Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
29 March 2021 | Story Prof Anthony Turton | Photo Supplied
Prof Anthony Turton, Affiliated Professor in the Centre for Environmental Management at the University of the Free State (UFS), writes that World Water Week provides an opportunity to rethink where we are as a nation.

National Water Week provides an opportunity to rethink where we are as a nation. It provides an opportunity to re-evaluate our journey from the past as a country with a fundamentally water-constrained but highly skewed economy, to a future in which inclusive growth can be achieved as a form of restorative justice. In my professional opinion, it is this journey towards restorative justice that lies at the heart of the way we ought to be thinking about our water management. 

Let me build the argument by describing key elements of this journey to restorative justice. Facts are our friends, so let me identify the key items that shape our journey. The most fundamental of all facts is that South Africa is one of the 30 driest countries on the planet. We often hear this from the media, but what does it mean, and what (if anything) can we do about it? The simple reality is that drought is normal in our part of the world. This simple fact, first written about in 1875 by JC Brown in a book with the grand title of Hydrology of South Africa; or Details of the Former Hydrographic Conditions of the Cape of Good Hope, and of Causes of its Present Aridity, with Suggestions of Appropriate Remedies for this Aridity, defined the simple truth that we live in a water-constrained area. This book became the first coherent body of knowledge about the constraints to economic development in our country. In engineering terms, once you know the problem, the next step is to find the solution; so, two years later, the same JC Brown published his sequel titled Water Supply of South Africa and the Facilitation for the Storage of It.  The core logic in these two books was simple. Because South Africa is arid, all economic development is constrained, so to achieve a desired level of future prosperity, we need to build dams to store water. The dam-building era was born. Stated simply, if you define the problem as a nail (water shortage), then the solution is to use a hammer (dam). 

A young professional by the name of Thomas Bain – a road engineer – was so deeply impressed by Brown’s work, that he began thinking about dam building in the arid areas where he was building roads. Road engineers draw maps and understand elevation and topography, so within a decade of Brown’s seminal work, Bain published his book Water-finding, Dam-making, River Utilization, Irrigation in 1886. The difference between Brown and Bain was startling because it created a radical shift in our thinking about water. Whereas Brown recorded local water scarcity as a limitation on local development, Bain said that localised scarcity could be resolved by capturing water from a different river basin and diverting it from where it is relatively abundant, to where it is relatively scarce. His mapping skills demonstrated that water could be diverted from the Orange River, across the escarpment, into the Fish and Sundays Rivers in the vicinity of what was then known as Port Elizabeth. Bain’s work became the intellectual foundation for the future economic prosperity of the country a century later when the Commission of Enquiry into Water Matters officially launched the South African hydraulic mission. In less than half a century, every major river had been connected to every other river in South Africa, driving economic diversification as the economy transitioned from an agricultural base to a mining, and subsequently to an industrial base. In all cases, this diversification was based on inter-basin transfers of water, to the extent that today our national economic well-being is totally dependent on this practice. 

What is the restorative justice?

But what of restorative justice? Have the fruits of democracy been translated into growing prosperity for the historically disadvantaged members of society? Have enough jobs been created to give dignified employment to the growing number of job-seekers – with high expectations but diminishing probability of actually finding work? More importantly, is the problem still a nail (water scarcity), and is the use of a hammer (dam) still the most appropriate response? 

This is where it becomes interesting, because a few new facts have been added to the equation. There is no more surface water to transfer from one basin to another. On top of this, climate variability is changing rainfall patterns and existing dams are silting up, making storage and prediction a challenge.  So, even if we have become very good at inter-basin transfers, that hammer is no longer appropriate because the problem has morphed itself into a screw and is no longer a simple nail. More importantly, public trust has been abused, as government has been transformed from a public service provider into a rent-seeking predatory machine that converts problems into patronage flows. Nowhere is this more evident than in the water sector. In 2018, the Auditor General reported a staggering R6,4 billion in fruitless and irregular expenditure, placing the Department of Water and Sanitation (DWS) on the list of worst performing entities on record. The purging of skills from the DWS, combined with corruption in the procurement of professional services from the consulting engineering community – the place where the intellectual property for our national water security actually resides – has left a trail of destroyed companies in its wake. Professionals have been given a stark choice to either cooperate with rent-seeking structures in government and be compromised forever, or to perish from the lack of contractual work. 

Stabilising the consulting engineering companies is a national priority

In my professional opinion, this is our current national priority. How do we stabilise the consulting engineering companies, many of which have either closed or downsized because skills have migrated offshore, as the process of deindustrialisation and decolonisation advances relentlessly to its logical conclusion? If we fail in this endeavour, then our repository of knowledge needed to create the future inclusive economic growth for restorative justice to be realised, will simply collapse. It is in this context that the mooted National Water Resources Infrastructure Agency (NWRIA) needs to be evaluated. Our unfortunate experience has been the loss of public trust in the face of massive looting, without any apparent consequence for the looters. One of the objectives of this proposed agency is to ‘streamline procurement and recruitment’, which is a code word for ‘gaining total control over the levers of patronage flows’. We now need about R1 trillion simply to restore systems that have failed because they have been looted into destruction. This is a big prize for those thriving on the future flow of patronage and is the actual target of the NWRIA.  

Focus first on creating an independent water regulator

The question that we need to reflect on as a nation, is whether this new hammer is an appropriate tool for driving a nail that has now morphed into a screw with a specific head that requires a hexagonal tool to shift? What we do know is that the Trans-Caledon Tunnel Authority (TCTA) has been extremely successful as a special purpose vehicle. Where failure has occurred, it has always been when political interference has sought to wrestle control of the procurement process away from the TCTA. This means that the problem is NOT the TCTA as alleged. The real problem is the inappropriate effort by political elites to bypass procurement procedures, entrenched within the TCTA, to divert patronage flows needed to sustain the now predatory ruling elite. The problem is the lack of governance and the immunity from prosecution enjoyed by cadres connected to the ruling elite. Because this is the actual problem, the NWRIA cannot be the solution, and public debate is needed to flesh this matter out. Government’s track record in state-owned enterprises is dismal, so why create yet another? The TCTA already exists and has been extremely effective in its core role, so let us improve governance, oversight, and empower the criminal justice system to hold looters accountable, before they sink their teeth into the R1 trillion needed to restore our failing water systems. Let us focus first on creating an independent water regulator, capable of the governance and oversight needed to restore confidence in our failing economy, before we create a new machine designed to specifically gain control over future patronage flows.

• The National Water Week campaign, which took place between 15 and 22 March, is aimed at educating the public about their responsibility in water conservation initiatives, raising awareness around the need to protect and conserve the country’s water resources.

Opinion article by Prof Anthony Turton from the Centre for Environmental Management, University of the Free State


About Prof Anthony Turton:

Prof Anthony is an Affiliated Professor in the Centre for Environmental Management at the University of the Free State (UFS). He specialises in strategic planning, transboundary water resource management, policy and institutional issues, conflict resolution (mitigation), political risk assessment for large infrastructural projects, and research programme design. He is also the Director of Nanodyn Systems Pty Ltd.

 

 


News Archive

Twenty years of the constitution of South Africa – cause for celebration and reflection
2016-05-11

Description: Judge Azar Cachalia Tags: Judge Azar Cachalia

Judge Azar Cachalia

The University of the Free State’s Centre for Human Rights and the Faculty of Law held the celebration of the twentieth anniversary of the adoption of the South African Constitution on 11 May 2016 on the Bloemfontein Campus.  Students and faculty members celebrated and reflected on not only the achievements of the constitution but also on perspectives regarding its relevance in modern society, and to what extent it has upheld the human rights of all citizens of South Africa.

The panel discussion started with a presentation on the pre-1996 perspective by Judge Azar Cachalia of the Supreme Court of Appeal.  Judge Cachalia reflected on his role in the realisation and upholding of the constitution, from his days as a student activist, then as an attorney representing detainees during political turmoil, and currently as a judge: “My role as an attorney was to defend people arrested for public violence. My role as a judge today is to uphold the constitution.”  He stressed the importance of the constitution today, and the responsibility institutions such as the police service have in upholding human rights.  Judge Cachalia played a significant role in drafting the new Police Act around 1990, an Act which was to ensure that the offences perpetrated by the police during apartheid did not continue in the current democratic era. Further, he pointed out that societal turmoil has the potential to make society forget about the hard work that was put into structures upholding human rights. “Constitutions are drafted in moments of calm.  It is a living document, and we hope it is not torn up when we go through social conflict, such as we are experiencing at present.”

Thobeka Dywili, a Law student at the UFS, presented her views from the new generation’s perspective.  She relayed her experience as a student teaching human rights at schools in disadvantaged communities. She realised that, although the youth are quite aware of their basic human rights, after so many years of democracy, “women and children are still seen as previously disadvantaged when they should be equal”. She pointed out that, with the changing times, the constitution needs to be looked at with a new set of eyes, suggesting more robust youth engagement on topics that affect them, using technology to facilitate discussions. She said with the help of social media, it is possible for a simple discussion to become a revolution; #feesmustfall was a case in point.

Critical perspectives on the constitution were presented by Tsepo Madlingozi of University of Pretoria and University of London. In his view, the constitution has not affected policy to the extent that it should, with great disparities in our society and glaring issues, such as lack of housing for the majority of the poor.  “Celebration of the constitution should be muted, as the constitution is based on a decolonisation approach, and does not directly address the needs of the poor. The Constitutional Court is not pro-poor.”  He posed the question of whether twenty years on, the present government has crafted a new society successfully.  “We have moved from apartheid to neo-apartheid, as black elites assimilate into the white world, and the two worlds that exist have not been able to stand together as a reflection of what the constitution stands for.”

Prof Caroline Nicholson, Dean of the Faculty of Law, encouraged more open discussions, saying such dialogues are exactly what was intended by the Centre for Human Rights. She emphasised the importance of exchanging ideas, of allowing people to speak freely, and of sharing perspectives on important issues such as the constitution and human rights.

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