R700m National Dialogue: Unity or illusion? - Dave Steward

Key topics:Ramaphosa announces R700m National Dialogue for SA unity31 public figures appointed to lead inclusive discussionsCritics doubt sincerity due to unchanged race-based policies.Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.Support South Africa’s bastion of independent journalism, offering balanced insights on investments, business, and the political economy, by joining BizNews Premium. Register here.If you prefer WhatsApp for updates, sign up to the BizNews channel here.The auditorium doors will open for BNIC#2 on 10 September 2025 in Hermanus. For more information and tickets, click here..By Dave Steward.President Ramaphosa has announced that South Africa will soon be holding a national dialogue “to forge a new social compact for the development of our country, a compact that will unite all South Africans, with clear responsibilities for different stakeholders, government, business, labour, civil society, men and women, communities and citizens.” He has appointed 31 “eminent persons” “to guide and champion the National Dialogue”. They include figures such as Siya Kolisi, Mia le Roux, Miss South Africa 2024, Manne Dipico, former Northern Cape Premier, Bobby Godsell, Archbishop Thabo Makgoba and Roelf Meyer.This is not the first time there have been calls for a national dialogue. On 23 November 2004, Archbishop Tutu proposed that South Africans should try to reach a national consensus on transformation and the other issues confronting the country. He said there should be an open debate on “issues such as affirmative action, transformation in sport, racism, xenophobia, security, crime and violence against Women and children”. He was critical of those who “demand an uncritical, sycophantic, obsequious conformity and called for a lowering of “the temperature in our public discourse.”Instead of lowering the temperature, President Mbeki responded with white-hot anger. He emphatically rejected the archbishop’s call for discussions on transformation issues. He insisted that only the ANC could set the national agenda – and that the setting of the national agenda was an arena of struggle rather than negotiation. The ANC followed up President Mbeki’s views with a multi-part ‘Sociology of the Public Discourse in Democratic South Africa’ in its online journal ‘Africa Today’. The crux of this debate was who should set the national agenda, the ANC government or the ‘white elite’ - assisted by some prominent black South Africans.The ANC saw this as a ‘struggle’ that would be ‘as demanding and bruising’ as the struggle for a democratic and non-racial South Africa – although it would not be fought ‘with guns, bans, harassment by state organs’ as had happened during the apartheid years.Despite this clear rejection of a national dialogue, President Mbeki nevertheless went to a great deal of trouble to engage with minorities regarding their growing concerns over aspects of the government’s transformation policies.On three occasions between March 2002 and August 2005 he graciously accepted invitations from the FW de Klerk Foundation to participate in meetings with the Foundation’s Board and prominent civil society organisations and academics..Read more:.John Matisonn: National Dialogue: 1980s solution to 2025 problem .On each occasion President Mbeki was accompanied by strong ministerial delegations – and on each occasion the meetings were held in a constructive and convivial atmosphere. The Foundation’s delegations used the meetings to express their growing concerns regarding affirmative action, the economy and the right to education in the language of one’s choice. At the last meeting in August 2005, the Foundation and its delegation proposed that the government and civil society organisations should consider the development of a code of good practice relating to the fair implementation of affirmative action – in accordance with constitutional principles and recent judgements of the courts. It was felt that such a code could provide a useful guideline to employers and would help ensure that minorities would be treated fairly in affirmative action processes – and, in particular, that they would not be subject to absolute exclusion from appointment or promotion. However, the kind of code that the participants had in mind never materialised. The ANC side repeatedly answered concerns raised by the Foundation’s delegation by reaffirming their commitment to the constitutional provision that South Africa belonged to all who live in it, united in their diversity. What they did not add was their insistence that this ownership should ultimately be determined by the country's demographics. In his closing remarks to the conference, Dr Flip Buys, the Chairman of Solidarity, said that after the discussion with President Mbeki he was still confused – but he was confused at a much higher level! In retrospect, it is clear that President Mbeki’s involvement in the talks was motivated by the ANC’s approach of “discretion in tact and firmness to principle”. In its Strategy and Tactics documents, the ANC recognises that the radical and racial redistribution of wealth it has in mind will inevitably elicit a reaction from its intended victims. This is “because property relations are at the core of all social systems”. It believes that “the tensions that decisive application to this objective will generate will require dexterity in tact and firmness to principle”. In other words, the ANC should lead its interlocutors up the garden path during discussions on issues of national concern - while retaining its adamantine commitment to its NDR ideology. There is no indication that it has ever deviated from this approach.There is every reason to suppose that President Ramaphosa’s national dialogue proposal will be another manifestation of dexterity in tact and firmness in principle. On 27 May – in a manifest expression of “firmness to principle”, the President made it perfectly clear in reply to a parliamentary question by Dr Corne Mulder, that he had absolutely no intention of deviating from BBBEE – despite growing and incontrovertible evidence that it is one of the main reasons for South Africa’s failure to achieve the economic growth that is essential for the well-being of all our people.The National Dialogue’s reported budget of R700 million will ensure a high level of comfort and nourishment for participants – but will they really be able to come to grips with the race-based policies that are at the root of South Africa’s economic and societal predicament? President Ramaphosa’s response to Dr Mulder’s parliamentary question and the composition of the eminent persons group suggest that there is very little likelihood of a real dialogue. The first session is scheduled for 15 August – exactly 40 years after PW Botha’s Rubicon speech.

R700m National Dialogue: Unity or illusion? - Dave Steward

Related Stories

GNU's fault lines crack open: ANC statement signals the honeymoon is firmly, officially over

Hartford: The struggle generation that built non-racial SA — and the movement that betrayed it

Riots, evacuations and trade threats: How South Africa's migrant crisis went regional

Hersov: There are two South Africas — it's time Washington started treating them differently