Institutional Restructuring

Higher education leapfrogs into a new non-racial future

Transformation in higher education gained new impetus last week when Cabinet gave its approval to the final proposals for the restructuring of the institutional landscape of the higher education system.

Meeting the higher education needs of local communities and the nation as a whole in the 21st Century will finally become a living reality. The people of our country will finally receive a quality higher education system that responds to equity and development challenges.

The road to the present has involved much discussion and debate especially over the last decade. Even before the first democratic government took office in 1994, the African National Congress had laid down guidelines for education. The National Education Policy Initiative (NEPI), a project of the National Education Coordinating Committee (NECC), between 1990 and 1992, sought to identify policy options in all areas of education, within a value framework derived from the ideals of the broad democratic movement. The broad frameworks that emerged from the NEPI process were built on by the African National Congress in the development of its education policies, published in its "Yellow Book", Policy Framework for Education and Training, in 1994.

The process of higher education transformation began under Minister Sibusiso Bengu, the first Minister of Education in the democratic government in 1994, and in recent years intensified under current minister Kader Asmal.

The White Paper on Education and Training, adopted in 1995, set out the first steps in policy formulation. The National Commission on Higher Education (NCHE), set up in 1995, undertook extensive research leading to a report tabled in 1996. The Education White Paper, "A Framework for the Transformation of Higher Education", developed in 1996, identified the need to review the institutional landscape in higher education. This document remains the policy basis for the transformation of higher education. In February 2001, the National Plan for Higher Education was adopted by Cabinet and this provided the implementation framework for the transformation and restructuring of the system. Thereafter the National Working Group under the chairpersonship of Saki Macozoma made recommendations, and Asmal undertook numerous consultations before the proposals went to Cabinet.

Finally, last week the transformation path in higher education took a sharp turn away from the apartheid legacy and instead leapfrogged into a new non-racial future, when Cabinet gave its approval to the final proposals for the restructuring of the institutional landscape of the higher education system.

After more than three years of intensive debate, proposals on the transformation of higher education was taken to the Cabinet in May of this year, and a three month period was then allowed to elapse for public representation on the proposals for the transformation and restructuring of the institutional landscape of higher education. The submissions from the public were taken into consideration and helped to shape the final proposals made to Cabinet.

With finality reached on a new institutional framework for higher education, we can now proceed with the building of an institutional framework capable of supporting the current and future high level human resource and research needs of the country. For the first time in the history of South Africa, we can look forward to building non-racial higher education institutions reflective of the new values of our new democracy, where there is increased access for those seeking to realise their potential through higher education, where equity exists and which provide a better quality of education. Moreover, the mergers of existing institutions and the establishment of new higher education institutes will serve to bring about growth in parts of the country poorly served in the past and every province will be able to boast of having at least one institution of higher learning.

These changes in higher education are long overdue and must be welcomed as part of the overall strategy for transformation. Certainly, the time has come that all our students should feel comfortable and at home in whatever institution they attend, that staff profiles begin to reflect the race and gender balance of the country, that human resource development comes to mean the provision of necessary skills to meet the needs of our people and to build a knowledge economy which can further enhance South Africa's participation as an equal in the world economy. The development of knowledge and skills is also important in that it can be used to produce high-quality goods and services in such a way as to enable us to develop our cultures, our society and our economy.

We must all work together on these exciting and challenging new developments and recognise that this is indeed the beginning of a new era for higher education in South Africa. The focus now shifts not only to the implementation of the new institutional framework, but also on the other vital elements of the National Plan for Higher Education which had been somewhat lost in the drawn-out debates on mergers.

There is now room for the exploration of language policies in higher education, especially in relation to indigenous languages. The restructuring now allows for a greater emphasis to be placed on research and this in turn helps to create the conditions for the nurturing of a national intelligentsia. The duplication of certain programmes within regions will be eliminated, so that more emphasis can be placed on pooling resources and building existing strengths and skills.

The following mergers/incorporations will be implemented:

• University of Natal / University of Durban-Westville
• Potchefstroom University/ University of the North-West
• Technikon Pretoria/ Technikon Northern Gauteng/ Technikon North-West
• Fort Hare/ East London Campus of Rhodes University
• The incorporation of the Vista campuses into the appropriate universities and technikons
• University of Port Elizabeth/ Port Elizabeth Technikon
• University of the North/ Medunsa
• University of the Transkei/ Border Technikon/ Eastern Cape Technikon
• RAU/ Technikon Witwatersrand
• Cape Technikon/ Peninsula Technikon.
• The proposed merger of Border Technikon, Eastern Cape Technikon and the University of the Transkei to form a comprehensive institution that will largely offer technikon-type programmes as well as relevant university-type programmes.

The first group of mergers will take place in January 2004 and the second group in 2005. In addition to the mergers, there will be the establishment of National Institutions for Higher Education in Mpumalanga and the Northern Cape which will allow for the coordinated provision of higher education in regions of the country where there is no university or technikon. The rejuvenation of the Universities of Venda and Zululand as comprehensive institutions should also bring new opportunities to the surrounding communities.

The availability of necessary financial resources to facilitate the mergers has been addressed. At a press conference held on 9 December 2002, Asmal said that government is committed to providing the financial resources necessary to facilitate the mergers and to ensure the stability and sustainability of institutions, including funds required to re-capitalise institutions that currently do not have an adequate asset base to cover their liabilities. He also reiterated that "the merger decisions should not be seen in isolation, but in conjunction with the other policy goals and objectives of the National Plan for Higher Education. They are part and parcel of wider efforts for transformation and the provision of increased and broadened access to higher education."

Recent developments in higher education also contribute to the transformation of higher education. The establishment of a National Higher Education Information and Applications Service is on the card. This will have a number of benefits, including providing information on the available pool of applicants, answering the information needs of applicants on available study opportunities and careers information. It will also enable the Government to monitor progress in achieving race and gender access. As a result, for the first time, all Grade 12 learners will have readily accessible information on opportunities in higher education.

The recently-released framework for Language Policy in Higher Education promotes a multilingual approach for the sector; and a task team is to be established in order to address the development of South African languages as mediums of instruction at higher education institutions.

Clearly, we have come a long way in attaining our goals of a non-racial, non-sexist and equal education system. As the radical transformation of higher education gets underway on the ground, we will come closer to reaching our goal of an equitable, sustainable and productive higher education system of high quality.

Open Letter

'To an old friend, Professor Sampie Terreblanche'

Dear Sampie,

Given how busy everybody is, we have not met for a long time. This is not a good thing, given our very fruitful and important exchanges in the years leading to the democratic transition. I am not certain that what happened then has either been properly evaluated, or communicated to our people at large.

As you recall, we had extensive discussions during our confidential meetings in the UK about the process of transformation politically and economically in South Africa.

One of the things I remember distinctly was your critique of our economic policies. As I remember it, you insisted that these were too singularly focused on redistribution, to the exclusion of the central objective of growth.

We had no ideological or political opposition to this objective. I would like to believe that you saw this reflected in policy statements of the ANC.

I also remember the stories you told us of some of the work you and others did to build the system of apartheid, as intellectual members of the Broederbond.

I mention these things because I was somewhat surprised to hear that you intended to publish a book which, allegedly, would attack the ANC and our government on the basis that we have betrayed the poor of our country, having sold out to big capital and the IMF.

Given that you are eminently aware, as we discussed in our "secret" meetings, of the apartheid legacy of mass poverty, gross economic inequalities, an inefficient and uncompetitive economy in very poor shape, and an equally poor macro-economy that we inherited, I am certain that you would know that it would take time to eradicate this legacy. Eight years are certainly not enough to achieve this result.

Accordingly I would imagine that you would not find it remarkable that our country continues to experience serious levels of poverty. It would however be remarkable that you would blame this poverty on the present government, on the basis that the dirt accumulated during three hundred years can be swept away in eight.

As an economist you would also be aware of what we have been doing to use a significant part of the public revenues to raise the living standards of the poor. Even as we worked to reduce the budget deficit, we made certain that we do not decrease our social expenditures.

Consistent with what you raised with us even before 1990, about the importance of economic growth, we have sought to attend to this matter. The performance of our economy during the current global slowdown indicates that we are succeeding to inject growth capacity in the economy.

Even the report of the Bank of New York - The ADR Investor issue of November 2002, states that the BNY South Africa ADR Index is up 53.7% (through October 11), compared to declines of 27.0% for the BNY Composite ADR Index and 34.7% for the BNY Emerging Markets ADR Index.

You are, of course, aware that the bulk of capital in our country is privately owned. Obviously, it is important that this pool of capital is mobilised for investment in our economy. Without this there will be no growth. Most certainly, we have tried to encourage such investment, including investment by foreign owners of capital.

I do not know whether this is what you mean when you accuse us of having sold out to the capitalists. When we oppose retrenchment we do so on the basis of a demand that these capitalists should at least maintain both their capital stocks and the labour component required to use these stocks and labour power to produce new value.

Even the correct demand to reduce the levels of unemployment in our country is, inherently, also a demand for increased investments in our economy. This means that we must encourage the owners of capital to invest. Does this constitute a sell out to the capitalists?

You also know that unemployment in our country is intimately linked to the problem of the low skills level among millions of our working people. Again, perhaps more than most of us, you will be aware that this is a result of deliberate policies pursued during the apartheid years to keep especially the African majority unskilled.

At the same time, you will be familiar with the steps we have taken, to change this situation within the context of an integrated human resource development programme. This includes the provision of funds to ensure that we have the means to change the skills profile. Without this, we will never be able to solve the problem of unemployment and poverty.

To address the racial and gender skills imbalances, we have indeed tried to get more black people and women better qualified. We do not and will not apologise for this.

Naturally, the result of this is that these qualified South Africans will earn more than the unqualified. As we succeed to get more black people pulled out of the ranks of the unskilled, the larger will be the pool of black people who belong to the middle class.

I do not understand why this should attract criticism. It may be that the suggestion is that the black skilled and professional should get earnings that are as close as possible to those of the black unskilled.

Interestingly, while some are fond of remarking about a growing income gap within the African section of our population, there is a deafening silence about the persisting gap between those that benefited from the apartheid system and the vast majority of our people. This suggests that it is natural for some to be well off, while, apparently, there is something wrong about African people escaping the clutches of poverty.

I am certain that a study of the history of the upliftment of the Afrikaner people, starting with the effort to address "the poor white problem", would demonstrate that at no point was there an effort to equalise incomes among the various sections of the Afrikaner people.

It is not possible that a Professor at the University of Stellenbosch would have been required to earn the same wage as an unskilled Afrikaner working in the Suid Afrikaanse Spoorweë en Hawens, or Spoornet. It is strange that this is required of the African people.

It is difficult to understand the factual basis of your attack. It may however be that this derives from a passionate opposition to neo-liberalism. I say this because you have described and condemned our policies as being neo-liberal.

This comes across to me as calling a dog a bad name and hanging it, regardless of the behaviour of the poor dog. Again this is because it is impossible to demonstrate with facts that our policies are neo-liberal.

I am sure that you do not need me to educate you about the basic tenets of neo-liberalism. As you are aware, one of these is the promotion of the concept of "laissez-faire", aka "the free market".

According to this, it is argued that the economy should be allowed to develop "freely", without any intervention by the state. This "withering of the state" in a capitalist society, is propagated as the very expression of the liberal principle of the freedom of the individual, who, it is asserted, is as free as he or she is liberated from state intervention.

These individuals include the owners of capital. Accordingly, within the liberal/neo-liberal paradigm, the first and most important right of these individuals is to own property. The neo-liberals therefore preach about individual property rights as part of a theology.

The second important matter is that this right must be sanctified into law. The doctrine and practice of the rule of law is then most stridently proclaimed when it is thought that these property rights are being undermined.

Thirdly, the law must prescribe that the state has no right whatsoever to reduce or temper with these sacred property rights. Necessarily, therefore, the owners of productive property must have unlimited rights to use their property as they wish, with no interference from anybody.

These are the philosophical bases that inform the ideological, as opposed to the pragmatic, pursuit of such objectives as privatisation, deregulation and liberalisation, once again seen as sacred and inviolable principles.

I have no doubt that try as you might, you would not be able to prove that the ANC and our government espouse any of these neo-liberal principles or have engaged in any activities driven by this ideology. Nor will you be able to prove your assertion that the ANC was once socialist, a position you claim we have now abandoned.

The ANC has always been a national liberation movement committed to fundamental transformation of our society. Socialism was and is the ideology and goal of the Communist Party.

Ordinary South Africans, of all colours and classes, understand and accept that we could never successfully address our burdensome inheritance, which continues to divide our people along racial lines, without the collective national intervention required of the democratic state.

What puzzles me is why, and on what basis, you make the allegation that we are following neo-liberal policies. This is particularly so given what I fondly recall of you, when we interacted with you and others of our people in your delegation, to talk about the future of our country.

At that time, we did not seek to score little victories over one another. What we aimed at was a common victory over apartheid, in the interests of all our people. We understood that to get this result, we had to be as objective as possible, frank and truthful.

It is difficult to see these characteristics in what you have been saying about the ANC and our government. Basing myself on the past, I would have presumed that once more you would seek us out to express your concerns, if you thought we had abandoned the majority to poverty, whether intentionally or not. Given the legacy of what we have inherited, we must bear in mind the enormous challenges we face to transform our society. No country has in a short space of eight years been able to accomplish what our government has accomplished.

I presumed you would do this in keeping with your earlier determination to change our country for the better.

But, of course, it may be that the fact of our democracy has convinced you that this change in our country determines that you should seek to bring about the realisation of your objective of the defence of the poor by launching a media struggle against those you consider to be the enemies of the poor.

It may also be that the objective to fight and defeat the process of transformation at all costs has, for whatever reason, become your principal objective. If this is the case, then your actions would, at least, be understandable.

This would be sad and puzzling, given what you did to break with your past and place yourself among the architects of the new South Africa that would belong to all who live in it, black and white.

As it always does, time will tell where the truth lies. With regard to those who define themselves as progressive and continue to oppose the transformation agenda of the government, I pose the vitally important question - whose interests do they serve!

Yours sincerely,
Aziz Pahad

[Aziz Pahad is a member of the ANC National Executive Committee.]

Return to Index