Chairperson, hon Ministers, hon members, chairperson of the portfolio committee, I want to continue where some of my comrades in the ANC have left off. In the state of the nation address - and one of my comrades has quoted the words - President Zuma says:
Working together with the people and supported by our public servants, we will build a developmental state, improve public services and strengthen democratic institutions.
He further emphasises in that speech, that, and I quote again: "A developmental state requires the improvement of public services and the strengthening of democratic institutions."
Further in that speech, the President details a few key initiatives towards this developmental state: To strengthen the strategic planning and performance management and evaluation of the state; ensure that the three spheres improve service delivery, and, therefore, the need for a single Public Service; putting people first, and for interactive government.
Today, Minister Baloyi gave further shape to that notion of a developmental state by setting out the values that would underpin that Public Service in a developmental state. Secondly, the Minister gave seven focus areas around which the developmental state would be constructed. I'm very happy that the Minister was able to come here with such a clear speech that is direction-giving, in the midst of all the difficulties and the challenges he has to face dealing with doctors who have historically never been on strike, but are now out on the streets; dealing with the OSD, which has been a vexing issue, together with remuneration challenges and the beginning of the bargaining season.
I think what we could do is to try and find, amongst all our parties, a workable definition of what this developmental state is or should be, or could be. I don't profess any great knowledge of it, but I think that if the notion of a developmental state was only a catch phrase; if it remained an undefined notion; if it was allowed to mean all things to all people, then it would be reduced to meaninglessness.
We wouldn't know what we are talking about; it would be frightening to those who feel threatened by it; it could even be a vehicle for opportunism for some who would see in the developmental state a space for their own agendas; and it could easily be reduced into a one-dimensional meaning. Some people would only see race in it; others would only see corruption, and all of those things.
Therefore, I think that what we need to grapple with and where I think some leadership would be required, is in giving body to this notion of a developmental state. What we do know is that a developmental state is a sharp break with the apartheid state. The apartheid state was exclusive, both racially and geographically; was functionally fragmented, with various departments for the same function. It was unequal and hierarchical: If you were white, you got the best. If you were African, you got the worst. It was insensitive and uncaring; it was unrepresentative and repressive. So, we know that a developmental state can't be any of that.
We must also be able to understand that a developmental state is also an alternative to a neoliberal state, which places emphasis on minimalism. A neoliberal state cuts away the functions of a state, the ability of a state to do things and the reach of a state. It says small government is everything. Less government is better for the people.
It abdicates key responsibilities. It says that it has nothing to do with economy. It would say: Let the markets sort out the global recession - the state does nothing. It's elitist, because it allows those who have money to get the best health services and those who have no money get no health services.
The same with education: It acts as a purchaser of service, rather than as a provider of service. And so, we can begin to say that maybe this developmental state shouldn't be any of those things. So, we know what a developmental state is not.
How do we construct a developmental state from what it is not, to what it should be - what it is? I think that, very clearly, what is coming out in all the years of discussion, particularly within the ANC and within Parliament, is that it must be an active state and a state that intervenes; that it doesn't abdicate its responsibility towards people; that it understands the fact that it needs to intervene in poverty; that we deal with the poverty that is racially colour-coded and poverty that is geographically defined.
So, how does the state organise itself around its activities and its interventions? We know that a developmental state understands that it is a vehicle for public goods, meaning that it has human capital; it can deploy in a certain way; it sets up institutions; it has resources, not least of all, the budget; it has infrastructure that it must use to deliver those public goods to citizens.
The third thing that we know about this developmental is that it is delivery-orientated and not repression-orientated. It's efficient. It has to be effective. It has to be courteous. Therefore, I think that the notion that hon Odendaal brings to the House about a depoliticised Public Service needs to be debated. I think she may not have been sharp enough in her way of putting the case. She may mean that she does not want a party-political public service. But, I think a public service that is not political, that does not understand and interpret the goals of society, would be a public service consisting of more than three blind mice. And so, they need orientation. [Applause.]
I think it is an important notion for us to debate ...