702 People's Dialogue: Citizens reflect on poverty and inequality in SA
Just days before the inaugural National Dialogue, Radio 702 has gathered South Africans across all walks of life, who are currently grappling with the many challenges facing the country, with most in the room expressing frustration with corruption that's not being tackled sufficiently.
Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse's Julius Kleynhans said laws and policies and even the various commissions are not the problem.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
4 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
In its current, elitist shape, the National Dialogue substitutes form for substance
In theory, a 'national dialogue' sounds necessary — a grand, inclusive conversation designed to chart a course out of sweeping structural crises. But in practice, the current iteration risks becoming a hollow vanity project: a carefully choreographed performance by political elites, masquerading as transformative reckoning, but bereft of transparency, tangible commitment or ownership by the people. This National Dialogue, commissioned by President Cyril Ramaphosa, is emerging less as a path of healing — addressing seemingly insurmountable socioeconomic issues — and more as a varnish meticulously applied to cover over the deep cracks threatening the very foundations of our society. Let us pierce the PR veil: from its inception, this initiative has been far more characterised by gestural symbolism than courageous reform. Yes, there are meetings. Yes, there are soundbites about 'inclusivity' and 'national unity'. But beyond the spectacle, clarity is conspicuously absent. Who designs the agenda? Where is the unvarnished documentation of participants' positions, agreements, and, just as critically, disagreements? Accountability? It is nowhere to be seen. Instead, we witness a calibrated, closed-door process that echoes the exclusivity of watershed interventions — like the Convention for a Democratic South Africa (Codesa) and the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) — where certain voices were granted airtime and others, particularly those of the marginalised, were systematically excluded. Among the most sour ironies of this spectacle is how it masks as progress what is really a retreat from accountability. The government drapes itself in the language of 'dialogue', 'listening', and 'consensus-building', yet consistently fails to release clear timelines, deliverables, or even an independent audit mechanism. A feelgood charade Without these, the entire exercise remains unmoored — a feelgood charade. And in this absence, citizens — who yearn for deep structural redress — grow angrier, resentful and even more alienated, sensing that their pain is being ritualistically acknowledged in words alone, not addressed in policy or reform. This is dangerous. As social commentators remind us, when citizens perceive dialogue to be superficial and performative, anger escalates. Real people — workers, students, community activists, township residents, rural communities — do not want symposiums of self-congratulation. They want real solutions: justice, economic equity, quality education, healthcare that doesn't bankrupt families, land reform that returns dignity, and governance that isn't riddled with corruption. But this National Dialogue offers none of that; it substitutes form for substance. Moreover, the lack of full transparency isn't accidental — it is strategic. By controlling the narrative and confining discourse to carefully selected participants — many of whom are politically connected or institutionally entrenched — the architects of this initiative limit dissent, forestall disruption and preserve the status quo. Systemic inequities remain untouched, while elites enjoy the illusion of legitimacy through media optics: a televised statement here, a glowing article there, a congratulatory headline lengthening the shelf life of government spin. But let us not mince words: dressed-up conversations are not leadership. They are weak sedatives, meant to lull the public into believing progress is being made. Yet beneath the vocal harmonies lies a rhythm of inertia. There are no plans, no commitments to constitutional reform, no public financing to remedy inequality, no enforcement instruments tied to dialogue outcomes. The initiative is effectively immobilised, waiting for political whim, subject to partisan will, and devoid of the coercive impetus required to compel structural transformation. The government — and its big business allies — may hope that the spectacle of dialogue will buy time: to slow down protests, silence dissenting voices, and repackage governance as consultative rather than coercive. But if the public discerns that this dialogue is a mirage — a cosmetic application over rotting infrastructure — the backlash won't merely persist. It will intensify. Anger morphs into radical realisation: that institutions meant to protect and empower citizens have become self-serving, out of touch and cowardly. For the National Dialogue to avoid that fate — and regain moral integrity — it must be radically reconfigured. First, full transparency isn't optional; it is non-negotiable. Every stage of the process and how participants were identified must be documented, recorded and made freely accessible — agendas, minutes, draft proposals, dissenting opinions, all. Second, civic representation must not be tokenistic. Grassroots movements, community organisations and historically excluded voices must be central, not ornamental. Measurable commitments Third, there must be measurable commitments: a public road map, with timelines, milestones, responsibility assignments and monitoring mechanisms independent from government interference. And fourth, consequences must follow — if outcomes are not implemented, participating officials must be made to answer to the electorate, including through binding referenda or judicial oversight. In the absence of these fundamental reforms, this National Dialogue will remain not a beacon of hope, but a hollow performance — 'a conversation about how best to paint over the cracks' as critics suggest — without the substance of genuine rebuilding. And here lies the final and grimmest danger: when dialogue is unmoored from implementation while seemingly designed to shield past political administrations from accountability, it amplifies the very crisis it purports to address. It sows cynicism, delegitimises our institutions and green-lights the rise of populist or radical alternatives. In a society facing deep divides, escalating inequality and institutional distrust, that outcome isn't hypothetical — it is all too possible. Of course, a national dialogue is necessary. But it must be meaningful, inclusive, and yield clear, actionable and measurable outcomes. Recycling self-congratulatory platitudes about the Constitutional Assembly that produced our current Constitution — or the largely failed or ineffectual National Development Plan — while ignorant of the zeitgeist does not in itself make for a cogent national dialogue. The public deserves a national dialogue that speaks truth, empowers communities and delivers reform. What we have instead is a curated exercise in surface-level conversations, conducted by the few, witnessed by many, but owned by none. It is time to dismantle the charade — and start conversing with courage, transparency, and real consequence.
Daily Maverick
23 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
National Dialogue's big question of cost shrouded in mystery
How much will the National Dialogue cost? That's the (multi) million-rand question. The National Convention – the preclude to the National Dialogue – is supposed to be the launchpad for months of citizen-led talks about South Africa's future. However, it will be held later this week amid big questions over budget and readiness, and without the buy-in of several foundations that were behind the initial process. Last Friday, legacy foundations including the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, Steve Biko Foundation, Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation and four others withdrew from the gathering, citing concerns over government control, the continued absence of a confirmed budget, and a rush to stage the National Convention on 15 and 16 August. 'The continued absence of a confirmed, approved budget allocation and a last-minute commitment of initial funds has made sound preparation impossible. This raises real risks of a poorly organised and unaccountable process. 'The push to proceed has created pressure to engage in emergency procurement, which may violate the Public Finance Management Act (PFMA),' the foundations said in a statement on Friday, 8 August. They said the withdrawal of their participation in the Preparatory Task Team (PTT) – which comprised the foundations, NGOs, community groups and representatives from the Presidency – and the first National Convention, did not mean a withdrawal from the National Dialogue project itself. While the Presidency has insisted that costs are being managed and will be largely covered by in-kind contributions, it has not revealed a final budget for the National Dialogue. This is because a budget for the National Dialogue will be finalised only after the National Convention, according to Presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya. 'The total budget for the National Dialogue will be developed as the structure and form of the community dialogues are finalised by the Convention, and will depend on in-kind contributions, donations and other resources that can be mobilised,' a statement from Magwenya said on Sunday, 10 August. In response to questions, Magwenya told Daily Maverick: '[The] total budget will be confirmed after the finalisation of the full roll-out process of the Dialogue by the National Convention.' Cost confusion Questions surrounding the total cost of the National Dialogue have been made ever more complicated by a recent report in the Sunday Times, which suggested a clash was taking place behind the scenes between President Cyril Ramaphosa and former president Thabo Mbeki, over arrangements for the National Dialogue. In its report, the Sunday Times cited government insiders who claimed that the foundations had proposed an initial R853-million budget for the National Dialogue, which they then 'begrudgingly' lowered to R700-million, after Ramaphosa refused their request. This allegedly then went down further to a budget of R452-million, the publication reported. The Sunday Times article seems to suggest that the total budget for the National Dialogue has been finalised at R452-million. However, this is untrue, with the Presidency confirming the budget hasn't been finalised. In addition, the foundations dispute the claim that they proposed an R853-million budget. Magwenya didn't respond to questions on the matter. CEO of the Steve Biko Foundation Nkosinathi Biko, who was the chairperson of the PTT, and CEO of the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation Janet Jobson told Daily Maverick that the figure of R853-million reported by the Sunday Times was, in fact, never put forward among the PTT for consideration. 'I have never heard of a figure of R853-million, and I was chair of that PTT,' said Biko. Jobson told Daily Maverick that the PTT had proposed an initial R76-million for a National Dialogue that was first conceptualised as a digital platform. 'That was for quite a different vision of the Dialogue National; largely as a digital platform and through the process of engaging citizens through technology. But, in discussions, it emerged that we felt it necessary for it to be a face-to-face process, and one that reached every corner of the country,' said Jobson. 'After that, we started the budgeting process for a much more extensive initiative,' she said. The PTT workshopped scenarios and approaches for a face-to-face dialogue, and a request was made to cost the roll-out of that model, which came back at R700-million, according to Jobson. However, she said, R700-million was never a figure considered for approval. A figure of about R450-million was also a proposed scenario that was discussed among the PTT, but again it was never approved, according to Jobson. 'Transparent and accountable' In their joint statement, the foundations called for the National Dialogue to be 'transparent and accountable, with no space for corruption or mismanagement of funds in its process.' Chairperson of Parliament's Standing Committee on Appropriations Mmusi Maimane, in a statement on Monday, expressed 'serious concerns' over the funding and implementation of the National Dialogue, saying he would seek clarification on the funding from the National Treasury. 'While the National Dialogue is vital for our democracy, we are deeply troubled by the absence of a concrete funding strategy. There is no dedicated allocation in the national budget and, in an already constrained fiscal environment, we cannot afford to divert resources from other critical priorities,' said Maimane. He said the funding model had to be sustainable and accountable, and could not place an added burden on taxpayers. Maimane said the committee had written to the National Treasury requesting clarity on the budget vote funding the National Dialogue, and an impact assessment report on programmes that might be affected by diverted funds. In Sunday's statement, Magwenya said that all budgetary processes relating to the National Convention were consistent with the PFMA. He said the costs of the convention were being funded from the existing budgets of the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac), and the Presidency for secretariat support, communications and logistics. 'The provisions in the Appropriation Act and the PFMA will be used to reimburse the Department of Employment and Labour, and Nedlac, in the Adjustments Budget later this year. All procurement and management of public funds will adhere to the PFMA and applicable Treasury regulations. All funds will be accounted for through the normal public finance mechanisms,' said Magwenya. In response to questions from Daily Maverick about the concerns over transparency and accountability, Magwenya said: 'The National Convention could not be pre-empted. Any finalised budget prior to the National Convention would have been speculative. The National Treasury has made provisions for the National Dialogue, which will be finalised after the Convention. In-kind support or sponsorship has been secured for the Convention and more support will be secured for the Dialogue roll-out. 'Any talk of an absence of a funding strategy is devoid of reality and truth. Public expenditures are reported in Parliament and in budgetary processes. I don't understand what informs concerns about transparency,' he said. DM
Daily Maverick
24 minutes ago
- Daily Maverick
Parks Tau's ‘Plan A' turns to new markets to outrun Trump's trade war
SA dangles blueberries and pork in a bid to avert the US tariff blow. South Africa has offered easier market access for American blueberries, poultry and pork in a revised trade offer to the US Trade Representative on Tuesday, 12 August. In a fortnight, container-loads of the exports will hit the waters from Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Alabama from three American ports. This is the cornerstone of a multi-pronged revised offer that SA hopes will stave off punitive tariffs of 30% that are steadily being implemented, and which have already cost jobs and contracts. Will it be enough to see off the trade war from truculent US President Donald Trump? It's unlikely, although a sharpened talks team will go to the US to walk through the revised offer. Trade Minister Parks Tau and Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen, along with new trade attachés and negotiating teams, will jet off to Asia and the Middle East to bolster new markets primarily for SA's fruit exports and motor cars – the casualties of the sky-high US tariffs. South Africa is now exporting apples to Thailand after a 16-year hiatus, an example of what new trade routes may look like. Steenhuisen said a beachhead had been opened with China, open to negotiations on access for five kinds of stone fruit, avocados and citrus once the black spot restriction is solved. The avo industry in Limpopo is so resilient, Steenhuisen revealed, that it believes it can still be competitive even at a 30% US export tariff. He also said SA was in negotiations for biofuels and wine exports. Market access talks are open in Vietnam and Japan (for wine, citrus and possibly ship-building exports). The Middle East is a key target with state visits to and from Qatar, the UAE and a wider number of Gulf countries scheduled for later this year. 'This is not a Plan B; it is a Plan A for long-term resilience and competitiveness,' said Tau at a briefing on the new trade offer. While Asia and the Middle East offer bigger markets, the obvious trading partners are on our doorstep. With the African continent forecast to grow at above 5% this year (albeit off a low base), the most significant opportunities are through the African Continental Free Trade Area and with the EU, still SA's largest trading partner, and China. The government also wants South Africans to buy cars, clothes and other manufactured goods made locally to grow domestic demand. The enhanced trade offer to the US was made as part of the Southern African Customs Union (Sacu) bloc of SA, Botswana, Eswatini, Lesotho and Namibia. 'The imposition of reciprocal tariffs by the US has created substantial obstacles for Sacu member countries, pressure on vital industries and employment. Although there are ongoing efforts to secure exemptions and expand trade relations, this situation highlights the susceptibility of smaller economies to global policy shifts,' said the Trade and Industrial Policy Strategies think-tank. Non-disclosure agreements govern trade talks, so the South African team may not have disclosed details, but key deals are missing from the revised offer made public. In July, Tau included the import of 750-1,000 petajoules of LNG for 10 years; SA foreign direct investment into the US of $3.3-billion in mining and metals recycling, and the exemption of specific sectors from reciprocal tariffs, including ship-building and counter-seasonal agricultural trade in citrus and other fruit. DM
