I wish to acknowledge the presence in the gallery of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Slovak Republic, His Excellency Mr Jan Kubis and his delegation. [Applause]. Hon Minister, we welcome you to our Parliament.
Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, my good friend, the hon Njikelana, and I share some common ground on this issue. He says that we are a developmental state in the process of being built. I am not sure if I agree with that, but we both agree that at this moment we are not a developmental state.
The saying that South Africa is a state crying out for swift and dramatic development is incontrovertible. Can we make poverty a thing of the past? The saying that South Africa is a developmental state is a delusion, and the often-repeated assertion to the contrary does not make it so. We lack too much to qualify.
Jac Laubscher, a Sanlam group economist, wrote the following in Business Day of 18 July 2007: "South Africa does not have an elite, meritocratic bureaucracy that attracts the best talent in the country..." Such a bureaucracy is of fundamental importance for a developmental state - one that I pleaded for earlier this year. In the classic sense, a developmental state enjoys unwavering and consistent government action within a context where all sectors of society are united in a single hegemonic development project. This is patently absent in South Africa.
We focus on redressing the wrongs of the past rather than on addressing a prosperous future for all. The wrongs of the past will be redressed and their effects erased when everyone is given the capability to share in general prosperity. When the focus is on making poverty history, then all sectors of society will unite with the willingness to make the necessary sacrifices.
There has been development over the past 13 years and some very real achievements too - especially in the important, but limited areas of housing, domestic water and electricity supply. But, how do the overall developmental advances measure up against what is actually required to make poverty history? The answer to this is: "Very badly." Revisiting the miserable list of government policy failures - stretching from health to education, unemployment reduction and industrial policy - is unnecessary. They are well-documented.
Suffice it to say that the Finance Minister's economic growth projections indicating a steady decline in growth from 4,9% this year to 4,5% next year before returning to only about 5% per year in 2009 and 2010 gainsays any claim to a successful developmental state. Given a target of 6% growth per annum, we can accept that the target area will not even be challenged by 2010. Since the growth target was set with a goal of halving poverty by 2014, we are clearly further than ever from achieving this. If that is development, then all one can ruefully say is: "Some development, some state."
Should South Africa; or even, can South Africa become a developmental state in the classical sense. The phrase "developmental state" was coined by an American political scientist, ... [Interjections.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, would the member take a question?
When I have finished.
The member will take the question later on.
... Chalmers Johnson, to describe the economic miracle of Japan after World War II. South Korea and Taiwan later adopted the phrase to describe their similar economic development methodologies. A classical developmental state is one that follows the growth methodologies of these Tigers. Importantly, their growth methodologies were pragmatically developed and implemented in the context of the international regime of the day, as a political economist, T J Pempel says: "It is hard to imagine the economic successes of these three had the United States not been so anxious to assist their economic enrichment."
Much has changed. Opportunities such as favourable access to the United States markets are not available to us. Import substitution and the protectionism they practised are not feasible under the World Trade Organisation regime.
The 21st century international climate simply militates against our ability to follow the mid-20th century developmental methodologies. Consequently, our concept of a developmental state must be a derivative rather than an emulation of the classical one. Yet, much can be learnt from the Asian successes.
Fortunately, since the unlamented demise of the Washington Consensus, no one seriously doubts the pivotal role of the state in economic development. What the particulars of that role are and how they change over time is our own decision - given our history, our diverse cultures and our predilections. We must seek and find our own third way too.
Joseph Stiglitz says that the term "third way" has attained different and, in some cases, quite specific connotations. But, what I mean, as he does, is that a third way lies between socialism, with an intrusive government role, and laissez-faire economics, with a minimal government role. The South African model must employ market-conforming methods of state intervention and a fixed focus on addressing future opportunities - opportunities equally accessible to all.
In a developmental state of the third way, consensus exists between all sectors of society regarding developmental goals and the means to achieve them. The goals are inclusive and not exclusive and selective. That produces an unconditional commitment by all for the developmental project - a focus on economic growth that disproportionately empowers the poor; not through handouts, but through capability enhancement and opportunity creation. It is not developmental to give people houses, water, electricity or food. It may be charitable, but it is not developmental. It is developmental when government enhances people's capabilities - allowing them to afford a house, water, electricity and food. It is developmental when you give people quality health care and education in high-grade facilities.
Capability enhancement is the developmental approach pioneered by the renowned Amartya Sen - an approach that the DA fully subscribes to. With him we say: Development is freedom. Freedom, he says, can only exist in an open democratic society. This we must maintain, develop and protect at all costs. That is why the DA embraces an open society - a society where freedom lives.
Democracy by itself is not freedom and does not guarantee freedom. Democracy plus capability, plus opportunity is freedom. An increase in capabilities is an increase in freedom - freedom to escape poverty; freedom to enjoy full social functionality; and the capability to live a life filled with accomplishment, boundless opportunity and the ability to use it. Thank you. [Applause.] [Interjections.] [Time expired.]
He can't take a question because he went over the time.
My time has expired?
You have no time left to answer any questions.
Yes. You can't ask the question otherwise ... [Interjections.]
I did not say that you must take a question. I am speaking on your behalf to the hon Minister to say that you cannot take the question because you have no time left. [Interjections.] So, you should actually be saying thank you, Deputy Speaker.
I would like to take the question. [Interjections.]
No, no - for saying ... [Interjections.]
I would like to take the question.
Then you should have actually timed your speech to make sure that there is time for the question. [Interjections.] Will you please take your seat, hon member.
Madam Deputy Speaker and hon members, the concept of a developmental state implies a certain ethos of a caring government. The ethos is underpinned by a recognition that uplifting the poor and defending the weak among us is the first and most important duty of any truly democratic and just society. It is an ethos that says that those that have will not only give to those that do not have in order to promote their self- interest and protect their prosperity from the eventual wrath of those with nothing. Much to the contrary, it is based on the sort of thing that says that I can view myself as prosperous if my neighbour and his neighbour and everyone of my fellows are also prosperous. That worth is not something that resides purely in an individual but depends on the general wealth and wellbeing of the entire society.
The social, political and economic implications of the developmental state for the poorest of the poor are thus benevolent. If indeed we accept this sort of ethos within the state, then we must also adopt it in the larger context of our nation's interaction with the outside world, especially our neighbours. It therefore, means that in as much as our neighbours do not prosper, we cannot prosper. As much as they do not succeed politically, socially and economically, we do not.
Thus, it is entirely contradictory to combine this ethos with the talk of hegemony or South Africa assuming such status in the region. It goes without saying that South Africa has not only the biggest economy in the region, but also the biggest on the continent. Indeed, our natural and human resources outstrip those ... [Time expired.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, while the concept of a developmental state is used to explain the exceptional growth performances in East Asian countries, the success of a democratic developmental state will depend on the capacity of that state to manage the complex and very delicate balance between growth and social development. Balancing requires trade-offs, with democracy and equity on the one side and economic growth policies and strategies within a demanding competitive global on the other. Capacity and capability are of course conditions for success and these factors present enormous challenges in South Africa.
When we look at the continent of Africa we see a kaleidoscope of rich cultures and historical traditions, but we also see a gap between the poor and the rich that continues to widen. And, in South Africa we are still plagued by inequalities, which are the cause of much tension.
Neither economic growth nor poverty alleviation programmes alone will be sufficient to eradicate poverty. There is no substitute for creating more productive employment and supply and demand for labour must change. While education and skills development are key it will take two to three decades for these sorts of interventions to begin to impact on the situation, so long-term and short-term solutions must go hand in hand.
Some economists do not see South Africa as a developmental state but as a redistributive state, focused on the transformation of the economy and society.
Observers, both inside and outside the government, struggle to make sense of South Africa's role and identity in Africa. Some argue against a hegemonic role for South Africa; others say we have hegemonic power whether we like it or not, largely due to the fact that South Africa is less vulnerable than other African states and presently more politically stable. Dr Adam Habib of the Centre for the Study of Civil Society who supports South Africa in the role of a hegemony, says simply being a pivotal state means that South Africa will be rejecting a role of leadership which is neither in our, nor the region's best interest.
If being a hegemonic power means being in the forefront of addressing issues of poverty, unemployment, marginalisation and inequality, how bad can that be? Because of South Africa's precarious First World and Third World qualities, perhaps the argument that South Africa could best be described as a potential hegemony makes most sense.
The ACDP would like to see South Africa's position, whether hegemonic or not, being sensible and realistic with a view to producing results rather than posturing for position or being overly concerned with our image. South Africa has a responsibility to do its utmost to actively and positively impact the lives of not only the citizens of the SADC region but this continent as a whole. Thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker.
Thank you, hon member. I would like to just make a little correction. I am not an Acting Speaker and I do not want Hansard to be confused in terms of recording proceedings. The Speaker is very much here - just two minutes away from this House.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the ideology of viewing South Africa as a developmental state is becoming increasingly popular. However, it is important for us to determine if we are a developmental state in the true sense of the ideology. Central to the concept of a developmental state is the idea that a developmental state is focused on a single goal: to achieve the highest economic growth possible. The developmental state is focused on state intervention on manufactured goods, exports to promote economic growth - state intervention has to support the market, and not replace it.
The state does not lead the market, but follows it. In addition, a developmental state also implies a specific institutional set upon which the role of society, and in particular the private sector, is crucial. In addition, in a developmental regime all sectors of society are united in a single hegemonic project, a national consensus regarding the objective economic development together with a willingness to make the required sacrifices to realise the objective.
Madam Deputy Speaker, when one considers all these points about developmental state it becomes obvious that we would be disillusioned to think that we are one. South Africa is primarily a redistributive state, focused on the transformation of the economy and society. We should concentrate on what the role of government should be in a predominantly free market economy, and focus our energies on the failures of the market by scrutinizing our economic policies.
Our country cannot just focus on pursuing high economic growth when the majority of the people are still poverty-stricken, less educated and less capable. We as a country need to focus on our socio-economic policies and challenges before we can view ourselves as hegemonic power in the SADC region. Africa has its own challenges of poverty, low levels of productive capacity, low capita income, low life expectancy, high infant mortality, illiteracy, oppression of women and over-dependence on export earnings and foreign capital, the list goes on, at the end of the day Africa has suffered immensely to be independent. Thank you. [Time expired.]
Chairperson and hon members, the concept of a developmental state is difficult to agree upon. Suffice it to say that it is generally used to mean a state that drives development in contrast to a free market approach.
According to Chalmers Johnson, a US Asian scholar, a critical element in a developmental state is its ability to mobilize a nation around economic development within a capital system.
The big question to us today is to what extent does South Africa mobilise the nation and neighbouring states to economic development? Is South Africa able to maintain mass support through nationalist propaganda, improvements in living standards for workers and businesses and increase employment as well as paternalistic labour relations in large companies?
If the answer is yes to all the questions, then we are moving in the direction of a developmental state, as defined by Lenin.
A developmental state has to answer the question why the countries of East Asia are industrialised while other countries are trapped in poverty and resource dependency.
For South Africa to get out of the cycle of poverty, the following have to be done: Firstly, government departments and agencies should be provided with a clear mandate to prioritise equitable employment-creating growth and ensure that there is effective co-ordination around all programmes. Secondly, government should export industries based on development of domestic market and other government measures should be built. Thirdly, we have to ensure the improvement of the quality of life of workers by reducing the costs of basic necessities such as transport.
It is a given that the moral standing, the economic and military resources of South Africa make it to look more or less like a hegemonic power in the SADC region.
South Africa has the necessary characteristics of a hegemony as she has a political and socioeconomic vision of the transitional environments and the political willingness to implement such vision. I thank you. [Time expired.]
Chair, South Africa is a developmental state. The achievement of democracy provided South Africans with an opportunity to pursue economic growth, development and redistribution, so as to achieve a better life for all.
Our vision of the economic base of a national democratic society is characterised by, among others, a thriving and integrated economy that draws on the creativity and skills that our whole population can offer, building on South Africa's economic endowment to create employment opportunities for the benefit of all. It is also an economy that is connected to the world - benefiting from vibrant trade relations with North and South, and which is an integral part of a balanced regional economy that contributes to the growing prosperity of Africa. Guided by the preamble of our Constitution, we have committed ourselves to build a united and democratic South Africa, able to take its rightful place as a sovereign state in the family of nations. SADC aims to promote sustainable and equitable economic growth and socioeconomic development through efficient productive systems; deeper integration and co-operation; good governance, and durable peace and security in order for the region to emerge as a competitive and effective player in international relations and the world economy.
Ours, therefore, is an interdependent region. The linkages among Southern African states include formal and informal cross-boundary human and capital movements; infrastructure networks, and shared natural resources. It is this interdependence among Southern African states that must be exploited for greater regional integration. We should also be mindful that Southern African settler colonialism concentrated extraction and production mainly in South Africa, Zimbabwe and Angola. Therefore, the three became the principal poles of capital accumulation within the region, while neighbouring states became labour reserves, servicing the labour needs of the white settler colonies.
It is this understanding which enables South Africa to prioritise regional integration. Therefore, current negotiations on economic partnership agreements have the potential to reverse the gains we have achieved as a region. These trade agreements we entered into between 1999 and 2002 - what we call the Trade Development Co-operation Agreement, the TDCA - allowed us to have access to the EU markets as much as they had access to our economy. Realising that our economy is linked to that of the region, we have thus taken a decision, as a country, to negotiate as a bloc. Whilst these negotiations are going on, there are issues of dual membership that the region has to deal with, which I have also alluded to. They came as a result of colonial settlements.
The EU has sought to take advantage of such issues as well as the expiry date of the Cotonou Agreement, which is 31 December 2007, to force us, as a region, to agree on terms which are unfavourable to our future economic development as a region, which is very important for us for the achievement of a better life for all and all of our neighbours. Our region should not allow this.
A number of African, Pacific and Caribbean states will find themselves in a difficult trading environment with the EU if the 31 December 2007 deadline still stands as the EU wishes. We are also told that there is no alternative to the EPA negotiations which deadline is 31 December 2007. Even though most parliaments will be in recess during that time for ratification of such an agreement before the implementation of the new agreement, the EU finds it impossible to change the deadlines.
We, therefore, urge the EU to accept that forcing us to agree with the EPA outcomes that will be detrimental to ourselves and the region is detrimental to a developmental state, as well as the region, which is busy integrating itself. Therefore, South Africa, in the interest of the region of which we are an integral part, must reject with contempt the suggestions we have seen in the media recently that we, as a country, are blocking economic partnership negotiation processes.
As a region, we have come a long way to where we are now. We also understand our historical backgrounds and diversity. We should, however, not allow the EU to defocus us from developing our region. We should not allow the EU to push us to a point where we compromise each other's economies. Together we need to focus on accelerating our integration. United we stand, but if we allow the EU to divide us, we will certainly fall.
We must, in line with our African agenda, protect the unity of the continent and refuse to negotiate alone in exclusion of the region. Even if there are difficult challenges, we need to stand firm whilst working on improving our intraregional trade disparities. Poverty and underdevelopment is still prevalent in our region and in our country and the EU, in possession of EPA negotiations, where they are attempting to also smother the deadlocked Doha negotiations, must realise that that will be an injustice to the majority of the people of our country and our region. We should not agree to that. I thank you. [Applause.]
Chairperson, we might look at ourselves and say we are progressive compared to countries in the SADC region, but we need to bear in mind that we are still a fairly new democracy and before we are to lead the way to democracy for our neighbours we need to first find our feet.
The MF has no objections to us being at the forefront on issues regarding human rights and human development. In terms of the policy and our Constitution, we are on firm footing. A close look certainly shall open our challenges in applying policy and the chaos we have found ourselves in since 1996. This chaos referred to does not imply that our current system has failed, but rather that the legacy that we have been left with has been extremely difficult to transform.
The MF believes that we do have a pivotal role to play in the development of democracy and human rights on the continent. We feel that the mandate for South Africa to run as a hegemonic power in the region remains the mandate of our neighbours in consideration of the interest of all South Africans.
The challenge of poverty on the continent is big and we need to find ways as a new democracy to cross the borders of being classed as a developing state to one of great power and strength. This will only be achieved if we can overcome the strains of poverty and retardation and infiltrate the gap that the powerhouses exhaust themselves with by keeping us out.
If the foreign debt can be written off on the continent as an incentive to correcting the implications of colonialism, Africa would be placed in a very progressive position on the map. We need to endorse a world conscience on the debt of colonialism. This will pave our road to speeding up development and then invite us to lead democracy in the SADC region. I thank you.
Chair, in the wake of third-wave democratisation and neoliberal ascendancy, our conception of the developmental state must be reconfigured. The PAC defines a developmental state as one that has a clear commitment to a national development agenda and does so by including the poorest majority and closing the widening gap between the rich and the poor.
There are many reasons for creating a developmental state that places greater concern on poverty eradication and social and economic liberation of the poor African majority in particular. Extreme social inequality also means that there must be an identity of interests between voters and parties in this Parliament. This means that floor-crossing must be abolished. It is not in the interest of the voters of our country, nor in the interest of development and effective service delivery.
This kind of state must pursue economic integration into the global economy. This it must achieve at its own pace, not at the behest of international pressure. In the post-Washington Consensus era, there is a renewed emphasis on institutional capacity and on states owning their own national development strategies. It would therefore, be anachronistic for South Africa to play a hegemonic role in the SADC countries. I thank you.
Chairperson, the FD supports the idea of a developmental state if by implication it suggests a caring state. A caring state upholds the rights and privileges of its citizens to access state services that are adequately resourced, easily accessible and available, duly responsive to meet required needs and service objectives as well as efficiently and effectively managed.
One of the basic conditions towards the implementation of a developmental state is for government to improve on service delivery. It does not matter if we call ourselves a developmental state when hospital beds are cut or when the cost of living in South Africa is beyond the reach of the average citizen. There is general concern that although South Africa has had stable economic growth over the past decade there is still the need for an economic miracle to lift our people from poverty and unemployment if you want to achieve the Millennium Development Goals by 2014.
Although we have had an average growth of around 3% to 5% over the past few years, the current economic climate suggests that unless real disposable income benefits are enjoyed by more and more people, very little turnaround in the fortunes of poorer households will be attained by 2014. Most of the poor are constrained by circumstances, which force them to rely too much on state assistance, even though government has introduced mechanisms such as Asgisa and the Jipsa programmes to empower the unskilled and the indigent.
Finally, a developmental state in the context of our country is one that should redress economic and social inequalities through a blend or market and social forces within a consolidating partnership framework including government, business as well as civic bodies and institutions of higher and further learning. I thank you.
Chair, the concept of a developmental state is primarily brought about by the urgent need to address, amongst others, poverty in underdeveloped countries. It works with the assumption, according to leading scholars, that the market can and will address the deliverance and, therefore poverty challenges.
The challenge, therefore, is for the developmental state to become more than a rhetorical concept, but a reality. It therefore, begs the question whether an even-handed ratio exists between what the market generates to the state in the form of taxes and delivery to the masses, especially the poorest of the poor.
Markets are most lucrative if conditions internally and externally are favourable. We therefore have considered whether not only our domestic market conditions allow for optimal state resources, but whether the conditions of our subcontinental economic and political environment need an overhaul.
The NA therefore believes that subcontinental customs regulations have to be reviewed to allow for more streamlined economic and trade activities within SADC. This, we believe, could lead to a greater flow of capital and labour among member countries that would bring about greater revenue resources to governments, which would allow for more poverty alleviation. Also, skills specialisation and technological advancement can be achieved in this way.
However, no matter how big the poverty alleviation resources pool is, the ability to channel this to the poor remains the biggest challenge. We therefore, above all, need to seek ways and means of how we will ensure that the necessary skills are in place for the desired distribution infrastructure to address poverty. Allow me to state that the magnitude of this topic begs for greater deliberation than what is allowed for here today. I thank you.
Chairperson, as we have already heard a couple of times today, originally the meaning of a developmental state was linked to the build-up and growth of Japan as an industrial nation after World War II, which later was also linked to other Asian developing economies such as Korea and Taiwan.
Chalmers Johnson, the American political scientist, explained the role of the developmental state in the modern economy as follows:
A state attempting to match the economic achievements of Japan must adopt the same priorities as Japan. It must first ... be a developmental state - and only then a regulatory state, a welfare state, an equality state, or whatever other kind of functional state a society we may wish to adopt.
Jac Laubscher, die groepekonoom van Sanlam, interpreteer dit dat 'n ontwikkelingstaat op 'n enkeldoelwit gefokus is, naamlik om die hoogste moontlike ekonomiese groeikoers te behaal. Die res, met inbegrip van die verdeling van ekonomiese groeivoordele, moet hieraan onderworpe wees. Laubscher beskryf in sy artikel "Die Suid-Afrikaanse ontwikkelingstaat: mite of realiteit?" die eienskappe soos volg:
[een,] 'n klein, maar elite-, meritokratiese burokrasie, wat die staat se nywerheidsbeleid formuleer en uitvoer. Die burokrasie ... word gemotiveer deur nasionale belang en nie eie belang nie ... [; twee,] 'n politieke stelsel wat aan die burokrasie genoeg ruimte gee om inisiatief te neem en effektief op te tree ... [; drie,] ... 'n leidinggewende organisasie [is nodig] wat beslag kan gee aan ... insentiewe vir die privaatsektor ... toegang tot insette waarborg, kapitaal op voorkeurbasis beskikbaar stel, risiko's verlaag, 'n entrepreneursvisie verskaf en konflik tussen ondernemings bestuur[; vier,] 'n unieke verhouding van interafhanklikheid en simbiose tussen die burokrasie en die privaatsektor [met] voordeel [vir albei; en laastens,] die vervolmaking van markkonformerende metodes van staatsinmenging. [Met] die ... fokus op uitvoere ... in die bevordering van ekonomiese groei ... veroorsaak [dit] dat staatsinmenging ... markondersteunend moet wees en nie markvervangend nie ...
[Dit bevestig dat] die ontwikkelingstaat ... 'n bepaalde institusionele opset [impliseer] waarin die rol van ... die privaatsektor, deurslaggewend is.
Ooglopend geld bogenoemde ni in Suid-Afrika se geval nie, en het ons in wese eerstens 'n herverdelende staat wat gefokus is op die transformasie van die ekonomie en die samelewing, en tweedens 'n regulerende staat omdat ons soveel kere spesifieke uitkomste wil bewerkstellig. Suid-Afrika is duidelik ni 'n ontwikkelingstaat nie, en die staat se rol in ons vryemarkekonomie moet eerder verder uitgedaag word. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Jac Laubscher, the group economist of Sanlam, interprets it as a developmental state which is focused on a single goal, namely achieving the highest possible economic growth rate. The rest, including the division of economic growth advantages, must be subject to this. In his article "The South African developmental state: myth or reality?", Laubscher describes these characteristics as follows:
[one,] a small, but elite, meritocratic bureaucracy, which formulates and executes the state's industrial policy. This bureaucracy ... is motivated by national interest and not self-interest ... [two,] a political system which provides the bureaucracy with enough space to use its own initiative and act effectively ... [; three,] an organisation which supplies leadership [is needed] to settle ... incentives for the private sector ... guarantee access to inputs, make capital available on a preferential basis, reduce risks, supply entrepreneurial vision and manage conflict between enterprises [; four,] a unique relationship of mutual dependency and symbiosis between the bureaucratic and private sector [with] advantages [for both; and lastly,] the perfection of market conforming methods of state intervention. [With] the ... focus on exports ... [this] means that state intervention ... should be market supporting and not market replacing ... in the promotion of economic growth ...
[This confirms that] the developmental state ... [implies] a certain institutional arrangement in which the role of ... the private sector proves conclusive.
Obviously the above does not hold in South Africa's case, and we essentially have, firstly, a redistributive state focussed on the transformation of the economy and society, and secondly, a regulating state because we want to achieve specific results so many times. South Africa is clearly not a developmental state, and the state's role in our free market economy should rather be challenged further.]
Chairperson, would the hon member care to take a question?
Hon Marais, do you want to take a question?
Chairperson, may I first finish?
He wants to complete his speech first, Deputy Minister.
Could you leave a minute at least to answer my question?
Beide die SAOG-state en die markte se tekortkominge moet ondersoek word. Pragmatisme is belangrik en dit kry vele kere die oorhand oor ideologie, en daar is baie voorbeelde daarvan in die wreld. Dit moet 'n les wees waaruit ons moet leer sodat unieke Suider-Afrikaanse ontwikkelingsmodelle geskep kan word vir ons unieke uitdagings en omstandighede. Suid-Afrika is ook in 'n belangrike rol en posisie om wel leiding te kan neem onder SAOG-lande en in die SA Ontwikkelingsgemeenskap. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[Mr S J F MARAIS: Both the SADC states and the markets' shortcomings should be investigated. Pragmatism is important and many times it gets the upper hand over ideology, and there are many examples of that across the world. It should be a lesson we should learn from so that uniquely Southern African developmental models can be created for our unique challenges and circumstances. South Africa also has an important role and position to supply leadership among SADC countries and in the Southern African Development Community.]
Then South Africa can embrace its assigned role as the hegemonic power in the SADC region.
Ek sluit af met die standpunt van die DA en my nasionale leier dat Suid- Afrika en die SAOG kan ontwikkel en groei indien ons gemotiveerde burgers het wat openlik vrye keuses kan maak en dat die staat die gemeenskap van diens moet wees en nie andersom nie. Dit is van die kernwaardes van 'n open- opportunity society. Ek dank u. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.)
[I conclude with the position of the DA and my national leader, that South Africa and the SADC can develop and grow if we have motivated citizens who can openly make free choices and if the state serves the community and not the other way around. These are some of the core values of an open- opportunity society. I thank you.]
Hon Deputy Minister, do you want to pose your question?
Thank you very much, hon Chairperson.
Hon member, just an observation that you have cited both Japan ... [Interjections.]
Order! I must request you to put the question, Deputy Minister.
Would the hon member agree or disagree that the apartheid state was a quasi-developmental state that ensured the rapid development, in particular for the Afrikaner and in general of the white people of this country, and if you do agree, to say therefore the task of a democratic developmental state is to address these imbalances created by an apartheid state?
Chairperson, I do believe that the moment that you talk about a developmental state, and obviously getting results from that concept, you must look forward. And then you must ask yourself what you will need to get to a developmental state.
We know that in the past many things have been done and there can be many arguments whether they were developmental or not, but I do not think that is the objective. I think one must look at the basic principles and say: "We must look forward and at what is required to develop into a developmental state. We must address those issues and forget about the past." Thank you very much. [Interjections.]
Chairperson, may I just say that we are very impressed with the hon Deputy Minister's interest in DA policy, etc, and if he would like to attend our study groups so he can learn a bit more, he is very welcome to do so. [Laughter.]
Order! That's not a point of order.
Chairperson, as the debate is already unfolding, I want to welcome the DA's shift because all along it has been a believer in a free- market system and now it is indeed embracing aspects of a developmental state. Unfortunately, in their embracing of the developmental state argument, their ingredients are unfortunately incorrect. I think there should be a debate, hon Deputy Minister, just to engage on those fundamentals and theories underpinning that particular debate because theirs are more liberal theories and ideologies. We need to then engage on other democratic ones to ask ourselves as to what exactly is working for South Africa.
I do not understand what exactly hon Stephens is saying. Earlier on, he said that delivering free houses in itself is not developmental. Did he visit the people to whom houses were delivered for the past two to four years, and thus checked the qualitative change that has happened in their lives with electricity and refrigerators in their houses? They are now able to sell some frozen items from their houses. One cannot therefore say that is not developmental in nature. It is developmental! [Applause.] I think he is living in another South Africa that I don't know where it is. [Interjections.] We welcome the shift but the ingredients are wrong. [Interjections.] Am I out of order, Chairperson?
Chairperson, is the hon member prepared to take a question? [Interjections.]
Are you prepared to take a question, hon Bapela?
Well, I will take questions towards the end of my speech. Thank you. I therefore hope that the hon member comes back to the real South Africa.
In characterising the international situation, the ANC in its strategy and tactics of 1997 said the following:
The ANC should aim to contribute to the restructuring of the international relations in the interest of the poor and this statement remains relevant as ever ...
It continued, and I quote -
... We are moved in this regard by the conviction that, as long as injustice, poverty and conflict exist anywhere on the globe, so long as humanity finds within itself individuals, movements and governments to co- operate in their eradication of such poverty, the ANC is proud to be part of these international forces.
The topic as tabled has four aspects to it and I will focus mainly on the hegemonic power, whether South Africa should become one or not in the interest of the region.
What is hegemonic power? I tried to look up what it could be. It is described as the use of power, usually by those controlling the Meta- or masternarrative against the other. Other explanations are that hegemony is a coercive control manifested through direct force or its threat. It is also about power, ideology, influence and knowledge, dominance of the ideas and coercion and cultural dominance. "Hegemonic" describes the policies of states, which control or bully those within their sphere of influence. Hegemonic power - the power of hegemony - is primarily through coercion and consent.
These are but a few descriptions and definitions on hegemony and hegemonic power. I raise all these points to later argue and respond to the question raised, whether we should become a hegemonic power in the region or not. Having that in mind, let us look at hegemonic behaviour and tendencies.
First- and fundamentally, hegemony is about raw, hard power. Militarily, hegemonic capabilities are such that no other state has the wherewithal, hegemony is about raw hard power. Militarily, hegemonic capabilities are such that no other state has, the wherewithal, to put up a serous fight against it. Economically, hegemony occupies a position of economic supremacy in the international system and enjoys a preponderance of material resources and a key factor driving hegemonic expansion.
Secondly, hegemony is about the dominant power ambitions - the purpose for which it is to use its power. Hegemony acts self-interestedly to create a stable international order that will safeguard its security and its economic and ideological interests only.
Thirdly, hegemony is about polarity, because of its overwhelming advantages in relative military and economic power. Hegemony is the only great power in the international system, which is, therefore by definition unipolar.
Fourthly, hegemony is about will. Not only must a hegemony possess overwhelming power, it must purposefully exercise that power to impose order on the international system. When it comes to grand strategy, a hegemony practices the adage, "if you have got it, flaunt it" or as the USA said during the Iraq invasion, "coalition of the willing" or "You are either with us or against us".
The philosophy and fundamentals concerning hegemony are about structural change, because if one state achieves hegemony, the system ceases to be anarchic and becomes hierarchic. Of course, as Robert Gilpin has noted:
No state has complete control over an international system, and thus hegemony is a relative, not an absolute concept.
When a great power attains hegemony, as for example, as the USA did in Western Europe after World War II, it means that the system is more hierarchic - and less anarchic - than it would be in the absence of hegemonic power.
Implicit in Gilpin's observation that hegemony is a relative concept is a subtle but important although the USA is not omnipotent. Although the US is the most powerful international actor today since imperial Rome, there clearly are limits to its ability to shape international outcomes.
The USA has been unable to suppress the insurgency in Iraq, just as it did not prevail in the Vietnam War and unable to compel either North Korea or Iran to halt their nuclear programmes. Does this mean the US is not an extra regional or global hegemony after all? Clearly not - at least not - if we understand what power is and what it is not. As Kenneth Waltz has pointed out: "Power does not mean the ability to get one's way all the time."
Material resources never translate fully into desired outcomes - a point acknowledged by military strategists that when they observe that the enemy has a vote in determining the degree to which one's own strategic goal will be realised. Rather, a state is powerful if it gets its way most of the time than others do, precisely because the US is an extra regional hegemony - a marked asymmetry of influence of favours it. In international politics, the US does not get all that it wants all the time. But, it gets most of what it wants an awful lot of time and it affects other states far more than states affect it.
Having defined in a very scientific and philosophical argument about what hegemony is, we in the ANC, reject any notion or thinking that South Africa is a hegemony. Hence, each time in international forums, we do stand and argue against insinuations, such as big brother, the power of the South, the regional power, a bully or imperialist power of Africa, which unfortunately are being ascribed without care and consideration.
One is a hegemony only if one uses the power of one's economy, the relative military power and if one coerces, forces and dominates, imposes and controls in such a way that one becomes a unilateralist. That is not the agenda or parts of any of our foreign policies in this country and not in the democratic South Africa.
Yes, probably under apartheid we saw such of hegemony, bombing neighbours, in Lesotho, Botswana, Mozambique, and in Zambia under the guise of fighting the so-called terrorists or stopping the expansion functions of the communists. It forced others into agreements, such as the Nkomati Accord and or the Mbabane Agreements, sponsoring and supporting civil wars in Mozambique and Angola. Apartheid South Africa was a bully and hegemonic power in the region. At that point, if one would ask the question whether South Africa should be called a hegemonic state, I would have agreed but not this democratic South Africa.
In the democratic South Africa values and principles of international co- operations are underpinned by multilateralism in international affairs and proactive engagement in conflict management. Multilateralism is a concept of foreign policy and is therefore based on collaboration as opposed to competition.
Countries that pursue multilateral foreign policies avoid acting unilaterally and are generally opposed to foreign policies based on dominance. They tend to preoccupy themselves with issues such as the reform of international institutions, greater collaboration between North and South and a South-South to south co-operation. Theirs is a vision of an inclusive- based on international system that is not discriminatory and where compromise is the norm. South Africa, our country, can safely be placed within that category of countries.
At the same time, in the field of conflict management, which is the other pillar of South Africa's Foreign policy, the country is becoming increasingly bold and assertive. Despite our commitment to acting within a framework of multilateralism, we have not shied away from taking the lead in offering dynamic and pragmatic solutions to some of the most intractable conflicts on the continent.
What is happening in the Doha Round of negotiations, in the G20 countries and in the EPA's negotiations, as alluded to by my colleagues, is that South Africa participates and contributes to those collectives and we are not bullying anybody. We contribute ideas for solutions and we look at the benefits of the collectives that benefit everybody.
Responding to the question whether South Africa become a hegemonic power in the interest of the region? Our response is no. It cannot be, it shall not be, and shall never be, but it will remain a regional player within a collaborative system of international agreements.
We must as a regional player enable our neighbours and the continent to grow their economies, assist them to address the challenges that they are facing, like the infrastructure, grow our own regional market as SADC within the regional economic communities' programme. I hope therefore, that the hon Ben Skosana will agree with that approach.
Noting also that our economy has expanded into the region and the continent, our strength and capacity gives us advantages as far as manufacturing is concerned. However, we have an obligation in the region to see to it that other member states produce goods that can also find their way into our markets and trade in South Africa. We also want to see increase in trade amongst member states within the region.
In conclusion, it is not in the interest of South Africa to become a hegemonic power. I think I have described what hegemonic power is and what is a hegemony. It is a senseless and heartless type of an activity or behaviour. We do not want to become that. We can still pursue our national interests through multilateral as the order of the new world that we are striving to build. As the ANC we clearly state that we want a just and equitable world order and that, just and equitable world order is possible. And, we must strive to build it. Amandla! [Applause.]
Chairperson, the hon member said he will take a question.
Okay, proceed.
I would like to know from the hon member whether he has ever taken the trouble to visit the people that were given houses and then thrown out of those houses? They lost them because they couldn't afford to live in a house because they had no jobs? [Interjections.]
Well, I don't know of any cases where people were thrown out of houses. I think there is an issue here and I want to explain that issue. The issue is that there are houses that are given to people for free. There is a category of those houses, if you are not aware; those are called "RDP houses". So, you cannot throw out a person who has been given a free house to live in. Then municipalities have what we call indigence programmes so that those people who are unemployed at that particular moment can go and apply for indigence and a consideration would be given. [Interjections.]
Government has been discouraging those people who after getting a house and then sell it to somebody else, to stop that. That is where we have to ensure that those things do not happen because we give those houses on the basis that people need them and therefore they will be able to grow and develop themselves. [Applause.]
Chairperson, hon members, the well-known definition of a developmental state as developed by Chalmers Johnson, which is premised on his seminal analysis of Japan's very rapid and highly successful post-war reconstruction and reindustrialisation has to be juxtaposed with our own uniquely South African home-made definition that will bear characteristics of who we are, where we come from and where were are going to.
According to Johnson, a developmental state is the one that determines and influences the direction and pace of economic development by directly intervening in the development process rather than relying on the unco- ordinated influence of free markets or market forces. Even if we agree with Johnson's definition, ours will have to be expanded to include an element of what one may call African humanism.
Indeed, I agree with hon Njikelana that South Africa is actually a developmental state in the making, but any development ideology that we seek to follow will have to be in touch with the African reality. Basil Davidson teaches us very clearly regarding this, that instead of building new states from the foundation culture of Africa's pre-colonial states, Africa tried to build new states from the foundation culture of colonial states. So, African independence had not been able to join in its own history and tradition.
The whole of the African continent is in the third phase of the struggle for economic liberation and development. No African country right now has won its economic struggle against poverty; and economic emancipation and development is the most important phase in our liberation struggle. Africa can never be free unless it has achieved economic freedom, and that is a given fact.
Political freedom cannot be sustained on an empty stomach whilst holding out the desperate and humiliating hands of begging. We can never be free unless we have overcome our personal poverty and achieved financial success. But, let us get this very straight: The Asian Tigers and China followed development pathways that did not conform to the Washington Consensus doctrine of free markets. It can be argued here that perhaps that is why they are what they are today.
The destruction of our African values as a result of colonialism accounts for many of Africa's ongoing economic problems. Africa borrowed wrong things from the West. Africa borrowed even the wrong components of capitalism. It also borrowed the profit motive, not actually the entrepreneurial spirit. We borrowed even the acquisitive appetites of capitalism, not its creative risk-taking.
Our kind of capitalism right now assumes that human beings are primarily economic beings. It assumes that human beings will always act so as to pursue their own rational self-interest. In business terms, these principles are mirrored by the pursuit of profits for its own sake and by the assumption that every business exists to maximise its own self- interest. At least, George Soros agrees with me, regarding this.
Poverty as we know it has many faces; one of them is intellectual poverty which has allowed for inappropriate development strategies that are inconsistent with our African culture. We need to ensure that there is an integration of our African belief systems, thought and culture. History shows that significant societal transformation has to be strictly and correctly accompanied by our guided and developed African Renaissance.
Order! Hon member, your time has expired.
Chairperson, we hope that the ruling party will actually take the debate on the developmental state forward, because it seems to be a very interesting debate. I thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.