Nationalising of mines on way, but not this lifetime
Aubrey Matshiqi
Nationalisation is in the air. In fact, climate change activists are concerned about the potentially debilitating effects the hot air generated by rumbustious exchanges between the African National Congress (ANC) Youth League and Mining Minister Susan Shabangu seem to be having on the South African political climate. What is the source of the heat? I suppose it depends on who you ask. As a self-appointed askee, it is my national, patriotic and revolutionary duty to give the most germane and cogent of explanations.
A few years ago, I was invited to the 62nd anniversary of the ANC Youth League’s founding by stalwarts such as Anton Lembede, Nelson Mandela, Walter Sisulu and OR Tambo. No, I was not invited by Lembede, Sisulu, Tambo and Mandela. At the time of the invitation, Fikile Mbalula was still in charge of the league. Julius Malema was in training. BEEsinessman and ANC luminary Tokyo Sexwale gave the keynote address on behalf of Madiba, whose in-laws had kept him in Mozambique against the will of the youth league.
What struck me was the speech by former president Kgalema Motlanthe . He argued, correctly, that SA needed a vehicle through which her developmental needs would be funded. The example he gave was that of free compulsory education for all. To this end, Motlanthe said SA needed to set up a state mining company whose profits would finance our developmental priorities.
I suspect the youth league was in some ways inspired by Motlanthe’s speech. Mbalula must be commended because his leadership training programme has produced Malema, a leader of progressive young thinkers, who understands the import of Motlanthe’s policy advice. It is for this reason that I am not surprised that the league is calling for the nationalisation of mines. I am still investigating whether they are calling for the nationalisation of private mining companies, too.
As expected, the media, in the spirit of reporting future crimes, is awash with reports of future anxiety. They argue that the call for the nationalisation of mines will cause nervous breakdowns in the markets. Contrary to the unfair expectations of market ideologues, the South African Communist Party (SACP) has grown up. It no longer supports nationalisation. This explains why Malema was booed at a congress of “yellow communists” last December.
But some among us believe that the call for nationalisation is nothing but an attempt by the youth league to fill the Kebble gap. It is even rumoured that the late mining mogul, Brett Kebble, was responsible for a steady flow of expensive gifts to youth league leaders. Those who are responsible for these nasty rumours are convinced that the youth league needs the proceeds of nationalisation to finance the ever- widening Kebble gap.
I assure you that Shabangu played no part in spreading these rumours despite her argument that mines will be nationalised over her dead body. Actually, that’s not what she said. She said the dastardly act of nationalising mines would not be perpetrated in her lifetime, maybe in the lifetimes of others, but not hers.
On the other hand, Malema et al say nationalisation of mines will happen in the “not too distant future”. I am confused. Should it not be the other way? It seems the leaders of the youth league, because time is on their side, should be telling the world that nationalisation will happen in their lifetimes, and Shabangu should be assuring nervous investors in the national executive committee of the ruling party that it will not happen in the “not too distant future”.
If you ask me, the mineral wealth belongs to us. Therefore, those who want to extract it for profit must enter into a contractual arrangement with the state according to which the larger portion of mining proceeds must go to the people.
When the time comes, I suspect the ANC will adopt a resolution in which it says that the nationalisation of mining “remains a long-term policy goal”.
Not in your lifetime, comrade.// Business Day
Matshiqi is a senior research associate at the Centre for Policy Studies.
Comments