Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
15 July 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the fracture lines in societies worldwide. South Africa is no different. The poor are less able to protect themselves from the danger posed by the virus. Workers in factories, mines, and the service sector went back to their places of work following the lifting of the strictest lockdown measures, while office workers, typically better paid, can generally work from home. Living conditions in informal settlements make social distancing all but impossible, while the middle class can largely stay at home and stay safe to a much larger extent. With many businesses shutting down, downsizing or rethinking their business models, it is often small and medium, as well as informal sector businesses that are most affected.  

The impact of COVID-19 comes on the back of a society and economy that was already under significant pressure following years of low economic growth and poor government performance. Many commentators have already questioned the social compact South Africans made in the mid-1990s, which marked the end of the apartheid regime. These divisions have become more glaring, with some civil society organisations considering challenging the Minister of Finance’s adjustment budget in the Constitutional Court, because the budget might result in a roll-back of the progressive realisation of the socio-economic rights mandated in the Constitution.

In this first of four webinars, academics from the UFS as well as invited experts reflect on the constitutional commitment South Africans made to one another two and half decades ago. Is it time for a new deal? Should we collectively recommit ourselves to our existing deal? Do we interpret that deal in the same way today as we did more than two decades ago? How does the economic reality we face, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 crisis, affect that deal? What are the economic realities we face, and whose are they? And how should we think about human development in the context of our deal? 

Come and join us from 14:00 to 15:30 on 21 July. 

RSVP to Sibongile Mlotya at MlotyaS@ufs.ac.za no later than 19 July, upon which you will receive a Business for Skype meeting invite.

Speakers:
Prof Danie Brand on ‘New deal’ or collective recommitment? The Constitution under COVID-19 and beyond

Prof Melanie Walker on Human development and the capability approach in COVID-19 times

Prof Lochner Marais on Reflections on continuities and discontinuities after COVID-19

Prof Philippe Burger on Viewing the realisation of socio-economic rights in a post-COVID-19 South Africa through an economic lens

 

Please also mark the following dates in your diaries for the second through fourth Reflection webinars:
Gender Inequalities and Gender-based Violence 28 July 14:00-15:30
The quality of our democracy under COVID-19 and beyond 13 August 14:00-15:30
Urban living post-COVID-19 27 August 14:00-15:30

News Archive

Reaction by the Rector of the UFS after a meeting with student leaders
2008-02-25

Reaction by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor of the UFS, Prof. Frederick Fourie, on the agreement reached at a meeting with student leaders held on Friday, 22 February 2008

Note: This is meant to be used together with the full joint statement that was issued by the UFS management and student leaders on 22 February 2008.

The memorandum of the primes of the University of the Free State’s (UFS) residences was handed to top management on Wednesday, 20 February 2008. In the memorandum they asked for a meeting with the UFS management by Friday, 22 February 2008. Such a meeting was arranged and took place.

The UFS top management, all the residence primes as well as the house committee member for first years, the executive of the Main Campus Student Representative Council (SRC) and residence heads were present.

In contrast to what is suggested in the Volksblad report of Saturday, the discussion went off very well. There was no consternation or shouting or “emotions that ran high”. It was a civilised, decent meeting as it should be at a good university. Of course, now and again individuals spoke out strongly and very enthusiastically, but it was all decent and orderly. The contribution of the primes was insightful and well formulated.

Because the top management and I wanted to listen very carefully what the problems and frustrations were, we spent nearly five hours in the meeting. The issues in the memorandum were discussed one by one. In some cases I could take a decision immediately and finalise the matter, in other cases, the management provided information that could largely finalise a matter. A number of other matters must be investigated further.

The management undertook to respond comprehensively and in writing to all the issues raised in the memorandum by Monday, 25 February 2008. This will be handed to the primes but will not be handed to the media beforehand.
It is obvious that there are matters at the university that can be better managed and that there are problems with communication within the Student Affairs division. A major change such as the new policy on diversity places huge demands on management and the administration, and problems were to be expected. However, we understand the frustration of the students in residences.

On the other hand, students don’t always make matters easier. The strong opposition of white student leaders last year, and their unwillingness to co-operate in preparation for 2008 is well known. This year it is going better. But often student leaders take positions that are very inflexible. They also see no room for adapting old habits and simply want their own way. Their contributions are then full of statements such as “It cannot be done”. This delays measures such as the full implementation of expert interpreting services, which, for the management, is a very important measure (and which is functioning very well in certain residences). Communication from student leaders to management is also not always what it should be.

At the end of the meeting student leaders and management reached an important agreement and issued a joint statement in which they committed themselves to the integration process and to good co-operation and communication. This was an important step which is a sign of rebuilding trust. Naturally everyone will still have to work hard to build on this and to strengthen mutual trust.

The course and outcome of Friday’s discussions, as requested by the student leaders, show that issues can be addressed and resolved by means of us talking to one another. This is why it is so sad that primes and house committee members went on strike on Wednesday already and stayed in tents in front of the Main Building – leaving their residences without its leadership. This created an opening for what appears to have been well planned and co-ordinated acts of vandalism by inhabitants of residences on the campus on Wednesday.

Such vandalism is unacceptable and no one can justify it.

Fortunately, order could be restored quickly during the night and all academic activities could resume without any disruption on Thursday and Friday.

FCvN Fourie

Media Release
Issued by: Lacea Loader
Assistant Director: Media Liaison
Tel: 051 401 2584
Cell: 083 645 2454
E-mail: loaderl.stg@ufs.ac.za   
24 February 2008

 

We use cookies to make interactions with our websites and services easy and meaningful. To better understand how they are used, read more about the UFS cookie policy. By continuing to use this site you are giving us your consent to do this.

Accept