Patronage kills development

The system of patronage networks is not a new phenomenon. Designed to benefit dominant dynasties at a particular time, it takes different forms according to the context.

It’s parasitic in nature and sustains itself through establishing a web of networks within the state apparatus.

Those driving it are located within political, business and royal circles. Loyalty is sustained through disbursement and the allocation of goods and resources.

Rogue business moguls use politicians to get close to state resources and facilitate the allocation of lucrative tenders.

The masters of this process exert enormous pressure on bureaucrats located in different functional areas within the institution’s value chain. Instructions cascaded down through political conduits lead to the circumvention of statutory processes, contributing to unauthorised, wasteful and irregular expenditure.

Resistance is discouraged through concocted rebellion in the form of industrial ac- tion, expulsion and even assassination.

Limited financial resources earmarked for community development are diverted to patronage schemes, bankrupting the municipalities in particular.

This is exacerbated by macro-economic factors, misgovernance and political micromanagement spearheaded by rogue politicians.

The provincial sphere has been subjected to patronage for a long time and how it manifests depends on which political party is running the show.

Of late, key national departments have become soft targets.

Apartheid was a legislated form of patronage designed to advance the interests of a specific group at the expense of the majority.

Patronage assumed both a political and economic character.

Apartheid patronage was protected by the judiciary, national parliament, and other state apparatus.

The army, police, intelligence and secret services were used to preserve the institutionalised, racially structured patronage system to the disadvantage of Black people in general and Africans in particular. White people largely benefited from capital accumulated through a system condemned by the UN as crime against humanity. Their inheritance of wealth should be understood against this backdrop.

The need for liberation should also be understood within this context.

Some white people joined the struggle against apartheid patronage, while a number of Blacks collaborated with the apartheid masters.

Therefore, it was correct to define our revolution as a non-racial, non-sexist and anti-oppression and exploitation movement. Within this context, the primary objective of the struggle was to liberate Blacks in general and Africans in particular.

Whoever is involved in patronage networks, irrespective of colour, gender, creed, sex, and national origin is not a friend of the people.

Patronage contradicts the vision of the Republic of South Africa as enshrined in the Constitution.

As a result of apartheid patronage, in 1994 the democratically elected government inherited a technically bankrupt state.

It’s alleged that in the runup to inclusive elections, there was plundering of state re- sources, including the looting of Treasury.

The new dispensation inherited a system which was corrupt to the core and liberation was also to expunge misdemeanours and build a just and caring society.

Some thought that the dismantling of apartheid had brought to a halt all forms of patronage. The moral bar was raised beyond expectations. The first democratically elected government was led by a person with an indisputable commitment to the prosperity of SA. It was a matter of transforming the state in order to be responsive to the new challenges and needs and attempts were made to increase the state's capacity to be responsive to new challenges.

Good progress was made on many fronts, but this process was intercepted by nonstatutory political processes.

The 2007 Polokwane conference ushered in extreme levels of populism underpinned by glaring incompetencies. This does not mean the precursor to the present dispensation was perfect. It had its own challenges, but substantive progress was made compared to the present situation.

Embracing a constitutional and democratic ethos is of critical importance.

Challenges include the failure to transform the institutional culture inherited from the undemocratic dispensation, and an untransformed leadership mindset still trapped in liberation struggle culture and rhetoric.

Leaders find themselves imbibed by an untransformed institutional culture which was used to sustain a colonial value system inconsistent with constitutional imperatives. They have impacted negatively on the task of transforming society into an inclusive and equitable space.

The conflict between the EFF and the ruling party on the issue of parliamentary governance mechanisms should be understood within this context.

Compounding the South African situation is the emergence of massive patronage networks pilfering the country’s resources that should be used to advance the developmental agenda.

This contributes to political uncertainty, discouraging potential investors.

Is ‘ radical economic transformation’ possible under these circumstances?

Policy uncertainty is the major problem facing South Africa. The government talks NDP (to achieve its goals by 2030, you can imagine), the 10 point programme of the President and undefined ‘radical transformation’ rhetoric.

South Africa's socio-economic challenges seem to be too big for the present leadership generation, irrespective of age, gender, and colour.

Yet the country is endowed with stupendous talent that remains unused due to leadership paranoia and factionalism.

Exacerbating the situation is the obsession with militarisation and securocratisation of democratic spaces meant to protect democratic values and norms.

This stop-gap approach is doomed to fail. Hitler, Napoleon, Mussolini, Stalin, Verwoerd and PW Botha tried.

The resolution of political differences requires substantive discourse within the ambit of the supreme law of the country.

Any transformation that takes place within existing skewed power relations may still favour the black and white elite to the disadvantage of the majority.

The South African problem is structural and systemic. Progressive alternative platforms are needed urgently to ensure that South Africans occupy centre stage in determining their fate.

By and large, SOPA will replicate the SONA. Obviously no extraordinary announcement could be made outside the latter.

• Christian Mxoliswa Mbekela is a strategic work consultant specializing in HR,

EE and risk management. Former SAYCO NEC member and he was part of the team that re-established the ANC Youth League. He is currently doing PhD in the Sociology Department at Rhodes

University. www.cmmmindpower.co.za