Why does cosatu object privatization

Parker suggests concentrating on the long-term effects on the competitiveness of European industry and the implications for social welfare. This brief review indicates the range of research methods being used by many authors to try to establish the impact of privatisation on the performance of the firms concerned over time. It also suggests a continuing concern with the impact of privatisation on differing interest groups.

The literature on privatisation is full of so many complementary definitions of key terms in regard to it. Hossain and Malbon's definition seems to be the most complete. According to the authors, privatisation is the desire to strengthen and expand the market at the expense of the state and increase the exposure of the public sector to market forces. Privatisation involves the selling of state-owned enterprises SOEs , government business enterprises GBEs , and others government activities to the private sector.

The most common privatisation mechanism includes direct sale of a GBE, public offer of a GBE, concession sale, joint venture, management buyouts, liquidation and lease.

In many nations, regulators have been established to oversee the privatisation process and to protect the interest and activities of three major players: namely consumers, privately owned new companies and governments. Defining the policy is a complex problem and several authors discuss this theme. Palfrey et al. Academic researches contrast policy as an aspiration of a political party, as a general purpose and a particular programme. In this way, public policy should be understood as a process by which proposals are transformed into activities that will produce some kind of output effects and impacts in the society directly affected.

The evaluation of public policy could be understood as the whole process of checking afterwards how far policy objectives have been achieved and how effectively and economically.

Evaluation frequently relates to existent, measurable and most often segmental aspects of the policy process. However, subjective values are admissible in some cases. Evaluations try to provide answers to causal questions impact or efficiency , and are conducted post facto Geva-May and Pal, This perspective is denominated a summative evaluation. This discussion will be presented later in this paper.

The several stages in the public policy cycle, agenda setting, policy formulation, policy legitimating, policy implementation, evaluation and policy reconsideration could be comprehended as a system where inputs, outputs, effects and impacts have a particular importance and must be distinguished as a part of the chain of value creation. Inputs are the resources required for formulating and executing the policy. So, outputs are specific activities that directly result from inputs.

Effects or outcomes should be defined as what actually happened. It refers to direct consequences or results that follow from an activity or process, the resulting change in previous conditions. Ultimately, the impact is the consequence of a policy, both good and bad, expected and unexpected, reflecting those implications for society as whole, for example, the long-range improvements in attractiveness or the improvement of the quality of life in the community.

Evaluation's literature has been giving emphasis at, firstly, the importance of the shareholders and stakeholders. Who should command the evaluators' attentions first? The answer to this question depends on the objectives of evaluation.

For example, if the aim is to analyse the financial performance of a privatised company, the focus will be the shareholders and financial assets. On the other hand, if the intent is to understand the various interests that encircle the whole process of public policy making, then it is necessary to identify persons or groups who make decisions or desire information about that program, which means the stakeholders Patton, The authors have discussed above how to approach privatisation from a public policy perspective, seeking to analyse the broad range of impacts arising from the privatisation process.

Besides, the study of public policy requires attention to its initiation, formulation, implementation and impact. Hogwood traces the growth of interest in a policy focus in Britain during the s and early s and its subsequent partial displacement by the emphasis on public management. Despite this partial displacement, the policy focus is now institutionalised in academic research, textbooks, journals and teaching. One area in which the British debate has assumed a leading role has been implementation planning and management.

However, the literature about evaluation continues to be dominated by the huge volume of American material. Pollitt confirms this conclusion about the development of Britain's research about public policy.

He suggests that British public administration has endured radical anti-state reforms since However, he concludes that "UK academic public administration is still more that of a North American Satellite than a core European State" Pollitt, Nevertheless, Geva-May and Pal , describing the differences about policy evaluation and policy analysis, argue that evaluation is a subset or phase of policy analysis that is primarily research-oriented.

Evaluation of a public policy tries to provide answers to causal questions, like impact or efficiency. It is conducted post facto , and concentrates its analysis in process and costs issues. On the other hand, policy analysis is about making recommendations for future improvement and will be based in part on research evidence derived from previous evaluation studies.

Defined in these terms, policy analysis is intended to assist policymakers in choosing the best policy alternative among a set of alternatives, with the aid of evidence and reason, based on multiple methods of inquiry and argumentation. The act of evaluating a public policy may thus be thought of as the compiling of a retrospective argument.

It relates to existent, measurable and often artificially segmented aspects of the policy process. Frequently, evaluators are required to use evidence and present policy makers with data that may assist them in the decision-making process. This informs but never determines the choice of the best policy among a set of alternatives, which is ultimately made on the basis of subjective reasoning. The target information of evaluators is goals, programme design, the implementation process and the outcomes of the evaluation process.

The study methods are another area of controversy and considerable experimentation. Evaluation typically uses strict and objectivist social science research methods to assess the worth of the various organisational structures, ongoing programs, personnel, budgets and operating procedures.

Policy analysis could be compared to journalism. It uses empirical methods and social science theories to figure out the expected consequences of anticipated alternatives; it requires data gathering and communication skill similar to those practised in journalism.

After all, the policy analyst must provide good information to convince that his conclusion is the best. Evaluation does make use of case studies, mostly experimental or comparative studies whether quantitative or qualitative, or a combination of the two.

It sets strict criteria and emphasises reliability and validity measurements. On the other hand, the data used by policy analysis are derivative and have been gathered, created or developed by others, in different settings and times, and for different needs.

Therefore, what is the evaluation's problem definition? Geva-May and Pal says that it is to determine the research method, target population and research tools, but particularly avoid predicting results. The analyst of public policy should finish this part of the work. Since evaluation is primarily retrospective, it looks at context in terms of factors that facilitated or impeded policy success.

When evaluators suggest policy options based on their evaluation research, they are using faithful data to make unfaithful recommendations. That is because the selection of options depends on a much wider range of information than can be provided through standard evaluation methods. This is the domain of the policy analyst. But, under certain circumstances, the boundaries can be crossed.

The big question is how to recognise the transition from one mode to another. Geva-May and Pal propose a theoretical distinction between policy analysis and evaluation concepts, marking the potential divergence between them. They suggest some methods to evaluate a public policy:. Beneath each of these methods lies a panoply of specific tools and procedures that are spelt out in considerable detail in the Centre European Evaluation Expertise Geva-May and Pal also suggest that the act of evaluation should be oriented to the particular problem under investigation and avoid predicting results.

Goldman, Nakazawa and Taylor's article proposes eight steps to evaluate the economic impact of a public policy. For them, economic impact studies need to provide information about the impact a project will have on the community's overall environment as well as on jobs, income and housing.

Airbus upbeat as aircraft sales forecast to soar. Economists split on when Reserve Bank will start inevitable tightening More than half of local economists in a survey expect the Reserve Bank will increase interest rates on Thursday.

Enoch Godongwana sticks to script on no new spending. Client service and client experience: The main differentiators.

Boris Johnson calls COP26 deal pivotal in fight to stop global warming Negotiators clinched a breakthrough climate deal but pushed the hardest decisions into the future. Shipping carries the can as investors shun coal. Cricket Other Sport Rugby Soccer. Cameroon, Ivory Coast stay on course for crunch World Cup clash. Bagnaia wins Valencia GP, Rossi 10th in emotional farewell. Analysts point out that many of the jobs have already been lost as the government has modernized and streamlined the companies in preparation for privatization.

The dispute highlights differences in the so-called tripartite alliance between the unions, the ruling African National Congress, and the South African Communist Party. The differences are becoming more defined as the ANC moves ever further from being a liberation organization and settles more and more into its role as a ruling party.

Despite the public confrontations, most South African analysts say the alliance is unlikely to split in the foreseeable future. Search Search. It does not make sense for government to invest large amounts of resources or forego huge tax revenues in order to attract or kickstart new investment projects for example through strategic industrial incentives offered by the Department of Trade and Industry , but fail to show similar commitment to salvaging productive public enterprises which have already been established.

It is highly unlikely that any private owner of Alexkor would accept such a commitment, which is six to twelve times higher than industry norms for the channelling of profits into development. Any job losses due to downscaling or particular forms of restructuring of Alexkor would clearly have wide-ranging negative effects on the region. Over six hundred workers have lost their jobs at Alexkor since , and with minimal prospects of alternative sustainable employment their future looks bleak.

The mine is particularly closely linked with the services, transport and construction sectors, and any reduction in mining production would have multiplier effects in contracting the regional economy. Many local and regional businesses, which depend on Alexkor contracts or linkages, would probably close.

Furthermore, the slashing of local buying power which would inevitably result from job losses would dramatically reduce demand in the area which would have devastating ripple effects on economic activity in the region. It compares the effects of a baseline scenario continuing production , downscaling and closure. Both the downscaling and closure options lead to massive job losses, both in the mining and other sectors. They also lead to significant reductions in the Namaqualand Gross Geographical product and in the population of Namaqualand.

The developmental role of Alexkor in Namaqualand confirms its position as a strategic State asset. Private business, driven by profit-maximising motives, would certainly not prioritise the developmental role. From a commercial point of view, money spent on development is a "cost" which reduces profit margins.

Even if compelled to invest in development for example through community equity ownership or through government regulation , private owners would generally attempt to get away with spending as little as possible. The dependence of Namaqualand on Alexkor and the disastrous effects which downscaling either of the mine itself or of its developmental role would have on the region will hopefully be further elucidated through the hearings that the Committee will be holding in Alexander Bay itself.

This derives from our belief that Alexkor is indeed a viable prospect for continued public ownership, playing a strategic economic and developmental role without acting as an unnecessary long-term "drain" on the fiscus. We thus outline below the basic framework of a "Seven-point Plan" for the turnaround of Alexkor as a state asset.

Should there be a genuine commitment within government to exploring viable alternatives to privatisation, we would be willing to further develop these proposals as part of a joint process. Such a team could constructively pool ideas and generate a short-, medium- and long-term plan for Alexkor which meets the various stakeholder needs. At this point, we will thus just sketch out the essential components of such a turnaround strategy. This would entail both the upgrading of existing mining methods and the introduction of new methods.

Without going into too much technical geological detail at this point, this would include:. While some of these methods are already used up to a point, indications are that this is either insufficient or not done with regard to the specific needs of Alexkor. Where possible existing technologies and production capacity should be optimised to minimise the capital outlay required.

The advantage of the former option is that commission paid is considerably lower, hence net profits would be higher. There is also a need to drastically improve general operational inefficiency, the problems of which were discussed in section 3. The problems with the current Alexkor management have been discussed in section 2.

These include a lack of demographic transformation; inadequate and inappropriate skills; failure to relate constructively with employees; rapid turnover of senior staff from outside the region; and an overreliance on consultants.

All of these problems can and must be resolved. There is a need for government, in collaboration with the Board, to take a more "hands-on" approach in the short- to medium-term to ensure that a management team with the necessary skills, vision, and representivity can lead the mine in future. It is imperative to move beyond the "us and them" adversarial relationship which exists at present. The transformation of management discussed above would go some way towards achieving this, as would an overall shift in the operational style and ethos of the mine.

It needs to be recognised that workers have considerable technical expertise and have valuable insights into how to make Alexkor more efficient. Certainty around the long-term future of Alexkor would also contribute to enhancing staff morale at all levels of Alexkor and boosting productivity. The comprehensive transformation of Alexkor and particularly the fostering of a more participatory environment would enhance the sense of "ownership" of and commitment to Alexkor.

As mentioned elsewhere in this submission, Alexkor is fortunate to have a general workforce with a relatively high level of education by industry standards. What is however badly needed is ongoing skills training geared towards the raising of productivity, career pathing, and changing the staff demographics from the middle level upwards. Human resource development is required at all levels of the organisation, from labourers to senior management level.

This would be an investment in the medium- to long-term success of Alexkor. At the moment one of the problems is that only a few key people have the necessary skills to use certain equipment or methodologies, and given the high staff turnover this is disruptive to operations.

Broadening the skills base would enhance operational continuity.