"Towards a better understanding of the service delivery protests"
Service delivery protests have persisted for much of the past year. In fact, the first three months of this year have seen an escalation of protests. According to experts, this is the highest number of protests for any three month period since 1994. Moreover, the protests seem to be more violent than in the past.
We need to understand these protests much better. Why are these protests taking place? Who are its key participants? In which municipalities and in which specific wards are these protests taking place and why? Are there patterns to the protests? If so, what are they? Why are certain protests violent? What do the protests tell us about the model of local government? What do they reveal about the cooperative governance system we have at present? How do we respond to the protests? How do we ensure that they are reduced over time? Of course, there are more questions too that we need to ask.
This input offers a contribution to addressing some of these questions. It is certainly not a comprehensive or adequate offer. It is meant to encourage debate, and even more important, appropriate action. One thing is clear. There are no easy answers to the questions just raised. There are complex and varying reasons for the protests.
The protests have structural, systemic, political, economic, governance, psychological, emotional and other dimensions. If we are to be effective in responding to the protests, we need to understand all the dimensions of the protests. This is not to say that we must be over-intellectual or philosophical about them. Nor that we should have endless debates about them. We need to arrive at a practical understanding of these protests, and we need action to address them.
Most of the protests are about service delivery issues. But they are not just about that. Many of the protests have been taking place in better performing wards and municipalities where there has, in fact, been significant service delivery. The protests are also about a range of other municipal issues, including maladministration, nepotism, fraud, corruption and the failure of councillors and administrators to listen to residents.
But it is the rage of sections of the protestors and the extent of violence and destruction they wreak that is striking. It reflects a far more fundamental alienation of people from our democracy. It suggests an acute sense of marginalisation and social exclusion. Many of the protestors come across as outsiders, those who feel they have not got what is due to them, and will never ever do so, while others not so long ago, not that different from them, have got something, and have become "insiders".
But there are also others who are different, who are outsiders who are now insiders, who are blocking the way to others becoming insiders, the Somalis, Congolese, Pakistanis, Zimbabweans and the like. The outpouring of xenophobic rage has to be partly understood in this context. Of course, it's bad, but it's also understandable.
Both indigenous South Africans and the foreigners' residents are victims of the situation. It is anger, frustration, hopelessness that fuels some of the protestors. In many cases, burning clinics, libraries, social development offices and other violent behaviour constitute both acts of destruction and self-destruction.
It may well be that some of them have passed the threshold and their sense of persistent exclusion since 1994 is so entrenched that even significantly improving their material conditions is not going to serve to easily re-integrate them into society. For many of them, their sense of social exclusion has served to reinforce their brutalisation and dehumanisation under apartheid.
For them, in other words, things were very bad under apartheid and things have just not got better enough under democracy. They are, I think, going to constantly pose a challenge to our democracy and we will have to come to terms with this.
For others, the violent behaviour constitutes acts of affirmation. It is seen as legitimate radical protest against a state that refuses to respond to their basic needs and as an important means of achieving these. After all, in the struggle against apartheid such means were also used. These protestors draw on the legacy of the liberation struggle.
But this is a democracy. Protests are a legitimate part of a democracy and can serve to enhance its quality. But violence isn't. Of course, we condemn the violence. But doing so is not going to end it. We need to better understand the violence to more effectively respond to it.
Clearly, municipal councillors and officials must take their fair share of blame for the protests. But to blame them fully for everything would be simplistic. Many of the protestors are alienated from the state as a whole, not just local government, and not just the whole state, but from society too.
Moreover, the protests are also about many issues that do not fall within the competency of local government or are not its core responsibilities. They are also about housing, jobs, health, crime and other issues. The protests are about the failures of service delivery of all three spheres of government, even if municipalities are being targeted. Municipalities, after all, are the easy targets; they are the immediate sphere of government to the people and are experienced most directly by them. Not, let me stress again, that municipalities are not to significantly blame, of course.
The impact of the global recession on our country and the loss of some one million jobs over the past year have worsened already high unemployment levels. The dramatic increase in the cost of living with the recession has further fuelled the protests. In some municipalities, especially the larger urban ones, infrastructure and resources have been considerably strained too by the migration of people into areas that simply cannot cope and backlogs have increased.
In a sense, the protests may also be reflection of a culture of dependency on the state we have unwittingly created since 1994. So some of those who don't get what they want feel that protests are the answer instead of taking part in structures established for service delivery and taking a measure of responsibility for also ensuring delivery.
Clearly, some of the reasons factors influencing the service delivery are certainly beyond the control of municipalities. And ultimately the service delivery protests reflect the failures of the cooperative governance system as a whole, not just local government.
So where are these protests taking place? According to information available, 27 percent of the protests since 2004 have taken place in Gauteng, 14 percent in North West, 12 percent in both Western Cape and Mpumalanga, 11 percent in Free State, 10 percent in Eastern Cape, KwaZulu-Natal seven percent, four percent in Limpopo and three percent in Northern Cape. 45 percent of the protests have taken place in the metros. 34 percent have been in informal settlements.
Signally, the protests reveal the failure of local democracy. Most, not all certainly, of the people are protesting because they do not have adequate access to councillors, council officials and ward committees and other municipal structures. Clearly, the ward committee system is failing dismally. Community development workers, who are meant to connect residents with government departments, are not being effective either.
In many cases, these individuals and structures do not seem to have the pulse of the people and are unable to sense protests looming. Presumably too, in many cases, school governing bodies (SGBs), community policing forums (CPFs) and other statutory bodies are not function fully effectively.
Our ministry and department have responded swiftly to the protests. As you know, Minister Shiceka has actively intervened. He will tell you that in a significant number of cases, residents have protested after having failed to get the attention of municipalities, as well as provincial and national government departments through verbal representations to councillors and other public representatives and officials and letters, memoranda, petitions and the like.
There is certainly a marked absence of communication between councillors and residents. And even where there are positive developments in a municipality, these are often not conveyed to residents. Nor are the understandable challenges municipalities have in meeting people's service delivery and development needs. If residents were better informed by councillors, officials and others they are more likely to be understanding and less likely to embark on protests.
Despite significant advances, there is in general inadequate delivery of basic services such as water, electricity, sanitation, sewerage and refuse removal. But sometimes protests take place because of service delivery; those in the queue for delivery are not prepared to wait any longer as they see others around them receive services, thereby reinforcing their sense of marginalisation. It's, as often in similar situations, relative deprivation that spurs protests.
Protests have also been spurred by decisions to move people living in informal settlements. People prefer to stay where they are, because of proximity to workplaces or access to transport. But some are shack-lords with tenants renting shacks on their sites and they don't want to move because they will lose their businesses. In some cases, the shack-lords want to move, but their tenants will lose out and so the tenants take part in protests. People also refuse to move because they feel they have not been consulted adequately or at all.
Many municipalities are not being governed effectively and are driven by political divisions that undermine delivery. There are also internal power struggles within the ANC led alliance. This includes key activists positioning themselves to become councillors in 2011 by mobilising residents against the current councillors.
Of course, their ability to do so is linked to the poor performance of many councillors. But the struggles are also about access to tenders and other opportunities for individual profiting. The power struggles are also, in some cases, residues of the Polokwane battles. The power struggles also relate to other issues.
During the election campaign last year people were mobilised and expectations created. The protests are partly an outcome of this momentum. Experts have observed that there was a spate of municipal service delivery protests after the 2004 elections as well. The integrated development plan (IDP) consultation process with residents is managed in a way that encourages undue expectations.
"Wish lists" are decided on through engaging with residents and then very little delivery follows. Criminal elements are exploiting the situation and also stirring people to protest. But obviously political entrepreneurs and criminals are able to do this because people have legitimate grievances in the first place.
Of course, there are other reasons for the protests too. The protests are about service delivery, but they are more than just about that and may be better defined as "community protests”. We need to discuss this further. So what should be our response? How can we reduce protests?
* We need to understand the nature and causes of the protests better.
* Since the protests are ultimately a reflection of the failures of the cooperative governance system as a whole and not just local government, there has to be a coordinated response from all three spheres of government.
* The local government turnaround strategy (LGTAS) needs to be more effectively implemented. It's partly because of the protests that the LGTAS was developed. The leaders of the protests, wherever possible, should be drawn into the municipal structures of the LGTAS to take a measure of co-responsibility for service delivery and development.
* The ward committees need to be strengthened. The ministry is preparing proposals on this. A review is also being finalised of community development workers.
* We need a structure of experts across the spheres of government that responds rapidly to protests and works with the councillors to attend to the grievances of residents. This would be part of the local government turnaround strategy and serve to empower municipalities, not become a substitute for their primary role. Our ministry is to take proposals to Cabinet in this regard soon.
* South African Local Government Association (SALGA) needs to develop specific structures to attend to service delivery and work closely with the structure referred to above.
* The review of powers and functions of the three spheres of government underway must be taken further so that more effective cooperation between the spheres is made possible.
The aim is not to eliminate service delivery protests, but reduce them. Service delivery protests are an important part of a democracy. They are significant barometers of the quality of a democracy. But for the most part the nature and scope of the protests we are witnessing are not part of a healthy, growing democracy. We need to respond to them and ensure that they in future those that take place are.
Issued by: Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs
23 April 2010
Source: The Times (http://www.timeslive.co.za)
