Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
01 July 2021 | Story Dr Nitha Ramnath and André Damons
Discussing local government elections. Panellists in the University of the Free State Thought-Leader webinar hosted on 29 June 2021.

Elections are supposed to bring better, more accountable governments into place, but at local government level this has not happened so far. No real change should be expected with new local governments. The elections are not necessarily the answer.

This is according to Prof Susan Booysen, Director of Research at the Mapungubwe Institute for Strategic Reflection (MISTRA), who was one of the panellists at the University of the Free State (UFS) Thought-Leader webinar on Tuesday (29 June 2021). The webinar with the theme South African politics and the local government elections: scene setter for a capable state? is part of the Free State Literature Festival’s online initiative, VrySpraak-digitaal


Mr Ebrahim Fakir
, Director of Programmes at the Auwal Socio-Economic Research Institute (ASRI), and Prof Sethulego Matebesi, Associate Professor and Academic Head of the Department of Sociology at the UFS, were the other two panellists who discussed politics and local government elections – which is only four months away. 

Not much progress in local government

“We've seen minor changes, more coalition governments that have been coming into power – at least in the metro cities.  In the last few elections, there have been in the region of 30 or so local and major municipalities with coalition governments in South Africa,” said Prof Booysen.

According to her, she does not believe that we can go without elections; however, elections are not necessarily the answer, as there has not been much progress at local government elections as well as on other levels.

Prof Matebesi is in agreement with Prof Booysen, saying that the forthcoming elections would not bring about any change. Said Prof Matebesi: “If we agree that problems in local government – which leads to poor performance – are caused by political and not administrative leaders, if we agree that the local government system is not geared for power-sharing, and if we agree that the challenges of political leaders can partly be ascribed to the dominance of internal party politics, particularly the immense power vested in the office of the mayor – where there is sometimes a complete disregard for council resolutions – then I believe that the 2021 local government elections will not affect the changes, and produce a strong local government, capable of fulfilling its constitutional mandate.”

Decent government can withstand bad politics 

Mr Fakir said it is not possible to talk about a capable state or governance or effective government if we do not talk about politics. Axiomatically, it would mean that if politics precedes government, the type of politics prevalent in society would determine the nature of government thereafter. 

“Even if there is bad politics – with robust institutions, processes, and procedures according to which decisions are made and resources are allocated, society will be able to withstand a period of bad politics. The US and the UK have had bad politics for some time, with robust institutions. However, in South Africa, only 20 years into transition, our institutions are not robust enough and have therefore been available for the malevolent acts of state capture due to corruption,” says Fakir. 


 

He outlined five markers for a capable state:

1. A strong regulatory capacity – the ability to make laws and policies that are prudent, appropriate, and that fit the circumstances of the society.
2. A technical capacity – the engineering works, the ability to technically maintain and build the infrastructure and carry out the necessary activities required to make a society functional and facilitate its social and economic activity.
3. An administrative capacity – the ability to execute and implement strong oversight, serious ways of extracting accountability. 
4. An extractive capacity – the ability to raise taxes, revenues, rates, so that there is funding for the kind of things that need to happen at local government level.
5. A coercive capacity – the ability to ensure compliance with rules.

“I would argue that if one had to take each of these five measures, you would find that local government – and government in general – are lacking. So, if you have bad and malevolent politics, if you have bad ethics in society, then the ability for these five functional areas of capability in state suddenly starts to wither away, and you have a weak state,” Fakir said. 

 

South Africa is going through transformation and transition fatigue in the local government area. “At each local level of the state, there is a cadreship of representatives who are more powerful and can exercise power over the PR system. This type of dysfunction filters through the system of accountability and oversight, and as such, people who are responsible for coalface delivery collapse because the oversight is not there.” 

According to him, we have bad politics, and because of this our institutions are easily manipulated, our processes are easily undermined, and people are put in those positions because they can be easily manipulated. 

“Because of that, you have poor accountability, laxity, a poor attitude of working with a sense of ‘all will do as they please’ – the one takes licence from the other, and people feed off each other’s desire for lack of compliance, giving rise to a predatory state.” 

Prof Francis Petersen, who was the facilitator, said the challenges relating to local government will persist.  
“Ultimately, it is about the culture of service, the trust that needs to be developed between the citizens and local government. It is not only about the technical competency, but also about the ethical and value systems,” said Prof Petersen.

According to him, the role of universities in this should never be underestimated.  Platforms should be open to debate and discussion to offer potential solutions to politicians and to bring across that ethical and critical analysis. 

News Archive

UFS policies want to help all students
2005-03-09

The death of Hannes van Rensburg, a first-year student from the JBM Hertzog residence, this past weekend, placed various aspects of student life in the spotlight.  Dr Natie Luyt, Dean:  Student Affairs at the University of the Free State (UFS), and the Student Representative Council (SRC) of the UFS explain which policies are in place to counter these practices.

At all tertiary institutions there are rules and policies to guide students and provide direction for certain behaviour and practices.  The same applies to the University of the Free State (UFS).

“At the beginning of the year the UFS provides every residence committee with a manual to establish a framework for meaningful and orderly relations within and among residences on the campus,” said Dr Natie Luyt.

However, it is one thing to set rules, but it is an impossible task to enforce all aspects thereof.  Policies currently in place include an alcohol policy, a policy on the induction of first years and a policy on banned practices in residence orientation. 

“The alcohol policy was compiled in cooperation with students and their input was constantly asked,” said Dr Luyt.  We also liaise on a continuous basis with residences and senior students to encourage the responsible use of alcohol, especially around activities like intervarsities and Rag. 

In the policy, recognition is given to the right and voluntary and informed choice of every individual to use alcohol on the UFS campus in a responsible way. 

Guidelines for the use of alcohol on campus include among others the following: 

Only authorised points of sale will be permitted on campus.  In this case it is the various league halls in most of the male residences on campus.

Alcohol will only be made available during fixed times and is not permitted in residence rooms.    

All alcohol-related functions are regulated and an application for a temporary alcohol license must be obtained from the Dean:  Student Affairs.     

The UFS obtained a liquor license in March 2004 which must be administered by senior leagues in various residences on campus.   Normal liquor license conditions and the county’s liquor laws apply.  Liquor can only be sold to members of the senior league (or special guests) and also to persons over the age of 18 years.  Liquor may not be used in public (outside the senior league) or on campus.    

The senior leagues may only be open three nights per week and within prescribed times.  No liquor could be used in any other place than the senior league halls.  Senior leagues could buy liquor from club monies generated by themselves. 

The right of senior leagues to serve liquor was suspended by the Rector and Vice-Chancellor the UFS, Prof Frederick Fourie, on Monday 7 March 2005 – pending an investigation of the recent events on campus. 

The policy on banned practices include among others that no swearing and shouting at first-years may take place, no first-year student may be targeted individually, no senior may enter the room of a first-year student without an invitation or permission from that first-year student and no senior under the influence of alcohol may have contact with first-year students. 

The induction of first-year students takes place by means of three functions, namely an information function (the introduction to the various facets and possibilities of the university system), an induction function (the first-year student becomes involved in various campus and residence activities) and a development function (the first-year student is motivated to take charge of his development potential). 

No first-year induction activity may commence before the residence committee’s contracting with the senior students is not completed.  This meeting is attended by the residence head and all senior students.  The induction policy, residence induction policy of first-year students and first-year rules are discussed.

The senior students sign an attendance list to show that he/she was informed about the policies.  A senior who does not sign, may not be involved with any induction session with first-year students.  

No physical contact is allowed during the conclusion of the first-year students’ official induction period.  The induction of first-year students as full members of the residence is a prestige event, presented by the residence committee.  No physical or degrading activities may take place. 

The Dean:  Student Affairs also has a daily meeting with the primarii of all the residences during the induction period.  This helps to monitor the situation and counter any problem behaviour or tendencies.

“Enforced behaviour – where a senior student forces a first-year student to do something against his/her own free wil – is not allowed.  Where there is any sign of this, it is met wortel en tak uitgeroei,” said Dr Luyt.

“In any group of people – whether it is a group of students or people at a workplace – there will always be those who will break the rules or those who would like to see how far they could push it.

The SRC, the UFS management and myself are and will stay committed to make each student’s life on this campus a school of learning and an experience which would be remembered for ever,” said Dr Luyt.

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