Cape Town:  In this article of our series, Elroy Paulus, Black Sash Advocacy Programme Manager, argues that the government's new anti-poverty strategy falls far short of what is needed:  Deputy President Baleka Mbete unveiled the draft Anti-Poverty Strategy discussion document at the Union Buildings in Pretoria on October 29.  Approximately 80 representatives from the government, international agencies, civil society and public entities attended the launch.
<br><br>
Panellists who responded to the discussion document included Namhla Mniki (civil society - African Monitor - reporting on synergy report findings of the National Poverty Hearings 2008); Ravi Kanbur (academia); Isobel Frye (research) and Vic van Vuuren (business). Regrettably, labour was not present, despite being given the opportunity to be a respondent to the discussion document.
<br><br>
The government's belated - yet at least now official - recognition of the devastating impact of inequality on mass poverty in South Africa is certainly a step in the right direction. But, considering the scale of the crisis, a higher priority response of a different order - to what has, thus far, been tucked away in the presidency - is needed if we are to win the war against poverty. The battle needs to be - and must be - at the centre of our public life.
<br><br>
Deep concerns persist over whether this anti-poverty discussion document will indeed produce an enforceable or workable strategy to address the critical challenges we face as a country. Although the document has largely incorporated the concerns of those who took part in the consultation process, it still appears to be a little thin on detail and rather vague on providing a clear way forward.
<br><br>
In fairness to the government, its release has come at a time of great political upheaval locally, and enormous financial uncertainty globally.  Not only has the ruling party undergone its own dramatic transformation in recent months, but we are also facing the greatest economic crisis in living memory. The standing of the official Anti-Poverty Strategy and the way forward needs to be finalised as a matter of urgency. As Professor Raymond Parsons of Business Unity South Africa so aptly put it: at the moment, we have the "shock absorbers" of a lower oil price and a surplus, but if we are in the same situation next year, we will be "riding on the rims".
<br><br>
But the writing has been on the wall for almost a decade. Social Development Minister Zola Skweyiya recognised as far back as eight years ago mounting evidence that our government's policies were failing the poor, and that the deep structural inequalities seen under apartheid were being entrenched and deepened. Skweyiya, then the minister of welfare, acknowledged we were "sitting on a time-bomb of poverty and social disintegration", and that persistent and increasing levels of poverty, violence, social inequality, highly inequitable income and asset distributions, as well as poor economic growth, had the potential to "reverse the democratic gains made since 1994".
<br><br>
Prominent University of the Western Cape economist Pieter le Roux put it more bluntly in a newspaper article published in March 2000: "If urgent action is not taken, our society cannot be sustained and will collapse in 10 to 15 years because of growing inequalities."
<br><br>
Therefore, it has become imperative that all of us work together with a sense of urgency towards finding solutions to reverse the unsustainable trajectory that is causing untold concern among the wealthy, increased tensions and stress in the middle class, and incredible hardship in the lives of the unemployed and working poor in South Africa.
<br><br>
To save time, and yet remain transparent and accountable, an acceptable mechanism needs to be found on how future engagements and inputs from civil society, labour and business will be taken on board, and how and whether these will be accepted, amended or rejected.  For example, there is an urgent need to get finalisation on the stalled work of the Poverty Measure Task Team currently tabled at Nedlac.
<br><br>
Labour, civil society and business representatives of this task team are anxiously awaiting feedback from the government, in particular the national treasury. Essentially, there's been an ideological disagreement. Civil society and labour insist interventions to address poverty must consider the beast's multi-dimensional nature. But the treasury and Statistics South Africa appear to be leaning towards an income-only-based measure of poverty.
<br><br>
Therefore, it is encouraging to see that the multi-dimensional nature of poverty has indeed been recognised in the government's draft anti-poverty strategy discussion document, and the strategy's framework is anchored around eight so-called "pillars". The strategy document states: "In line with the adoption of a multi-dimensional nature (definition) of poverty", the anti-poverty framework must be anchored on pillars that help to "locate the roles of government, the private sector and society at large in addressing the different dimensions of poverty". It also reflects the inter-related and inter-dependent roles of these in addressing poverty.
<br><br>
However, the line the government takes regarding some of these principles, and the lack of clarity and direction generally in the document, remain a cause for concern.  For example, if we look at the first "pillar" - the creation of economic opportunities with a pro-poor emphasis - it is not clear in the discussion document exactly how this will happen. Surely, though, it is imperative that any labour-intensive work should have agreed on norms and standards so it doesn't open up opportunities to exploit people as cheap labour.
<br><br>
Another example of the lack of firm commitment and direction is illustrated in the third "pillar".  This is to provide income security through safety nets for the most vulnerable, primarily through social grants. Will "the most vulnerable" continue to exclude the unemployed and working poor and other vulnerable citizens from receiving social protection?
<br><br>
It must be remembered our current social security system is based on the projected needs of a country with acceptable levels of employment and growth. It was designed to only provide support for traditionally vulnerable groups - the very young, old, disabled and those who have worked in the formal sector and are temporarily unemployed.  The system was constructed during apartheid to serve the needs of a relatively well-off minority. Therefore, it is crucial to see the current gaps in the social security system as a consequence of our past. We cannot afford to tinker just with the existing framework in response to the manifestations of the crisis of poverty, as this would be a completely inadequate response to the needs - and constitutional rights - of all South Africans.
<br><br>
Despite the government's enormous strides in rolling out social grants, there remain major, critical gaps in the system. For example, there is no social protection for 15- to 18-year-olds who are still at school. There is nothing either for the unemployed, working poor or chronically ill. Introducing a comprehensive social security system must surely be one of the most crucial strategies in our fight against poverty, particularly because of the extent and nature of structural unemployment in South Africa. After all, social security remains one of the sharpest social policy tools available to address unsustainably high levels of poverty and inequality.

<br><br>
And it must be governed by certain fundamental principles if we are to heal our deeply divided nation and find greater social cohesion. Firstly, our social security system needs to be rights-based in accordance with our Constitution. It also needs to be universal. Everyone should be able to access social assistance when they need it. Currently, the undignified, cumbersome and discretionary "means testing" that applies to social grants often leads to unintended or incorrect exclusion or fraudulent behaviour.
<br><br>
Our social security system should also demonstrate social solidarity. It should provide protection for everyone by allowing for maximum cross-subsidisation (redistribution) from the rich to the poor, the healthy to the ill, the employed to the unemployed, and so on.
<br><br>
Finally, it needs to be transparent and democratically governed. The policies, administration and implementation should be fully transparent and accountable to democratic structures in which organs of civil society participate.
<br><br>
One of the respondents at the launch of the Anti-Poverty Strategy discussion document was Professor Ravi Kanbur, a respected economist at Cornell University. He pointed out that there is often a "disconnect with what is measured by government, and what is felt on the ground".  Therefore, it is critical for the government to engage the informal sector, the marginalised and working poor more directly, and bring the fight against poverty into the centre of public life in South Africa.
<br><br>
Now, more than ever, the precious resources, skills and people power we have in South Africa to address this challenge must be employed with greater diligence, accountability and value for money. Above all, putting people first must dominate the agenda of our government. Failure to do this may have dire consequences that would take a very long time to undo.

• This article was originally published on page 9 of The Cape Times on November 18, 2008