Transformation

Andrew Layman:  PCB CEO

If ever there were an over-used term, it is “transformation”.    It’s used by all and sundry and never seems to mean exactly the same thing.   Many seem to regard it as the measurement of how many disadvantaged people, including women and people with disabilities, are employed in positions that were previously denied to them.   Thus, it is seen as a matter of affirmative action or employment equity.  And yet, even when these expectations are met – and they are in some cases – the calls for “transformation” continue.    In a government document that I read recently, reference was made to gender discrimination as one of the legacies of apartheid.    I don’t agree with this.   Apartheid may be held responsible for many human rights infringements, but I don’t think that this was one of them.   Gender discrimination is a cultural issue, it seems to me, and reflects attitudes of almost the whole of the global society until very recent times.   It is true, some societies have embraced women’s rights quicker than others, but there are many countries throughout the world where women remain the subjects of implicit discrimination.   Politics and Business are mostly dominated by men wherever one goes.   Despite the disappointment of women’s movements, South Africa is moving quite quickly in a positive direction as far as the leadership of women is concerned.    We have an enlightened constitution to provide the imperative for this, but the ANC, in particular, has committed itself to fulfilling the constitutional promise, perhaps even despite the cultural and social mores of some of its members and supporters.

But can this be said to be the kind of transformation that is required?   Will we be satisfied if the numbers prove parity without there being any other significant change?   Will we be happy when the majority of company shareholders are black and one plutocracy becomes replaced by another?   This, I believe, is happening now; slowly yes, but at a pace which far outstrips the pace of change that applies to the lower orders of society where poverty is rife.   Is it transformation for society to be intimidated by the demands of worker unions?   Does this signify a desirable new order in which the withdrawal of labour and the accompanying application of pressure will determine the path for the country to follow?    Public sector workers are demanding what they call a “living wage” and claim that it is in the interests of the poor to be paid this so that they will be more committed to delivering services to them.    Millions would be happy to earn a fraction of the salaries that are being claimed.   Not that all the demands are unreasonable.  Far from it, in fact.   Teachers, nurses and doctors are notoriously under-paid considering the value of their services to society.  This is not characteristic of this country alone.   All sorts of other things consume financial resources which are insufficient, inevitably, to do justice to these essential servants of society.    Defenders of budgets hide behind the quantum of money spent on education, for example, without addressing the implication that if all this money fails to produce the desired improvement, much must be wasted.   I don’t think it’s about the money; it’s more about the priority.  Our society in its materialism seems to equate priority with money.  I’m not sure that this is valid.   Is it not possible to ensure that the government and the country focuses so intently on education, and health, that we achieve improvement, even without having to spend a lot more?    The soccer World Cup showed that focus is a wonderful thing.   Forget the stadia and the infrastructural marvels, think of the ways in which people applied themselves to a common cause.   Someone made the point that for the duration of this event, politicians were conspicuous by their absence – and the country flourished!    Perhaps they were all luxuriating in the free seats bought by government departments and agencies.   

It is a moot point as to whether this sports event should have displaced in our minds far more pressing matters, like the health of our people or their education, or their safety.   As a once-in-a-lifetime event, perhaps it was justified, but have we now returned to the challenges of the day and time?  I think not.  Education remains in crisis and this will not be resolved by another 1.6%.   In one sense, therefore, legitimate transformation would be represented by an education system that works.                

Leave a Comment