Fix the shortcomings, communicate clearly with citizens
“Province aims to communicate efficiently with citizens” (Sowetan, Opinion, November 07) refers.
Phuthi Seloba is of the opinion that public participation is the cornerstone of a democratic government. He states “democracy is founded on the right of citizens to take part in the management of public affairs”.
In South Africa a choice was made for multi-party politics during negotiations that led to the formal acceptance of the constitution, as well as bill of rights.
Section 17 of the constitution stipulates that everyone has the right, peacefully and unarmed, to assemble, to demonstrate, to picket and to present petitions. Currently, this is how citizens display their discontent with the management of public affairs.
The truth is that citizens’ role in democracy ends on election day after they’ve voted their preferred representative and party of their choice. The writer holds the view that education and constant change of government can enhance capacity to achieve better service delivery but fails to highlight and emphasise corruption. He argues that corruption is rampant but the prosecution rate is very low.
Government is good with drafting and developing policies and strategies, but implementation lags far behind. The writer has exposed some shortcomings regarding Limpopo government’s communication skills. He stated that “through our monthly Exco Outreach Programme, we can only reach 12 municipalities annually”.
In other words, of the 22 local councils in Limpopo, contact is made with one municipality on a monthly basis while the remaining 10 will wait for the following year.
Seloba has the temerity to emphasise that this is what “Stanley Mathabatha has been championing since taking office”. Is this what the premier has been doing? Mr Seloba, you embarrass your employer, this paragraph should have been omitted or edited.
The Expanded Public Works Programme is equally trying to reduce unemployment, however it struggles to recruit people with disabilities. It is for this reason that some councils have failed to implement the programme.
My questions is, where is the problem? Too often, the people involved in implementation of the RDP in 1996 are the same ones who created the National Development Plan. These plans are not run by a computer but corrupt officials, which is why they fail.
The writer believes that debate and discussion with the public can speed up service delivery. In his words “consultation and dialogue between government and citizen, can in principle, improve people’s understanding of and support for government policies, and encourage ownership of projects and programmes by the people, as well as service delivery”.
This sounds like an advert on community radio. Those who can remember will tell Seloba that formal structures have been established on national, provincial and local government – National Council of Provinces, National Economic and Labour Council, parliamentary constituency offices, to mention just a few.
The debates, discussions and recommendations remain in the minutes of the meetings, and life goes on. At least for now, citizens have Chapter 9 institutions whereby consultation with public officials is pragmatic.
What is the solution? Seloba, should have identified how Limpopo will assist councils to accelerate implementation. At the provincial level, we do not communicate directly with the public but through municipalities and traditional councils.
Furthermore, the writer failed to highlight the standard to which achievement in service may be determined by the degree to which municipalities respond to the Limpopo Development Plan.
I am referring to priorities and targets, and positive response implies that communities are satisfied with the plan.
We have seen the tried and tested, now let us get rid of corruption and give the youth an opportunity they deserve. The future of Limpopo is the youth and through the youth we can communicate efficiently with citizens.