Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
06 May 2020 | Story Dr Ina Gouws | Photo Supplied
Dr Ina Gouws

The President of the Republic of South Africa made another address to the country on Thursday 23 April 2020, indicating that the country will enter a phased approach out of lockdown in the coming months. This announcement was met with positive feedback not only nationally, but internationally. It was clear that the President consulted with many experts and also with opposition parties, which indicated that an ‘all-hands-on-deck’ approach was followed across party lines and varied interests. The plan seemed rational, well thought through, and clear: 
 
Support for lockdown
The government’s lockdown and subsequent restrictions on movement, trade and industry held wide support until now. The argument that people’s lives are most important and that the prevention of the spread of COVID-19 infection must be a priority, was accepted as rational. Truth be told, this strategy was entirely reliant on public trust and cooperation, which the President did have at the start of the lockdown. So, when he announced that the country would enter Level 4 from 1 May 2020, there was a sense of relief that progress was being made and that sacrifices made by all of us (some much more than others), have yielded some positive results. 
However, there was also an almost immediate realisation that this approach would have to rely on state machinery, especially on provincial and local levels, which – before the lockdown – was ineffective, to say the least. State capacity had been gutted by widespread corruption, incompetence, and the inability or unwillingness to hold to account those who are guilty of mismanagement and corruption. Add to that the planned deployment of more than 70 000 South African National Defence Force (SANDF) troops in our midst, as well as very little detail on how the R50 billion relief fund will be applied, and most importantly, how oversight over the spending will work. 
Cynicism is good 
This cynicism is being criticised as being uncooperative and that South Africans should only be proud of how government has met the challenges of this pandemic thus far. It is true that in the context of the country’s reaction to the pandemic, this government has done much better than most across the globe. The larger context of governance realities in the country cannot be ignored though. 
I was reminded of certain elements of the value of cynicism in an article by JR Macey. The article was written in the context of USA politics, but there certainly are touch points with South African politics. He basically argues that cynicism is good, and that people should be more cynical when it comes to politicians, officials, lobby groups, etc. As people, we are looking for leadership and sound decision-making. We expect good governance from the government. As South Africans, we have been consistently disappointed with our government in this regard for decades now. When it became clear that this virus was spreading across the globe like wildfire, we naturally held our collective breath. How will a government that can hardly keep the lights on or provide safe drinking water and whose public healthcare system has all but collapsed, deal with this virus when it finally arrives? All valid questions. We were appeased when the President announced a planned lockdown not long after the first cases were reported. We were impressed with the leadership from the Minister of Health and the experts he surrounded himself with. Rightly so. The President announced that the SANDF would assist the police in enforcing lockdown rules, but that they should perform their duty with empathy and in a spirit of service to the country. South Africans were supposed to feel secure. 
Cynics raise questions
Yet, cynics raised questions about the fitness of the untrained SANDF to perform these duties and of the SAPS which, according to the latest crime statistics, all but lost ‘the war on crime’. Cynics raised questions about the ability of the public healthcare sector to use the time bought by the lockdown to ready itself for the inevitable rise in the numbers of infected South Africans who would need very specific healthcare, and to protect its healthcare workers. Cynics questioned the lack of data with which decisions are made and the reluctance to start planning for getting out of lockdown for the sake of the economy. These questions were met with accusations of being unpatriotic, tone-deaf, and choosing to save the economy over dying South Africans.
These questions became prevalent after the announcement of the phased approach on 23 April. Commentators, journalists, politicians across party lines, as well as ordinary citizens once again began to realise the validity of being cynical. There are many reports of brutality by the SANDF and SAPS, so there are understandably fears regarding the deployment of thousands more soldiers. The phased approach will rely heavily on local government machinery; so, how will the accountability for financial and performance management work when it continues to worsen in most municipalities.
It is good to be cynical; cynics are believed to be more vigilant, to question, and to expect answers. The problem is that cynics often do not get the answers and then stop participating. This is something we as South Africans cannot afford at a time when our freedoms are encroached upon. We need to be more vigilant than ever. Listen to the cynics. See if their questions are answered (not spun), because the expectations from government in the coming months are going to be immense and South Africans must make these expectations clear.
Opportunity 
Provinces and local governments must carefully discern what these measures mean for each region and communicate this clearly. The latter has been sorely lacking up to now where most provinces and local governments are concerned. Oversight on all levels of government should not only be allowed but welcomed. There is time and opportunity to address all these concerns to prevent chaos and confusion. Public trust and participation are essential for this process to succeed. All the good governance principles such as transparency, accountability, responsiveness, etc., are required to ensure the success of the implementation of any government process, just as it has always been. This is an opportunity to use an enormous crisis to put these principles at the center for a change. One lives in hope...

Dr Ina Gouws is Senior Lecturer: Programme: Governance and Political Transformation in the Faculty of the Humanities.

News Archive

UFS hones focus to nurture world-class research - Business Day
2006-02-10

 

Sue Blaine
THE University of the Free State plans to concentrate academic study in five areas to strengthen its status as a research institution, the university said yesterday.

The Bloemfontein-based university will focus on areas it classes as development (economics, health, literacy and other human activities) and social transformation — an analysis of how South African society is changing from a philosophical and political viewpoint.

The other three research areas are new technologies, water resources and security, and food production and security.

“It makes sense to concentrate the university’s human resources, infrastructure, financial resources and intellectual expertise,” said university rector and vice-chancellor Prof Frederick Fourie.

The move introduces a style of research that matches international trends.

Universities in Canada, Britain and Australia are setting up their research departments in this way.

In SA, the universities of Stellenbosch, the Witwatersrand, Cape Town and KwaZulu-Natal have embarked on similar strategies.

Fourie gave the example of his alma mater, the US’s Harvard University, whose Nanoscale Science and Engineering Centre is an example of “clustering” on a larger scale.

The centre is a collaboration with Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of California, Santa Barbara, the Museum of Science, Boston, and universities in the Netherlands, Switzerland and Japan.

Fourie said the modern research world was so diverse and complex that no university could cover all bases so it was better to establish areas of expertise that made it different from its peer institutions.

Having scientists and researchers work in teams meant certain issues could be researched and developed in a multidisciplinary manner. “I think it’s the only way in which any university can excel. This will help SA become world class in selected areas,” Fourie said.

It is in chemistry that the cluster model has already had its most visible results, with a slice of the university’s on-campus pharmacological testing company Farmovs, established in the 1980s, sold to the US’s Parexel International.

The company is one of the largest biopharmaceutical outsourcing organisations in the world, providing knowledge-based contract research, medical marketing and consulting services to the global pharmaceutical, biotechnology and medical device industries, according to Biospace, an internet-based company providing resources and information to the life science industry.

President Thabo Mbeki, in his state of the nation address last Friday, committed government to allocating more resources to research, development and innovation, and increasing the pool of young researchers in SA.

He said government would “continue to engage the leadership of our tertiary institutions focused on working with them to meet the nation’s expectations with regard to teaching and research”.

The university used to be home to several A-rated scientists, who are considered by a peer review, conducted by the National Research Foundation, to be world leaders in their fields, but had lost them to other institutions. Fourie hopes to lure them back, and with them postgraduate students and funding for their work.

“At universities where you get a star researcher they tend to attract people and funding; if they leave they take that with them,” he said.

Fourie said R50m would be spent on the project, with some already spent last year and the last disbursements to be made next year.

There is R10m in seed money to gather experts and improve equipment and infrastructure, and R17m has been invested in chemistry equipment and staff.

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