NUMSA's Response to Mr Mathe's Defence of the NPC

Mr Khulekani Mathe's response to NUMSA's critique of the NDP, ‘A Response to NUMSA's Attack on the National Development Plan' (24 March 2013, City Press Online), refers. It is indeed "heartening", to observe that Mr Mathe is beginning to engage with NUMSA constructively, rather than throw insults at our General Secretary, comrade Irvin Jim, such as the NPC's claim that comrade Jim suffers from "infantile disorder" for critiquing the NDP.

However his response, like many responses that we have received so far, falls far short, simply because it does not go straight to the issues we raise in our critique. I will not engage with his distorted view of our policies which, it is obvious from his article, he has not even cared to read. I will therefore focus on the NDP, because we were "arrogantly" told, "it is the only game in town".

Just to clear the air, it should be acknowledged that our union has made submissions and severely criticised both the Diagnostic and the Draft plan of the NDP since 2011. None of our criticism was responded to by the NPC. An impression must therefore not be created that suggests that our union has "just woken up" to critique the NPC. We have engaged with the NPC's work since its inception. Our union is well-known for its public stances on issues surrounding manufacturing, macroeconomic policy and the NDP among others. We invite Mr Mathe and our detractors to visit our website and consult our record of media statements on these issues.

Let us now turn to what Mr Mathe has written, in response to our critique. The first point to raise is that Mr Mathe's article is surprisingly silent on our claim that the NDP is of a plagiaristic nature. We claimed that strategic parts of the NDP's proposals, especially those relating to the Economy, Economic Infrastructure and Land Reform, were lifted directly from the Democratic Alliance's policy documents. We also claimed that ideologically, the NDP is closest to the DA. Instead of responding to this charge, Mr Mathe writes: "The less said about Numsa's dismissive attitude towards delegates who attended the 53rd ANC National Conference and about its gratuitous insult on the partisan origins of the NDP the better!" This is not a factual rebuttal of our charge, but a ploy to hide behind the delegates of the 53rd National Conference of the ANC. 

This isolationist attempt to whip up the emotions of the delegates of the 53rd Conference of the ANC will not work with us. It is just a poor diversion from the issues. It will not erase the fact that strategic proposals in the NDP reflect those proposed by the DA, and neither does it erase the fact that the NDP sits comfortably within the neoliberal framework.

We have presented our analytical critique of the NDP to the public, where we have provided proof that the NDP peddles DA policies. We went to the extent of referring readers to page numbers and direct quotations from relevant documents. Mr Mathe must explain how it came about that the policies and philosophy of a rabidly neoliberal political party such as the DA, found themselves in a document that was adopted by "the disciplined force of the left". Accusing NUMSA derisively, of "singing revolutionary songs about its revolutionary purity" does not answer this question.

Mr Mathe insistently writes: "The NDP proposes several measures to grow the economy in a more inclusive manner, to directly tackle poverty and inequality and to change patterns of ownership and control in the economy...The plan also provides the most coherent proposals to date to improve the effectiveness of the state... The NDP sets out proposals on how to achieve these objectives." He does not mention even one proposal, not even one. His style is just to focus on the most obvious broad outcomes, with which it would obviously be untenable to differ. All of us want to "tackle poverty and inequality" and we all want "better education". NUMSA is not opposed to these things. The issue is: what are the concrete measures that the NDP proposes to achieve them? Reading the NDP, we come across statements such as "ensure this", "promote that", "encourage this", and "explore this and that". Such statements do not tell us how, exactly, "this and that" will be "encouraged", "promoted" or "ensured". In our critique, we mention that this is simply a plan without instruments, a plan without a plan.

Mr Mathe must tell us what instruments will be deployed to, for example, support broad-based industrialisation. He claims the NDP "proposes several measures...to change patterns of ownership and control in the economy", what exactly are those measures? The only thing mentioned in relation to ownership and control of the economy is the plan to make capital available to blacks in order to finance BEE. No mention is made in the entire 440 odd pages of the NDP about how this capital will be acquired and from whom.

Then there is this issue about how BEE raises the cost of capital for white people, and yet again it is not mentioned how white people's cost of capital will be reduced. What we know from his source, the DA, is that BEE should be tax deductible, so that the "rich give more", like charity. There is nothing about the ownership and control of strategic sectors such as petro-chemicals, steel and minerals in the NDP. Some vague and weak rhetorical mention of "clusters" features, but nothing about what policy measures will be used to support industrialisation. Yet, Mr Mathe wants to make us believe that they are serious about industrialisation. True, the NPC has delivered to the working class a "radical" plan, but it is a "radical neoliberal" plan, like the DA policies. 

Now, this style of presenting public policy, the style of elevating generally agreed outcomes while concealing the instruments that are required to attain these outcomes, is yet another diversion. In our detailed critique of the NDP, we show that whatever minute concrete interventions are mentioned in the whole 440 odd pages of the NDP, they sit comfortably within the standard neoliberal framework. Consequently the NDP decisively fails to break out of the GEAR mould.

That is why it is extremely puzzling for Mr Mathe to write: "The NPC seeks to radically transform the economy without destroying it". His understanding of this is that the South African state must retain or protect "the wealth of the rich" because apparently "the wealth of the rich" sustains existing jobs. This type of thinking once and for all rules out an overarching strategy of redistribution as a frame within which the economy operates. This is as neoliberal as they come.

To round it all off, Mr Mathe even fails to hide his failed DA-isque economic assumption. Listen to this: "The National Development Plan proposes that we should raise economic growth, ratchet up exports to generate surpluses for investment....South Africa is a small economy with a low saving rate...etc, etc." This is policy sloganeering under the guise of sounding sophisticated. The problems of South Africa are not due to the fact that there is not enough growth, as we mentioned in our critique. If growth were the fundamental issue, then why did the democratic forces take up arms against colonialism?

Since when was growth the instrument to fight colonial structures and their apartheid offshoots? This is exactly the trickle down approach of GEAR, the DA and the rest of the neoliberals; no overarching strategy to ensure growth is redistributive. The neoliberals say growth creates more wealth, more wealth means more is shared, together, forever! The DA wants to grow the pie without a redistributive strategy; the NDP wants to grow the cake without a redistributive strategy, spot the difference.

Similarly, the problem with the South African economy is not that we have "low savings". Where have people saved their way out of colonial domination? In fact, if South Africa had a plan that is underpinned by an appropriate macroeconomic policy, there would be much higher savings than is currently the case. All that Mr Mathe and his colleagues at the NPC have to do is just to read the Reserve Bank bulletin to see that much of the profits generated in this economy are exported, thanks to excessive foreign ownership of strategic monopoly industries and the financial system.

All that Mr Mathe and the NPC have to do is just read up on the extent of over and under-invoicing that is taking place in the South African economy, to see the extent of illegal capital flight and read up on what the EU and emerging fast-growing economies are doing with taxes on financial speculation. The story that the tax rate cannot be changed and that only growth can save us to balance the fiscal position is plain DA fiscal policy and bears no relation to a genuine redistributive and transformative strategy. For want of space, we can go on, showing how ridiculous the NDP's approach to macroeconomic management is. 

Lastly, it is indeed "heartening" to notice that Mr Mathe is no longer as self-assured as the NPC initially was, going around the country claiming that "the entire society", "all South Africans", support the NDP. Now he is cautious to say "virtually all South Africans" agree to reduce unemployment and eliminate poverty. This is however, very different to saying NUMSA agrees with the targets set out in the plan, nor does this mean that we agree with the NDP.

The extremely populist self-assurance by Mr Mathe and the NPC that "all South Africans" support the NDP is still doing the rounds though, but it does not help Mr Mathe and the NPC to elevate obviously good outcomes as if they constitute the actual plan. The plan is supposed to map out how we get from the current state to the agreed outcomes. Sadly, as our union has observed, it is precisely in this mapping out that the NDP fails, dismally.

Castro Ngobese is Numsa National Spokesperson

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter