RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (RDP)

SECTION I 7.21.1.14 Policy

2.13 RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME (RDP)

World Bank, whereas the broader economic model of liberalised trade and open markets are simultaneously promoted. This contradictory situation interests advocates of alternative approaches to development. Moreover, this tension between an acceptance of mainstream economic policy and dealing with its structural consequences infuses policy frameworks, especially as they emanate from official sources and translate into official discourse and practice (parnell & Pieterse 1998:9).

Development Local Government in South Africa is thus born of the consensus and the conflict apparent in international development thinking. Against this background one can begin to anticipate the issues that will inform debate and contestation about translating policy frameworks into implementable developmental action. Before exploring these issues in the South African context it is worthwhile recalling that the international development debates are mediated by local specificity, notably the spatial and institutional legacy of apartheid segregation (pamel & Pieterse, 1998:9).

resources towards the eradication of apartheid and the building of democratic, non-racial and non- sexist future. Therefore, it is fundamental for local government. The RDP has as one of its principles an attempt to address poverty alleviation and employment creation and as such to address local economic development in the country as a whole. Basic principles for RDP are presented below.

2.13.1 Basic principles of the RDP

According to the Basic Guide to the RDP (1994:4) the following principles can be identified:

*

A programme to address to whole problem

The effect of apartheid cannot be overcome by policies which only look at some of the problems and ignore others. The RDP addresses all of the problems. It brings together strategies to make the best use of all the resources, both now and for the future.

*

A programme which puts people first

People, with their hopes and strength, are the most important resource. The RDP focuses on people's most immediate needs, and it relies, on the energies to meet these needs.

*

A programme for peace and security

In the past police, the security forces and the law served apartheid and were unable to control the wave of violence against its people. In order to rebuild and develop the country, it is necessary to establish security forces which protect people and a legal system which will treat all people fairly and equally, according to the Constitution.

*

A programme to build the nation

Apartheid divided people into developed "first world" communities and underdeveloped

"third world" communities. The RDP aims to build a strong nation which cannot only develop itself but also play a part in the development of the whole Southern African region. It aims to build a nation that can play its full part in the world community.

*

A programme to link reconstruction and development

Building the economy and developing the country must happen side by side.

*

A programme based on democracy

Under apartheid, a minority of people controlled everything. This led to great inequality and underdevelopment. The way to real development is through democracy that allows everyone the opportunity to shape their own lives and to make a Constitution to development

2.13.2 Key programmes for RDP

The RDP (1994:7) sets out five key programmes that need to rebuild and develop the country:

meeting the basic needs;

developing human resources;

democratising the state;

building the economy; and implementing the RDP.

Central focus would be on meeting the basic needs of people and the implementation of theRDP.

According to the Basic Guide to the RDP (1994:7; The RDP-The First Year Reviewed (1995: 1) provides a list of important facts showing that almost half of the people do not have basic things such jobs, houses and medical care. A list of these important facts is presented below:

About 17 million people live below the poverty level;

In 1990, there was a shortage of about 1.3 million homes;

About 12 million people have no reasonable access to water and about 21 million do not have adequate sanitation;

There is spare electricity in South Africa but only 36% of household are electrified;

82

About 3 million homes do not have electricity; and Millions of people do not have adequate health care.

Many RDP projects are infrastructural and directed towards poorer areas and communities. By sector, the biggest spending has been on urban housing, infrastructure and renewal (R3 million), health (R2,7 billion) and water (R500 million). However, considerable amount of unspent money was controlled over after the first years of the RDP. This was mainly due to government departments not being geared to spending money according to the RDP principles (Steward 1997:12).

The implementation of RDP promIses and plans, and especially the lack of implementation, has been the subject of much debate and negative comment. This debate and comment is based both on the RDP's impending failure to meet its own standards (for example, the one million houses in the first five years), and the visible persistence and growth of poverty and inequality. The delay in establishing democratic local government structures clearly impeded RDP processes of that level until the beginning of 1996 (Steward 1997:10).

It is undeniable, that non-payment for services rendered hampered the delivery of basic services to many impoverished communities. Some of the reasons for this situation are as follows: (Kroukamp 1995: 194).

non-payment consumers having adjusted their lifestyles 10 accordance with the increase of disposable income;

a common complaint from residents is that the services for which they are being overcharged are non-existing, or are of a very poor quality;

there is suspicion that tariffs charged in townships are not the same as those charged in the city areas; and

unemployed people simply being too poor to pay for services.

In addition, many knowledgeable, senior treasury officials have left local government in large numbers, thereby leaving a void that cannot easily be filled. Sound financial management requires a high degree of financial expertise and without such expertise, financial mismanagement becomes inevitable, thereby exacerbating an already complicated situation. Political supremacy must also lead to political and financial accountability and unless that happens, local government finances will remain precarious (van der Linde 1996:92).

The role of local government in implementing RDP will be discussed in chapter three of this study.