary employment services" is deleted.

The concern here is that the current section 198 does not have the effect of permitting labour broking. It in fact does place some restrictions (albeit insufficient) on the practice of labour broking, such as the extension of bargaining council agreements to labour brokers. Accordingly merely deleting it just has the effect of allowing it to continue to in an even more unregulated manner.

2. New definition of "Employee" under section 213.

"Any person who is employed by or who works for an employer and who receives or is entitled to receive any remuneration and who works under the direction and supervision of an employer."

This is a much narrower definition of employee than the current definition. The limitation to direct supervision creates problems since many forms of atypical labour (i.e. not limited to labour broking) either do not involve direct supervision or receive supervision from an intermediary. Examples include the owner-driver system in the road freight industry.

3. New definition of "Employer" under section 213.

"Any person, institution or organisation, including government who employs and provides work to an employee, directly supervises, remunerates or tacitly or expressly undertakes to remunerate such employee for services rendered by such employee."

Again the reference to direct supervision creates similar problems as with the definition of "employee". However, we have additional concerns in relation to the fact that more recently establishing a person's status, as an "employee" has been made easier. It is establishing who is the "employer", which is growing increasingly more difficult.

Protection of Information Bill

COSATU generally accepts that apartheid security legislation should be replaced, and would accept that safeguards are needed to protect specific categories of information (provided they are very narrowly defined) for the purposes of protection of safety and security.

We accept that there is a need to address the problem of "information peddling", considering COSATU's own experience with the "Browse Mole Report".

The federation however cannot support this bill and has made written and oral submissions to the Ad Hoc Committee considering the Bill in Parliament. Our concerns include:

1. The Bill covers a far too broad range of information that can be classified on the grounds that it is considered to affect the "national interest", which is widely defined to include such problematic elements as:

• Matters relating to the advancement of the public good

• Matters relating to the protection and preservation of anything owned or maintained by the State

• Pursuit of ... economic growth, free trade, a stable monetary system and sound international relations.

• Significant political and economic relations with international organisations and foreign governments.

This is further expanded to include "commercial information" that would include:
• Information whose disclosure would "prejudice" commercial, business, financial or industrial interests causing such effects as:
a. Financial loss or competitive or reputational injury

b. Disclosure of trade secrets, confidential processes, operations, styles of work, source of income, profits, losses or expenditures

2. Classification of information extends beyond what us strictly necessary for the purposes of safety and security, including information, which would affect "commercial, business, financial or industrial interests.... or cause financial loss or competitive or reputational injury". A key concern relates to the potential these provisions create to suppress information on corruption and irregularities.

3. A person wanting access to classified information must apply to the same HOD who classified the information to declassify it. This raises concerns about conflict of interest. Appeals against the HOD would have to be lodged with the Ministry under which s/he falls.

4. Additional problematic responsibilities may be imposed on trade union representatives who would be obliged to report a worker (or return classified information) where such a worker seeks advice about possible irregularities affecting a classified matter. This could make whistle blowing far more dangerous.

The CEC agreed that the bill must be withdrawn and completely reconstituted.

ANC NGC Media Paper

The CEC considered an ANC NGC discussion paper - "Media transformation, ownership and diversity". It was agreed that there are serious problems with the South African media. One of the biggest is the concentration of ownership within the print media, around 95% of which is owned by just three big, wealthy companies - Independent Newspapers, Avusa and Naspers, which all reflect the outlook and prejudices of the capitalist class that own them - pro-big business, the ‘free market' and private enterprise.

The CEC agreed with the ANC paper "there can be no real media freedom without diversity in ownership... The Media is a contested terrain and therefore not neutral, but reflects the ideological battles and power relations based on race, class and gender in our society. It cannot claim that its role is merely to reflect interests - rather it helps to shape those interests."

The meeting also endorsed the ANC view that "media freedom... is a cornerstone for any democracy to flourish. All of us have a responsibility to defend media freedom and editorial independence from any form of compulsion, whether it be political economic or commercial... Freedom of expression is in the self-interest of all those who believe in democracy."

There are however problems with how to deal with cases where the media goes beyond merely exercising their constitutional right to express a view, but resorts to using lies, defamation, distortion, selective reporting, unsubstantiated ‘facts' from anonymous ‘sources', deliberate omission of relevant facts, etc.

The present system for dealing with complaints against such abuses are the Press Council of South Africa, the Press Ombudsman and the Press Appeals Panel, which, in their own words, is "a self-regulatory mechanism set up by the print media." They have not been effective in combating the problem, because they are underfunded, understaffed and too closely linked to the media industry.

There is therefore a case for looking at alternative bodies to provide the public with ways to defend themselves against unfair or inaccurate reporting. The proposed Media Appeals Tribunal is one such proposal, but the CEC agreed that it could not be supported until it was much clearer how it would be constituted. Studies should be conducted into how the problem is dealt with in other countries, and how the independence of such bodies can be safeguarded.

COSATU would oppose any tribunal that could be used to intimidate the media into not exposing crime, corruption, incompetence or waste of public money. On the contrary that is what the media should be encouraged to do.

SABC

The CEC discussed the state of affairs at the SABC, which has moved from bad to worse. The Chair of the SABC, Dr. Ben Ngubane, and GCEO, Solly Mokoetle have persistently undermined the SABC Board and ignored and overturned its decisions. Since May 2010 board meetings have been constantly cancelled leading to a situation where Board members have declared a "vote of no confidence" in the Chair.

COSATU participated in a very active and transparent public nomination process for the new Board, which in general provided us with a competent set of Board members with the requisite integrity and skills to hold the confidence of civil society.

After eight months in office, however, the Board has not been able to draft a critical turn-around strategy for the corporation. The lack of board meetings have meant none of the policy issues addressed to the SABC by the independent production sector - or the unions - have been addressed.

Without a functioning Board, the public will continue to see the unabated strategy of imported shows on their screens, the independent production sector will continue to shrink alongside SABC's income, the morale of staff at the SABC will continue to drop, and we will see the return of the SABC being used for factional political purposes, as already reflected in the blatantly biased coverage of the public service strike, and the way it reports the issues around the SABC board itself.

Forex amnesty

COSATU has been asked for its view on a proposed amnesty for those who have contravened foreign exchange control laws by taking money offshore illegally. In return for a fine, they would be able to bring that money back to South Africa. The CEC agreed that we should oppose this idea and mobilise a campaign against it.

International

The CEC received reports on the International Labour Conference and the World Congress of the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC). Concern was expressed as to whether any progress has been made in transforming ITUC, which remains dominated by unions from the wealthy Northern countries. Even though their policies are sometimes is progressive on paper, their practises tend to reflect the policies of their governments, which are conservative and protectionist. There has been no serious attempt to address the global inequalities between the rich, developed Northern states and the poor, developing Southern states.

25th Anniversary

The CEC adopted a programme to celebrate COSATU's historic 25th anniversary on 4 December 2010. Provincial rallies will lead to a massive national rally on 4 December 2010 in Gauteng. Further details are to follow.

COSATU in solidarity with public service workers

The Central Executive Committee of the Congress of South African Trade Unions has declared its total support for the strike by 1.3 million public service workers and demands that the government moves immediately to make a new offer which can lead to a rapid conclusion to the strike.

COSATU warns that it will not allow a defeat of the public sector workers. We know the full political and economic implications if the public sector workers lose this battle. In order to ensure that the strike does not fail COSATU makes the following calls:

1. On all public sector workers to intensify the strike. We need a total shut down of the public sector until the government comes to its senses and accedes to the legitimate demands of the working class.

2. All COSATU affiliated unions will embark on solidarity action in support of the demands of the public sector workers. In this regard, every COSATU union shall on the 26 August submit notices to their respective employers that will allow them legal right to embark secondary strike. Our members and their communities (working class) are the ones on the receiving end of the current situation. It is workers' kids who have not been at school since the beginning of the strike; it is the workers and their families that rely on the functioning public hospitals. The rich, which includes the elite in society, are hardly affected by the strike. Their kids are in private schools where teachers are better paid. They go to private hospitals to access healthcare. We warn that the strike will also be protected and take as long as necessary until the government as the employer accede to the legitimate demands of the workers.

3. COSATU calls on all members of POPCRU and SAPU and all police and other law enforcement officials not to allow the employer to use them to crush the strike. We certainly are not making a call on them to allow lawlessness. Our call on them is that they exercise maximum caution and avoid unnecessary conflict with workers whose only sin is to exercise their right to picket and demonstrate in support of their demands.

4. We call on civil society to support the strike and not to cross the picket lines. Volunteering is equal to scabbing and scabbing does deepen frustrations and anger amongst workers. This is what normally creates violence between workers on strike and those seen by workers to be taking their jobs and undermining their legitimate demands.

The federation regrets the hardship which the strike has caused but insists that the responsibility for this must be firmly placed at the door of the government, which could have prevented the strike in the first place, and could still now end the strike, by coming forward with a serious new proposal. Secondly government has refused to sign an agreement on minimum service level agreements for the past 16 years. This would have allowed clarity with an agreed number of workers to continue providing a service in case of essential services.

Government has for all these years refused to sign so that it can unilaterally declare most of the public sector workers as essential services whilst declaring that the is no support for strike action by its employees. We recall on the government even at this hour to sign an agreement with the public sector workers so that there is skeleton staff in areas where workers provide an essential service.

The federation also reiterates its strong insistence that strike must be conducted in a peaceful, lawful and orderly manner and condemns any acts of violence and intimidation by anyone involved in the strike, including its own members. We also disassociate with the irresponsible utterances by some of our leaders that have only served to alienate us from the public. Our demands are legitimate and enjoy an overwhelming support from the public.

Union pickets have been mainly very peaceful, but striking workers exercising their legal rights have come under attack from the police with intimidation, rubber bullets and arrests. What makes us even more angry is that during the FIFA world cup police were trained in civilised ways of crowd control. Once their more important visitors left, they have now revert back to the old apartheid style ‘skiet and donder' with trigger happy police shooting at workers at their backs. This we will take up with the leadership of government at the highest level.

We submitted a letter to the Minister of PSA on 12 August in line with the LRA authorising legal pickets by members and supporters. We are entitled to establish the legal pickets in public places outside workplaces. The police have no right to disperse pickets outside workplaces.

The unions are deeply disturbed by the outright lies that government has told the people of South Africa that there is an 8.5% wage increase offer that has been presented to the unions. No offer was tabled at the PSCBC, a democratic institution set up for negotiations. Government has now decided to negotiate with the media instead of trade unions admitted to the council. The unions latest statement issued by Government stating that in "real terms" government is offering public service unions an 8,5% increase, is pure misinformation aimed at causing confusion.

The Government has added the Pay Progression - an old and hard fought gain by the unions - on to the 7% salary increase offer to claim this 8,5% increase. The Government must explain to the public and workers that, the general salary increase for 2010/2011 is only 7% as contained in the draft agreement. Labour is demanding a general salary increase of 8.6%.

The pay progression which is 1% for teachers and 1, 5% for other public service employees, has been in place since the signing of Collective Agreement No 8 of 2003. It is also not automatic as workers first have to undergo performance evaluation before they are awarded the increase.

Government calculates pay progression as a wage increase knowing full well that not everyone qualifies and benefits from it and it is a flawed system that is open to abuse by the supervisors. This system is a performance-based system which was first unilaterally implemented during the 2001/2002 financial year by the government as employer. This performance based system is part of the existing conditions of service, which was not part of the 2010 negotiations and had never been part of any negotiation recently.

The system gives rise to extreme unhappiness amongst public service workers and annually when evaluations are completed government is flooded with grievances by disgruntled public service workers. This unilateral system is not an objective tool and bonuses are allocated on favouritism, nepotism and blatant unfairness. Further, it is not possible for everyone to qualify as a limited budget is made available and the DPSA policy also limits the different categories of bonus allocations.

We would like to state categorically that the Government's offer at the Bargaining Council is a 7% general salary increase, R 700 housing allowance and 1 July as the implementation date.

We urge the employer to refrain from confusing the public through this misinformation. This wage impasse will not be solved by misinformation but by the parties concerned working together in good faith.

We also demand that SABC News apologise for broadcasting inaccurate news to the public. The public broadcaster must, at all material times, provide the public with accurate information and not allow itself to be used by government to spin. Government's unashamed lies show the contempt which this government has for the citizens of this country and the crisis of leadership we have as a country if our own government lies to the public without a sense of shame.

We have noticed that despite government pleading poverty it has enough money to buy full page adverts to peddle its lies and also has money to transfer patience to the private hospitals. With the private health receiving 2/3 of all money spent on health to provide services to 15% of the population, private hospitals are helping government to derive big profits. Special courts were set up for the World Cup but now they are being used to punish striking workers when they should be established permanently to fight crime that is affecting everyone.

These are workers who are employed to serve the public and they are ready and willing to perform their duties as long as government gives them what they deserve which is an 8.6% wage increase and a R1000 monthly housing allowance. A government with serious socio-economic challenges will think twice before spending millions of rands buying tickets on a month-long soccer tournament and buy acres of space in the media to peddle lies and mislead the public.

The government ministers who deny workers their meagre wage increase have spent millions of rands on luxury vehicles and are living caviar lifestyles at the expense of the poor majority that is dependent on government services. This is a case of the shepherd feeding himself forgetting about the lambs.

We call on government to respect the democratic institutions and present a new offer, if there is one at the PSCBC, not tell lies in the media. The ministers are wasting time playing games because they are not suffering and their children are not forced to use public hospitals and schools. The entire government continues to fail the poor South Africans by failing to provide the necessary leadership to resolve the impasse.

Finally COSATU repeats its demand that the government is responsible to end the strike by bringing a new offer to the table.