On the 11th
of November the National Planning Commission (NPC) published the National
Development Plan (NDP). After months of planning and consultation, the NPC Jam
and numerous presentations across the country, they put forward a vision for
South Africa in 2030.
Last week
the School of Economics at NWU hosted the first Peet Strydom colloquium and the
topic of discussion was perspectives on the NDP. The panel included Prof Strydom
(an extraordinary Professor in the School) as well as Proff Philippe Burger,
Raymond Parsons, Theo Venter and the discussion was moderated by Cees
Bruggemans. The discussants presented macro, micro and political economy views
on the NDP. Academic economists from the NWU, UJ, UP, UNISA and Monash South
Africa were in attendance along with participants from the Reserve Bank,
Planning Commission and the private sector.
The panel
agreed that the NDP is centrist document on how to make a mixed economy work
better and liked the absence of ideology and spirit of endowment, rather than
entitlement. The challenges outlined by the NPC are the familiar ones of
reducing unemployment, poverty and inequality and first and foremost this
requires economic growth. Prof Strydom stressed that increasing economic growth
rates from 3% to 5% per annum and more, requires that policymakers, business
and labour do many different things right. The different elements of the plan
that were discussed included export-led growth, education and training,
infrastructure, the role of small business and the relationship between
business and labour.
Prof Burger
noted that although export-led growth will have to be part of the solution it
is no panacea. The markets that we export to are not doing well and South
Africa cannot compete as a low-cost manufacturer. Average hourly wages in South
Africa are up to five times higher than in India and three times higher than in
Mexico and Malaysia. There is a need to increase the productivity of
low-skilled labour and this raises issues of education, training and
innovation. It also links up with the need for infrastructure investment. Prof
Strydom argued that South Africa has experienced the destruction of
infrastructure capital and there is a clear need to improve the quality of
railways infrastructure, electricity provision and water management. He was
not, however, in favour of the wide spread use of user charges and argued that
government needs to supply the infrastructure at growth points. Linked to the
cost competitiveness of business the panellists spoke about a need for a
re-think of the centralised bargaining model. In was noted that the NDP has
interesting proposals on short-term employment contracts, rules regarding
dismissals and foreign skills. The fact that the NDP makes no mention of the
informal sector or second economy was also discussed. It was argued that the
informal sector can be a job creator, but the challenge lies in turning
survivalist activities into for-profit SMMEs. There is, however, limited South
African research available on the barriers to entry, need for skills
development and the roles of regulation and competition.
On the
political economy-side of the panel Prof Parsons emphasised along with “doing
many different things right”, a vision for 2030 implies a decades-long process
involving some pain: forgoing consumption now for a better life later,
businesses will have to prepare for more competition and labourers for wage
moderation. For this to succeed, requires a credible vision, a strategy for
getting there and policymakers that are trusted. Such criteria raises questions
about the political sustainability of the NDP: Can minister Manual survive
politically to see it through, is there institutional capacity, what can be the
roles of the private sector, labour and civil society?
At the end
of the colloquium the discussion centred around the issue of political will.
The NDP is another in a long line of plans and strategies: the RDP, GEAR, the
Jobs Summit, the Growth and Development summit, ASGISA, the work of the Harvard
group an and the growth commission, but there may not be time left for another
summit or plan. A lack of coherence or coordination of policies and ambivalent
signals from government (think mining nationalisation and the Wallmart court
case) can be particularly detrimental. We now require a reconciliation of the
New Growth Path and the National Development Plan and the building of a social
compact to face our challenges head-on.
All this
being said, the NDP is a discussion document that will be talked about much
more in months to come!
Who should one befriend to get invited to such interesting debates?
ReplyDeleteI'm still undecided about the NPC-plan. I'm impressed to see some micro-elements put forward. As mentioned in your post 'Analysis needed', government needs to start focusing on the what, where and hows. Micro-plans like "build hospital in Limpopo" are easier to implement than macro-plans such as "improve public transport". Success- criteria is easier to define and responsibility is easier to delegate. Micro-plans fit in nicely with Governments outcome-based management style. Nationally defined micro-plans are especially important in a government where skills and resources are "top-heavy".
It is easy to identify healthcare, education, infrastructure etcetera as prerequisites for economic prosperity. However, these illusive goals will never be reached if government does not define reasonable, implementable and measurable plans to achieve these goals. RDP, GEAR, ASGISA and New Growth are fundamentally all the same (RDP to a lesser extent). Why aren't we seeing results? Because economic ideals are not translated to workable plans. "Lower the cost of doing business and costs for households", how Mr Manual?
Furthermore, South Africa does not have a culture of austerity and solidarity. South Africans are simply not about to sacrifice some of there own for the common good. Like you wrote, whether political leaders will be willing or able to risk the political capital to make the necessary but hard decisions are, regrettably, improbable.
Finally, and I know I keep hammering on this, but the issue of labour market inflexibility is yet to be emphasized - a pink elephant in the South African economy. Whether we are talking about manufacturing competitiveness, export-led growth, productivity, skills mismatched, unemployment or poverty we are in effect talking labour market issues.
In 1970's the unions become a liability in Britain. Unions have now become a liability in South Africa also. Dame Thatcher had enough guts to fight the unions and address labour market inflexibility ensuring 20 years of British prosperity. Who will have the guts in South Africa to ensure true sustainable prosperity? Our labour market is just not in line with our developmental status.