Political Perspective
By: Gwen Lister
THE issue is not so much the dilemma of the so-called ‘children of the liberation struggle’ but the fact that Namibia seems currently unable to effectively address any of the socio-economic challenges it faces right now, and this is just one of them.
Let’s put aside for the moment the issue of whether a culture of entitlement is at play when we address the subject of the ‘exile kids’ to the exclusion of other priorities, and whether, in fact, that aspect even needs to be the subject of discussion. More pertinent is the fact rather that there are a host of different groups with urgent needs in our country; and the question, regardless of the historic legacy behind each or any of them, is why we are unable to address them without fear or favour.
IN THE course of a long discussion this week with former Prime Minister, now Defence Minister Nahas Angula, I realised that the issue isn’t whether we should or shouldn’t be concerned with the plight of the ‘struggle children’, but instead why we are seemingly unwilling or unable to address the urgent social needs of a variety of disadvantaged groups among our people.
Probably no one wants to simply dismiss the ‘struggle children’ as a needy recipient of assistance out of hand. What they don’t want is the perception that some groups are preferred or get exclusivity above others. We need to also make a distinction between the various disadvantaged groups, because not all their needs are the same. There are some who need ‘one-off’ assistance (many unemployed who need help in either accessing skills they don’t have in order to become employable and/or the opportunity to get a job); and others who will need it for the rest of their lives. (Decent pensions for the elderly or veterans in the latter case, for example, and how to tackle the crippling poverty that remains such an indictment on our pre-independence promises).
Even the needs among the ‘struggle kids’, as Angula pointed out, are different. And in order to enable their ‘independence’, one needs to know who needs what or simply waste time and effort, and this is probably largely what has happened up to now. This, and other issues, have been mismanaged, and clearly since independence. So for the future we need to learn that to help people to help themselves, and not face a recurring problem of them simply coming back for more, is to find a durable solution.
Of course if I had my way with two things: a social unemployment grant for those in need and a minimum wage, I believe a lot of the problems we currently face, and the odious choices of having to identify one group’s needs above those of another, would go away. Not everyone is employable, unfortunately; and among the ‘struggle kids’ are probably already some of those who are perhaps sick or, as Angula pointed out, already have too many dependants to be able to take time to be trained for gainful employment.
So I would suggest we search for a more holistic solution than just to cater for some groups more vocal than others. Hopefully something like the just-released census information will help us in our search for answers. For it is permanent answers we need, and not just temporary solutions which simply defer the problem for the future.
It’s been said that the test of a good government is how it treats its most vulnerable citizens. We are clearly not passing that test. At the heart of this failure is corruption, waste (which is essentially the same thing) and lack of political will and the fact that we’ve lost our moral compass. We need to, as someone pointed out to me recently, decide whether a priority is to keep Air Namibia afloat to the tune of 1.2 billion to ‘subsidise rich European tourists to travel to South Africa’ or spend that money on those with dire needs instead. We need to expose the corrupt and not just pretend we’re doing so. We need, in short, to get serious before a crisis strikes.