Latest News Archive

Please select Category, Year, and then Month to display items
Previous Archive
11 March 2022 | Story Prof Frikkie Maré | Photo Supplied
Prof Frikkie Maré is from the Department of Agricultural Economics at the University of the Free State (UFS)

Opinion article by Prof Frikkie Maré, Department of Agricultural Economics, University of the Free State.
In William Shakespeare’s play Julius Caesar, Mark Antony utters the words: “Cry ‘Havoc!’, and let slip the dogs of war,” after learning about the murder of Julius Caesar. With these words he meant that chaos would ensue (havoc) to create the opportunity for violence (let slip the dogs of war).

The recent invasion (or military operation, according to Russian President Vladimir Putin) by Russian armed forces into Ukraine brought the famous words of Shakespeare to mind. Putin cried “Havoc!” and his troops created chaos in Ukraine. This is, however, not where it stopped because the dogs of war have been released into the rest of the world.

What is the impact on South Africa?

The day after the invasion we felt the bite of the dogs of war in South Africa. The rand suddenly weakened against the dollar, oil and gold prices increased sharply, and grain and oilseed prices on commodity markets increased 

This was before the rest of the world started to implement sanctions against Russia, which could be described as a shock reaction due to uncertainty as to how the situation would unfold. In the days after the initial market reaction we saw the markets actually “cool down” a bit, with most sharp initial reactions starting to change back to former positions. This period was, however, short-lived when the world hit back by closing airspace and borders and refusing to import products from Russia or export to them. The sanctions were in solidarity with Ukraine as an attempt to bring the Russian economy to its knees and force the Russians to withdraw from Ukraine.

Although the sanctions against Russia should certainly be successful over the long term, it does not change much in the short term and we will have to deal with the international effects of this conflict. The question then is, how will this affect South Africa?

Although there are no straightforward answers, as the impact will depend on what one’s role is in the economy. One thing for certain is that the total cost will outnumber the benefits. What affects everyone in South Africa, and the starting point of many secondary effects, is the increase in the price of crude oil. Russia is the second-largest producer of crude oil in the world and if the West is going to ban the import of Russian oil we will have an international shortage. Although the banning of Russian oil is the right thing to do to support Ukraine, it will have devastating effects on all countries in the world, with sharp increases in inflation.  

The increase in the price of oil not only drives up the cost of transportation of people and products, but also manufacturing costs. Fertiliser prices are correlated with the oil price, and it will thus drive up the production cost of grain and oilseeds.

Speaking of grain and oilseed prices, the Black Sea region (which includes Russia and Ukraine), are major exporters of wheat and sunflower seed and oil. The prices of these commodities have soared in international and South Africa markets over the past few weeks. Although it might seem like good news for our farmers, the increase in prices are offset by high fertiliser prices and the local shortage of fertiliser. This may lead to fewer hectares of wheat being planted this year in the winter rainfall regions.  

Nothing good is coming from this situation

In terms of agricultural commodities, both Russia and Ukraine are important importers of South African products, especially citrus, stone fruit and grapes.  Alternative markets now need to be found for these products which will affect prices negatively.

Although one needs to write a thesis to explain all the effects of the Russian-Ukraine conflict, the dogs of war have been slipped, and it is clear from the few examples that nothing good is coming from this situation. In short, we will see higher fuel prices (maybe not R40/litre, but R25 to R30/litre is possible), higher food prices, higher inflation and a higher interest rate.  

These factors affect all South-Africans, especially the poor and some in the middle class who will struggle in the short term. The time has come to cut down on luxuries and tighten belts to survive in the short term until there is certainty about how the havoc in Ukraine will play out.

News Archive

Position statement: Recent reporting in newspapers
2014-10-03

 

You may have read reports in two Afrikaans newspapers, regarding recent events at the University of the Free State (UFS). Sadly, those reports are inaccurate, one-sided, exaggerated and based not on facts, but on rumour, gossip and unusually personal attacks on members of the university management.

Anyone who spends 10 minutes on our Bloemfontein Campus would wonder what the so-called ‘crisis’ is about.

We are left with no choice other than to consider legal action, as well as the intervention of the South African Press Ombudsman, among other steps, to protect the good name of the institution and the reputation of its staff. No journalist has the right to launch personal and damaging attacks on a university and its personnel, whatever his or her motives, without being fair and factual. In this respect, the newspapers have a case to answer.

But here are the facts in relation to the reports:

  1. No staff member, whether junior or senior, is ever suspended without hard evidence in hand. Such actions are rare, and when done, are preceded by careful reviews of our Human Resource Policies, labour legislation and both internal and external legal advice. Then, and only then, is a suspension affected. A suspension, moreover, does not mean you are guilty and is a precautionary action to allow for the disciplinary investigation and process to be conducted, especially where there is a serious case to answer.
  2. At no stage was the Registrar instructed to leave the university; this is patently false and yet reported as fact. We specifically responded to the media that the Registrar does outstanding work for the university and that it is our intention for him to remain as our Registrar through the end of his contract in 2016.
  3. The Rector does not make decisions by himself. Senior persons, from the position of Dean, upwards, are appointed by statutory and other senior committees of the university and finally approved by Council. No rector can override the decision of a senior committee, and this has not happened at the UFS even in cases where the Rector serves as Chair of that committee. The impression of heavy-handed management at the top insults all our committee structures, including the Institutional Forum – the widest and most inclusive of stakeholder bodies at a university – which reports directly to Council on fairness and compliance of selection processes.
  4. In the case of senior appointments, Council makes the final decision. Council fully supports the actions taken on senior appointments, including a recent senior suspension. The fact that one Council member resigns just before the end of his term, whatever the real reason for this action, does not deter from the fact that the full Council in its last sitting approved the major staffing decisions brought before it. The image therefore that the two newspapers try to create of great turmoil and distress at the university, is completely unfounded.

Even if we wanted to, the university obviously cannot provide details about staffing decisions, especially disciplinary actions in process, since the rights of individuals should be protected in terms of the Human Resource Policies and procedures of the UFS. But that does not give any newspaper the right to speculate or state as fact that which is based on rumour or gossip, or to slander senior personnel of the university. For these reasons, we have been forced to seek legal remedy and correction as a matter of urgency.

Make no mistake, underlying much of the criticism of the university has been a distress about transformation at the UFS; in particular, the perception is created that white colleagues are losing their jobs. The evidence points in the opposite direction. Our progress with equity has been slow and we lag far behind most of the former white universities; that is a fact. More than 90% of our professors are white; most of our senior appointments at professorial level and as heads of department are still overwhelmingly white. Reasonable South Africans would agree that our transformation still has a long way to go and only the mean-spirited would contend otherwise. But based on the two Afrikaans newspaper reports, an impression is left of the aggressive rooting out of white colleagues.

In the past few years the academic standard of the university has significantly improved. We now have the highest academic pass rates in years, in part because we raised the academic standards for admission four years ago. We now have the highest rate of research publications, and among the highest national publication rate of scholarly books, in the history of the UFS. We have one of the most stable financial situations of any university in South Africa, with a strong balance sheet and growing financial reserves way beyond what we had before. We now attract top professors from around the country and other parts of the world, and we have the highest number of rated researchers, through the National Research Foundation, than ever before. And after the constant turmoil of a number of years ago, we now have one of the most stable campuses in South Africa. Those are the facts.

The UFS is also regarded around the world as a university that has become a model of transformation and reconciliation in the student body. The elections of our Student Representative Council are only the most visible example of how far we have come in our leadership diversity. Not a week goes by in which other universities, nationally and abroad, do not come to Kovsies to consult with us on how they can learn from us and deepen their own transformations, especially among students.

Rather than focus on what more than one senior journalist, in reference to the article in Rapport of 21 September 2014, rightly called ‘a hatchet job’ on persons and the university, here are the objective findings of a recent survey of UFS stakeholders: 92% endorse our values; 77% agree with our transformation; 78% believe we are inclusive; and 78% applaud our overall reputation index.  Those are very different numbers from a few years ago when the institution was in crisis.

This is our commitment to all our stakeholders: we will continue our model of inclusive transformation which provides opportunities for study and for employment for all South Africans, including international students and colleagues. We remain committed to our parallel-medium instruction in which Afrikaans remains a language of instruction; we are in fact the only medical school in the country that offers dual education and training in both Afrikaans and English for our students - not only English. We provide bursaries and overseas study opportunities to all our students, irrespective of race. And our ‘future professors’ programme is richly diverse as we seek the academic stars of the future.

We are not perfect as a university management or community. Where we make mistakes, we acknowledge them and try to do better the next time round. But we remain steadfast in our goal of making the UFS a top world university in its academic ambitions and its human commitments.

END

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