Growth vs. The People: The GNU’s Defining Economic Test

Can the GNU Find a Balance Between Economic Growth and Social Justice?

Those who don't learn from history are doomed to repeat it. South Africa's budget is contentious once again in politics, and the economy is back up for debate. Parties in the Government of National Unity attempt to find a middle ground and a way to usher in a better South Africa for all—or so they claim.

Reading Peter du Toit's book The Super Cadres, I came across the contention that pulled at the ANC and, in many ways, divided the party. The presentation of Growth, Employment and Redistribution (GEAR) was South Africa's economic reform program from 1996. The plan aimed to create jobs, reduce poverty, and improve the economy.

Considered a very neoliberal act at the time, GEAR intended to manage the debt and prioritise giving South Africa a macroeconomic plan that could be presented to international investors. Dropping the Freedom Charter, Ready to Govern, and RDP housing, it seemed that the ANC no longer cared for its socialist values in the same way it was perceived prior to the establishment of GEAR.

It furthermore highlighted a sentiment that is present now in the current decision. It highlighted the desire to reach 3% per annum GDP growth to deal with the growing unemployment that was plaguing the country, which has only worsened, with hopes of achieving 6% growth by 2000.

In its first five years, it reached this goal once, in 2000, when it achieved a growth rate of 4.20%. Averaging around 2.48%, it appeared to be effective in expressing positive GDP growth until it was replaced in 2006. However, it still remained unpopular among many within the ANC.

Former President Jacob Zuma weaponised the implementation of GEAR as a shift away from social policies to neoliberal capitalism against Mbeki, which led to Mbeki's loss in the ANC election and his subsequent resignation as president.

Once again, the GNU is faced with setting up a new framework that speaks to South African needs and necessities. We need to be careful not to protect the economy at the expense of the people. Simultaneously, we need to express and explain what many of these changes and policies mean for South Africans.

Though many deemed GEAR ineffective, it gave way to BEE and child grants, which helped many families access state support and economic activities. The flaws in these policies, which made a minority of the Black community rich, presented a system that perpetuated inequality.

BEE did not live up to the hopes of economic empowerment for all. It instead presented economic empowerment for a few, as many influential leaders and people who had ties to politics and activism were beneficiaries of lucrative deals, while the public struggled to access basic education, healthcare, and job opportunities.

In many ways, GEAR was protecting the macroeconomy of the country without reforming the country. It allowed for a dominant neoliberal capitalist system to thrive and left people hoping for the trickle-down system to work and be rewarded. It failed to actualise.

Now, we have a Government of National Unity that claims to want to provide jobs, healthcare, and education. It still has its focus on the economy. President Ramaphosa echoed a need for growth throughout the economy.

"To create this virtuous cycle of investment, growth, and jobs, we must lift economic growth to above 3%. To achieve higher levels of economic growth, we are undertaking massive investment in new infrastructure while upgrading and maintaining the infrastructure we have. We are developing innovative ways of funding infrastructure," Ramaphosa said.

It lacks many of the practical and pragmatic ways South Africans' lives will be fulfilled, already setting out an ambitious goal as the country relies on the corruption that stripped municipalities and SOEs of their budgets. It appears that action needs to be taken—and it needs to be taken quickly.

Over the years, medical facilities, schools, and basic services have been dealing with budget cuts, corruption, and a lack of funding. There is a need to find ways to stimulate the economy and provide relief for the most dire and pressing issues now, not in the near future.

If South Africa, as it did in the past, picks the economy instead of the people, we will only be waiting for someone just as smart—or even smarter—than President Zuma to dominate political discourse once again, pointing out the neoliberal tactics that have dominated the ANC.

Many communities have expressed how privatisation only makes things worse and more expensive. Already, the cost of living is deemed too high. The people of South Africa need answers before we are all led astray, looking for a bigger and better socialist with greater promises—and an even worse execution.