South Africa’s National Dialogue: putting the cart before the horse
Dialogue cannot be effective without first properly assessing what's wrong and how it can be fixed.
The National Dialogue announced by President Cyril Ramaphosa two weeks ago aims to foster unity in South Africa and find collective solutions to the country’s multifaceted challenges. The initiative, which has been under discussion for years, will involve a wide range of societal sectors. It starts with a National Convention on 15 August, which will set the agenda for the broader dialogue.
The aim is to forge a social compact to drive a new 30-year National Development Plan (NDP). A National Dialogue Preparatory Task Team has begun mobilising civil society, establishing various working committees. A second National Convention, planned for early 2026, will consolidate proposals from the various engagements into a national vision and implementation programme.
Consultation is essential but insufficient to develop a common understanding of our poor growth trajectory. We may think we know why South Africa is not growing inclusively and rapidly, but an authoritative assessment is needed to determine what is wrong. Collective discussions of these challenges can then shape a plan of action.
South Africans want action, and are well aware of the pressing issues Ramaphosa listed, such as poor social services, high unemployment, widespread crime, corruption, food inflation and economic stagnation. What they do not see is a plan to carry the country forward.
It is naïve to think that such a plan will emerge from broad consultation without preparatory work by issue-level experts, which is then made available for public critique. This needn’t be a lengthy process.
This logical route was used to develop the current National Development Plan (NDP 2030). Each phase in its drafting allowed room for consultation and engagement, providing an excellent example to emulate.
It is naïve to think an effective plan will emerge from consultation without preparatory work by issue-level experts
The process started with establishing the National Planning Commission (NPC) in May 2010 by then president Jacob Zuma. Led by Trevor Manuel, the NPC spent the first year developing its impressive Diagnostic Overview, which identified key challenges. The current National Dialogue process should start with a similar analysis.
The subsequent development of NDP 2030 involved wide-ranging consultations, with the overarching goals of eliminating poverty and reducing inequality by 2030.
A first draft for comment was released in 2011, and the cabinet adopted the final plan in August 2012. But because the purpose of the exercise was primarily to ensure a political offramp for Manual – a political challenger and irritant to Zuma – subsequent attention was limited, and the plan was essentially shelved.
The National Dialogue should develop a follow-on NDP to 2043 or 2053, aligning with the third and fourth 10-year implementation plans of the African Union’s (AU) Agenda 2063. South Africa has rhetorically supported Agenda 2063 and hosts the AU Development Agency-New Partnership for Africa’s Development secretariat, which oversees Agenda 2063.
It would send an important message to other African countries if South Africa aligns its follow-on NDP with Agenda 2063’s successive 10-year action plans, as other African states are now doing. Institute for Security Studies work on long-term futures across Africa uses 2043. Our experience is that a long horizon (e.g. to 2050 and beyond) is easily ignored by governments fixated on electoral cycles.
It is important to ensure that any plan emanating from the National Dialogue survives beyond 2029
Politics will inevitably encroach on the process. By March 2026, when the dialogue is set to conclude with the adoption of a programme of action, Ramaphosa will have little more than a year left of his presidency. The ruling African National Congress (ANC) selects a new leader in December 2027, with Deputy President Paul Mashatile the most likely contender to lead the party into the 2029 general elections.
Irrespective of its choice of president, these polls will likely see the ANC continue on its downward trajectory, emerging at best, as the largest party in a coalition government. Recent polling even suggests the ANC will be ousted to the opposition benches.
It is important to ensure that any plan emanating from the National Dialogue survives beyond 2029. Practically, that means the Eminent Persons Group (the over 30 people appointed to guide the dialogue) and the Steering Committee must be isolated from politics and serve as the incoming planning commission. Alternatively, the group should be endorsed by the parties comprising the current Government of National Unity, given their commitment to shared governance.
The location, mandate and composition of the dialogue’s Task Team and Steering Committee are therefore vital. At first glance, locating the day-to-day operations of the secretariat in the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) appears attractive. NEDLAC provides a platform for dialogue between government, business, labour and community organisations to address economic, labour and development issues.
But NEDLAC has not engendered much confidence, and a forum for dialogue is not an appropriate place for national planning, monitoring and vision. The logical location remains within the Presidency, given the importance of proximity to power when translating good intent into impact.
Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana’s budget included the dialogue as one of six unfunded spending priorities
The current 27 NPC commissioners’ terms end in 2026. It makes sense – since they have already been appointed and announced – to formally align the dialogue’s Eminent Persons Group with the NPC, allowing them to assume responsibility for developing the follow-on plan, serving as commissioners.
Finally, South Africa is cash-strapped. When he tabled the 2025/26 national budget, Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana included the dialogue as one of six unfunded spending priorities. The preparatory committee has apparently mentioned R700 million to finance the process – enraging many South Africans.
It is a stretch to argue that such a costly dialogue is more important than the other unfunded items Godongwana listed – all of which are pressing and would make a practical difference to growth. These include the Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa’s (PRASA) rolling stock fleet renewal, replacing the gap left by the United States’ withdrawal of PEPFAR funds, and funding for the Chief Justice and Statistics SA.
It appears that the Task Team, comprising over 50 organisations representing foundations, non-governmental organisations, community-based groups and the Presidency, has yet to present a budget to the Treasury.
The National Dialogue is crucial to confronting South Africa’s deep-seated problems and fostering a unified approach to building a better future. But it must be grounded with appropriate analysis and consultation, driven from the Presidency, reviewed regularly and assume a time horizon aligned with Agenda 2063.
Exclusive rights to re-publish ISS Today articles have been given to Daily Maverick in South Africa and Premium Times in Nigeria. For media based outside South Africa and Nigeria that want to re-publish articles, or for queries about our re-publishing policy, email us.
