5 October 2001
Festival-goers,
friends,
comrades:
A place like Potch would, I think, appreciate Aristotle. It was the Greek thinker who said in his work Politics 2 500 years ago:
Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime.
Much closer to home, a privileged white South African (Anton Rupert) rose above the callous insensitivity of the apartheid times he was living in when he remarked:
If the poor don't eat, we don't sleep.
If there is more than a grain of sense in such comments, and I think there is, one is led on to accept the fact that poverty is not something peculiar to one segment of society but impacts on all of society, and can even bring it crashing down if not attended to. This gives the lie to those people, many of whom make big play of having fought their way to wealth from humble beginnings, who view poverty with callous distaste; with a sense of rejection and remote hostility which is dangerous to the stability of society.
There is no question about it. All members of society must be concerned about poverty, if only in their own vital interests, for it can indeed be the parent of revolution and crime. Fighting poverty is taking out an insurance policy against instability. Fighting poverty is building a nation. But one should not indulge in over-sentimentality. Charity might be satisfying to giver and beneficiary, but has its limitations. It was Martin Luther King who said that philanthropy is commendable, but the philanthropist must not overlook the circumstances of economic injustice which makes philanthropy necessary.
And there can surely be no serious argument against the view that economic injustice has been the mark of the world order for generations, and that economic injustice has been with us in South Africa for a very long time. The real challenge in fighting poverty is to change the structural imbalances - what King called the "circumstances of economic injustice" - which keep making some people poorer and others richer.
The whole question is being tackled these days on the world stage, sometimes in an atmosphere of disruption and protest. There are serious moves to reform crucial world bodies and to get the wealthy north into better alignment with the needy south. Although, as has been reported widely, the current world crisis may impact on the capacity of developed nations to help the poorer ones, it can be hoped that any effects, particularly on Africa, will be temporary -and there is cause to believe that thoughtful world leaders appreciate this. Maybe what will emerge from all that lies ahead will be a greater realisation on the part of the developed world that aid is not charity but enlightened self-interest; an investment in stability. And there is reason to believe that a tendency to brusque unilateralism by major powers, for instance in snubbing world conferences and collaborative efforts, will make way for a more accommodating approach of, rather, seeking allies and friends in the wake of awful recent events - events which can bind people and nations together in peaceful endeavour rather than threaten humanity. Happily, too, there is an African revival plan on the table, widely known as MAP, which is designed to tie our own continent, in stability and peace, into a meaningful relationship with the developed world, to mutual benefit. It promises to be a lodestar in the uncertain times that lie ahead.
Here inside South Africa we are seeking to change the imbalances of history, too, and I should like to share some thoughts with you on this.
I have recently argued (Sunday Times 2 September) that poverty should properly be viewed as going well beyond cash income, for real poverty can best be defined as the denial of opportunities most basic to human development, which include the right to freedom, dignity, self-esteem and respect from others. Classic first-generation human rights, e.g. against arbitrary arrest, or the right to a free trial, etc, go hand in hand with socio-economic or second-generation. It is as necessary, for the good life, to have access to nutrition and health as it is to avoid arbitrary arrest and unfair trial. Our Constitution, ambitiously but sensibly, seeks to protect both.
In South Africa we inherited the stubborn legacy of a badly run country. When democracy came to our shores in 1994, poverty abounded. Much of it was hidden away in the backwaters of the Bantustans, but it was there nonetheless. There had been no possibility for people to empower themselves to fight their way out of poverty, apart from mobilising the world against apartheid and taking up arms against an evil regime. There had been appalling mismanagement of the South African economy, notably all the mismanagement inherent in racial domination - and leaving us impoverished, with a huge deficit, an import substitution industrial strategy built on protection of uncompetitive industries, and poor diversification of an essentially mining economy. Things wer!rn to growth and sound economic policies became the reality, the new democracy battled against difficult international conditions including the 1998 Asian currency crisis, the 2001 global slowdown and, now, the vast uncertainties of pending Nato strikes following the dastardly attacks in New York and Washington.
Things have not been easy. But our constitution has sought to empower every individual to take charge of his or her own life, and it has been possible - for the first time in centuries - for the poor to have a realistic hope of a better life in South Africa.
A systematic pro-poor strategy has been adopted, aimed at broadening access to basic services such as education, water and sanitation; and widening the social security net by providing old age and other pensions to increasing numbers of people. Poverty programmes have been mainstreamed in virtually all government departments, with social assistance playing a vital role in alleviating poverty among children, women, the elderly and the disabled. Free basic levels of water and electricity are becoming a reality. An inquiry into comprehensive social security has been launched by government. As it is, more than 45% of the Budget goes to social services, a figure of which we can be proud.
Over a very wide front, there is evidence of serious government commitment to fight poverty. Only this week, we saw the Minister of Provincial and Local Government on TV speaking about the efforts of 80 municipalities to create 3 000 long-term jobs; and Mr Mufamadi went on to urge other municipalities to similar effort.
The list of government programmes to eradicate poverty is impressive:
The structural mechanisms to pursue the battle are operational, eg:
Oversight and Implementation Committees
So, with the structures in place and operating, how effective are we? What progress can we point to? I think we can use the word "steady". Comparing 1995 with 1999, households living in formal dwellings increased by 4% (from 66% to 70%), nearly 7 million people gained access to clean water, there was a 6% rise in the proportion of households using electricity for lighting, the proportion of households with a phone increased from 29% to 35% and more than 500 new clinics were built. When the Statistics SA findings for this five-year period came out recently, there was wide agreement that it had been demonstrated that things were getting better. There is reason to believe that later data will confirm the trend.
As I have argued publicly, fighting poverty will take time and short cuts should be avoided. The commitment is there. The structures are there. Government and civil society are bound together as partners in the cause. MAP is being pursued with vigour and success. The economy is holding up remarkably well under the many pressures. Increasing numbers of people are entering the labour market, when one includes the informal sector. We can say with confidence that there is steady improvement in the lot of the poor. There is no room for complacency. What has been achieved must be viewed as a spur to better effort in the future.
Combating the spread of HIV/Aids is a definite threat to the nation, and the scourge's link to poverty cannot be overemphasised. Our campaign against poverty is part of our campaign against Aids, and our country runs arguably Africa's biggest anti-Aids programme. Beating Aids is therefore part and parcel of a comprehensive health policy for all which in turn would help us in defeating poverty.
Overall, we must remember that poverty, most significantly, bears down in its severest form on the majority of our people, those for whom 1994 held the promise of a changed life. The reality is that 25.5% of African households are described as being "very poor" and 32.4% as "poor", adding up to almost 60%. That is where the main challenge lies. The work ahead remains vast. But we are getting there.