KGAUGELO GUMEDE | National dialogue: talk is not cheap, it’s robbing South Africans blind

Maybe it’s just me, but I have questions about the national dialogue. I imagine sitting here that as confused as I am with access to all the news reports, this so-called national dialogue must be even more confusing and arbitrary to most South Africans who have been pushed to the fringes of the rainbow nation dream.

I challenge any ordinary South African to pick up their phone and have a meaningful conversation about the intention, the subject matter for discussion, the budget breakdown, the programme rollout schedules, and their knowledge of the participating and representation in the national dialogue.

Unfortunately, the reality is that government, political parties and even some civil society groups are so detached and far removed from the communities that I keep asking myself, who is this thing intended for, and what is the expected outcome? Is this just another talk shop and a waste of time and money? We know very little about this national dialogue as South African nationals.

Let us start with the biggest elephant in the room, which, for me, is representation. It was recently reported that a number of so-called “legacy foundations” have opted out of participating in the national dialogue. These include the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, FW De Klerk Foundation and others, including the right-wing movement AfriForum. Most of these organisations are very far removed from community activism in the modern South Africa and do not really understand the struggles and pressing issues of everyday life as a citizen. Most of them are only accessible to people in certain circles, meaning they are far from being nationally inclusive. Of course, we can’t expect a single NGO to represent the issues and aspirations of all South Africans.

Why should the nation be dragged into a dialogue without any logical parameters or end goal just so we can do collective group work, which, quite frankly, is what the president, his advisers, think-tanks and cabinet should be constantly preoccupied with?

But who else is involved and representing us from all walks and classes of life in South Africa? If local counsellors and traditional leaders in broader communities have a disjointed relationship with their constituents to the point that pockets of our society are in constant turmoil, plagued by unending protests, who is representing the people on the ground in this dialogue? Will it be the same people who profess to understand us as a people from far-off distances, imagining that our realities are the same when they are not?

Then there is the issue of a R700m budget that was initially requested. It was reported that R20m will be spent just on transporting 1,000 delegates by various methods, including road and aviation, and this is just for phase 1 of the national dialogue, which is the national convention due to kick off this week. That is a R20,000 budget per delegate to travel from one destination to another and back, within South Africa. Who on earth is being transported for that much, and who are these service providers of travel who charge so much? Then there are catering costs, accommodation, facilitation and project management. Who came up with this budget, and how did they even arrive at the figure of R700m?

Another question that I have in my long list is quite simply, what are we discussing? What is the national dialogue about? Can anyone succinctly explain to us in football terms, as the cool kids would say? What should this nation be in dialogue about, which the government is not aware of, that the government can’t determine majority public sentiment. What should we discuss beyond the briefings that the president and his cabinet receive regularly?

What is truly keeping the government from serving its public, and by government I mean from all spheres, including the executive, parliament, the judiciary, as well as civil servants and officials working in government as a whole? Why should the nation be dragged into a dialogue without any logical parameters or end goal just so we can do collective group work, which, quite frankly, is what the president, his advisers, think-tanks and cabinet should be constantly preoccupied with.

Has President Cyril Ramaphosa and his government failed and run out of ideas so much that they need to call us to the table to discuss matters which should be their everyday job? They know full well how ordinary South Africans feel about those matters, but they are failing to act on them. Imagine having to have a national dialogue and discussing the aspirations of the nation, with an ever-increasing murder rate, an unemployment rate skyrocketing and economic growth that is slower than receiving justice in a country ravaged by crime and loss of hope.

The real national dialogue should be among citizens only, discussing what we should do with this ineffective government leadership that we have. It’s not like we don’t know the challenges our people face. If we are being serious, we should be using the national dialogue as a voice and conversation on the type of leadership we want. We should be giving each and every aspect of our systems of government a thorough review, as well as those who are entrusted with governance but are failing dismally.

We should be organising ourselves and give an evaluation of services rendered and changes to be made, including cutting out corrupt and inept so-called leaders, officials and civil servants. It’s about time we took ourselves seriously as citizens. For as long as we let politicians get away with symbolic, meaningless money-draining talk-shops like this national dialogue, then we must also accept the rubbish quality of service and national leadership we get and stop complaining about a reality that we allow, a form of tacit complicity. Yes, the longer we allow such things to go on unabated and without question, we are indeed complicit in the rot of our country as its people.