Tony Leon critiques South Africa’s proposed R700-million “National Dialogue,” labeling it a costly diversion from meaningful action on the country’s deep-rooted economic and governance crises.

The latest scene in the long-running tragicomedy of SA politics features a half-baked old hit called “a national dialogue”.

Weary and depressed South Africans confront broken cities and violent farms and townships, shuttered factories and sky-high debt courtesy of a no-growth economy and a corrupted state.

They might respond to the latest presidential deflection by reprising the song from the great musical My Fair Lady.

Eliza Doolittle in Show Me sings “Words! Words! I’m so sick of words… Don’t waste my time. Show me!”

There is every reason to respond to this latest wheeze with deep cynicism and a touch of despair.

The cynic-in-chief, though, is President Cyril Ramaphosa. His introduction of the national dialogue was littered with false precedents and fake parallels.

He advised the country that “through dialogue we were able to deal with the challenges that the apartheid system caused in our country and achieved peace… we established a democracy and ended apartheid”.

Misreading of history

The problem with this analogy is a deliberate misreading of history.

The Codesa and multiparty negotiations of the 1990s met the needs of bridging the divide between the forum where state power resided at the time (government and Parliament) and the unrepresented majority who were excluded from apartheid power structures.

The “people shall govern” was the call to be answered. Designing the architecture to meet this fundamental right was the purpose of that dialogue.

The system of democratic elections, a national parliament, nine provincial legislatures and hundreds of local governments set up the democratic state where the people’s representatives were sent to dialogue.

Thirty-one years later, we recount the fact that there are 490 national MPs, 487 provincial MPs, 278 municipal councils (with thousands of councillors in total). And the cost: the total salary bill for national Parliament is approximately R2.615 billion annually, and throw in the provinces and municipalities and it likely breaches the R4-billion threshold.

And that is before all the salaries, perks and packages for the “state institutions supporting democracy” are thrown into the mix. Six such bodies cover the table on all matters from human rights, culture, language, gender and public protection.

The entirety of this vast machine of state at all levels is precisely designed to give voice to aspirations and needs and to answer “our difficulties, our concerns, our hopes and our aspirations as a people”.

This formula was the exact expression which Ramaphosa offered last week in punting his national dialogue. You might be forgiven for asking what precisely have the thousands of elected representatives and state institutions been doing these past three decades at staggering cost to the bankrupt fiscus and overburdened taxpayer?

R700m talkshop

The national dialogue steering committee, populated in the main with Ramaphosa intimates and ANC acolytes, was extremely vague on this topic.

Though they were quick to place a sum on the costs of this elaborate talk shop: R700 million. How this was computed and which intermediaries, grifters and middlemen with inflated procurement bills will benefit from this endless national chat show are unknown.

Since the national government has been unable to grow the economy and take its heel off the neck of the productive sector which might spur economic activity and attract investment, we have no money for this event. This year we are indebted to the tune of approximately R6.2 trillion, so the R700 million for the national dialogue is just a modest addition to this debt spiral. Just don’t expect too much, too soon from it.

However, a ‘known known’ is that the first ‘national convention’ in August is just the start. There will be a second ‘national conversation’ only next year, and so it will go until an exhausted and distracted nation gives up that any meaningful action will follow.

But note the linguistics involved which again points to the false parallels invoked. The historic ‘national convention’ was the forum which created the Union of South Africa in 1910, from which all Black South Africans were excluded. But the participants in it had been at war with each other before it convened. So, not a great term of art.

Unfortunate precedent 

And then there is the current ‘eminent persons group’(EPG) of 32 South Africans (including Codesa revenant Roelf Meyer ) to head the national dialogue, some of whom are indeed distinguished. The EPG, though, first entered the SA lexicon back in 1985 when an exasperated Commonwealth appointed five former state leaders to “encourage dialogue aimed at dismantling apartheid in South Africa’.’

This EPG failed in its purpose, reporting in 1986 that ‘the South African government lacked genuine intent to dismantle apartheid’ and comprehensive sanctions followed.

So once again, this is an unfortunate precedent, except for one echo from that past failure.

Every scrap of available evidence today suggests that when it comes to real hard economic reform, Ramaphosa’s government is quite as deaf to reason and evidence-based outcomes as the apartheid government was on the issue of political change. At least until 1990.

Whatever outcome on economic change is produced by the latest national dialogue will not be implemented or introduced if it touches on any aspect of the ‘national democratic revolution’ of the ANC. The evidence on this, too, is clear enough.

Last year, at a cost of approximately R3 billion an election was held in South Africa. All participating parties offered their prospectuses, to address ‘our difficulties, our concerns, our hopes, our aspirations’ to borrow Ramaphosa’s claim for the national dialogue’s purpose.

True, 60% of those who voted rejected the ANC offer; but then there was a ‘statement of intent’ signed by parties who won over 70% of the seats which contained some principles and programmes many of which have been largely honoured in the breach by the GNU in the year since its formation.

Go back in time to 2012, as political analyst Prince Mashele recently did in an interview in Currency. That was the year Parliament approved the National Development Plan, which specified the action steps needed to create a high-growth and job-enhancing economy. He said:

“[This] was the blueprint for fixing the country, and yet it has only gathered dust for more than decade. Why not implement that? It’s a diversionary tactic.”

Still one unlikely early outcome of the national dialogue announcement has been its unifying effect on Ramaphosa’s allies and opponents.

His notional coalition partner, the DA, was scathing in its assessment. Its executive chair, Helen Zille, wrote on X: “Another diversion costing hundreds of millions – incomprehensible.”

ANC ally Cosatu was even more scathing on the cost aspect. Spokesperson Matthew Parks described the organisation as ‘amazed that anyone could even suggest…this rash thumb suck budget figure best dismissed as a verbal gaffe and reckless typo…”

The EFF chimed in that the national dialogue was purposed as “a false impression of work being done”, while MK dismissed the event as “a tone-deaf charade”.

Polls highlight citizens’ priorities 

So, some unexpected national unity against the proposed dialogue across the political divide. And an agreement from left to right on the politics of illusion and the evasion of the government’s core task – to act on the electoral mandate it received and to make the choices and tough trade-offs to achieve them. And not defer them.

Of course, at no cost, government could consult the detailed opinion polls to hand which specify precisely what priorities citizens expect of government and even the specific deliverables they want.

Or go abroad and look at what Argentinian President Javier Milei has achieved in just 18 months since his election. Before him, the country was ground zero for economic hopelessness and a desert for investment. Today it is forecast to grow to around 5% the precise target set for SA by the long forgotten national development plan of 2012.

Milei recently presented the new Pope Leo with a copy of Friedrich Hayek’s book The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism.

It is a primer on the repeated failures of such constructs as the local ‘national democratic revolution’ and how the more decentralised our decision-making is, the more likely the outcomes for human progress and national renewal. Not state planning and national dialogues.

And it cost just R376.89 on Amazon. A bargain basement price and likely as useful as a R700-million national dialogue.