WeekendAnalysis
THE WELCOME
word ‘marquee’ had not visited the lips of many until the year 2003, when government caused a national uproar by purchasing this large tent for the first ever Smart Partnership Dialogue to be staged in the country. The amount of E8 million spent on this tent, which it was to later emerge was even second hand, is what brought curiosity to many as to what was this foreign object known as a ‘marquee’ that government had bought with taxpayers money. A conversation began even before the dialogue was convened. People soon got to know what a ‘marquee’ is.
In that year, there was hardly a day when the country’s newspapers did not carry an article on the ‘marquee’. Admittedly, this should not have been the ideal start to what was meant to address the country’s challenges, among which was corruption and excessive expenditure within and by government. This led to the forum being described as an expensive party, even before it kicked off. Everyone though looked forward to seeing the ‘marquee’!
The Smart Partnership Dialogue, which had three components; international, national and regional, might have had its own shortfalls, mainly being considered an expensive talk shop, but at least it got the nation talking among themselves. The international forum saw the country either hosting the dialogue, with attendees consisting of heads of State, government leaders and key stakeholders from other countries, or being invited by other countries that were the hosts.
DIALOGUE
The international dialogue rotated among countries, such as Malaysia, Zimbabwe and Eswatini. It got Eswatini sharing experiences and finding solutions with other countries, to problems that they might have gone through themselves.
The national forum was for emaSwati and the host was His Majesty the King. It is not always where emaSwati have a platform to directly engage with the King. Being in the same room with the King for more than one day and dialoguing with him on various issues was phenomenal.
And then there was regional platform where the dialogue would be held in all four regions, which saw people at grassroots level engaging with leaders of government and other key institutions. Who still remembers that encounter the between the then Prime Minister (PM), Sibusiso Barnabas Dlamini and Mphandlana Shongwe of the proscribed People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO)? It was in 2010 during the regional dialogue in Manzini, where Shongwe had been formally invited by government, through senior member of the royal family Prince Masitsela, who at the time was Manzini Regional Administrator. The fact that Shongwe had been invited to the dialogue was significant on its own. But the fact that Shongwe honoured the invite was humongous also. An even greater gesture was that government had also extended an invitation to Mario Masuku, the PUDEMO President at the time. Although Masuku did not personally honour the invite, he sent a representative, Jerome Shongwe, which was also a milestone.
PROSCRIBED
Mind you, PUDEMO had already been proscribed two years earlier by the very same administration that was now inviting the organisation’s leaders to a dialogue platform. As for the issues over which to dialogue, one would argue that despite politics not making the top of the list, at first, at least the willingness to engage was there, which was the fundamental starting point. Rome was not built in a day, so goes the archaic adage that acts as a reminder of the fact that it takes time and patience to create something big and great.
I was there at S&B Restaurant in Matsapha when, during tea break of the Manzini Regional Dialogue, Barnabas and Mphandlana joyfully shook hands, exchanged pleasantries and shared a few jokes. It was Barnabas who asked the then head of the Smart Partnership Hub, Martin Dlamini, who is Times of Eswatini Managing Editor, to call Mphandlana who quickly sprung from his seat and followed Martin to the ex-PM. On arrival, he smilingly shook hands with Barnabas who returned the favour before they were joined by then Finance Minister Majozi
Sithole. Interviewed later, Mphandlana said he had been greatly humbled by the PM’s invitation but said he hoped for a more formal invitation, where they would discuss national issues of concern. in his own words, Mphandlana said: “The PM asked me to come so that we could greet each other and I must congratulate him for what he did because he’s Swazi and I’m also Swazi.
“If there was friendship that was developed between the PM and I here today, then it should continue. We exchanged greetings, and he thanked me for attending the dialogue.
CRACKED
‘‘We then cracked a few jokes. He asked me to join Tinkhundla and I responded by asking him to also join SWAYOCO.”
Martin said Prince Masitsela felt that no one in his region should be left out including the ‘comrades’, whom he felt should be part of the dialogue and there were no problem about that.
This was despite that political activists had previously elected not to attend smart partnership dialogues.
Mphandlana, though, said they had not attended previous deliberations because there was no instrument calling upon them to attend such dialogues.
One would assume that he meant they were willing to attend the dialogues as long as there was an invite.
He said the main reason that made him come to the regional dialogue was Prince Masitsela’s call for dialogue, but the problem he detected upon getting there was that the people seemed not to understand what the prince meant.
Mphandlana’s observation may have been true because some people were still familiarising themselves with the process. It is not easy to dialogue. And this process is not an overnight thing.
It needed time for everyone to acquaint themselves with it and we were getting there as a nation. One of the aims of a dialogue is to provide a space to discuss a broader range of issues relevant to the wider society, expand participation and build relations among different actors. This was happening at international, national and regional level.
If not, at least there was that attempt. Never mind the financial cost. The major objectives of the Smart Partnership Dialogue included the following: To have a nation well sensitised and more receptive to the dialogue concept; to have a nation effectively contributing to national development through an embraced culture of dialogue; to promote tolerance of one’s views and respect towards one another which will help foster peaceful development; to promote the sharing of innovative ideas that provide solutions to development challenges in a spirit of prosper-thy-neighbour; and to encourage networking amongst citizens that result in partnerships or joint ventures with win-win outcomes.
PERTINENT
These were pertinent objectives that unfortunately could not be realised because someone somewhere decided that the Smart Partnership Hub should be dismantled. The whole concept was thrown out the window. Before an announcement was made on abolishing it, it had effectively become redundant. People were being paid for doing nothing.
The Smart Partnership movement had sets itself the visions of being a hub for peace and prosperity by linking all sectors of society, locally and internationally, through a dialogue process that employs a ‘prosper-thy-neighbour’ approach and produces ‘win-win’ solutions to help society fully realise the aspirations of their national visions.
Its mission was to facilitate active engagement of every sector of society on all matters affecting their lives by ensuring that their views were captured and put into action through commitment by leaders in the public sector, the private sector, NGOs, the church, traditional structures, the youth and the media while being kept updated constantly on progress.
Here, we had a good things going on. It was expensive and some took advantage of the platform to enrich themselves.
These people are the enemies of dialogue. Others, seeing that the King was coming into close proximity with his people, did not like it. They have always wanted to see the King alienated from the populace.
They then ensured that this forum, which the King had embraced fully, was done away with. These, too, are enemies of not only dialogue but peace.
Today everyone is screaming for a dialogue. They should be screaming for the head of the one who did away with the Smart Partnership movement. Damn that person!