STATEMENT BY TITO MBOWENI, MINISTER OF LABOUR, ON BEHALF OF GOVERNMENT

Just over four years ago democracy was finally achieved in SouthAfrica. One of the first tasks of the new parliament, was passing the National Economic,Development and Labour Council Act which established this institution nowcommonly referred to as Nedlac. This was a major development for our country in the questto promote social dialogue amongst the key stakeholders in our society. This institutionwas deliberately designed to provide the nationally organised constituencies with aframework within which to "strive to promote the goals of economic growth,participation in economic decision-making, and social equity." This goal was to beachieved by seeking consensus on social and economic policy before such policy wasfinalised by government or in the case of labour laws, before submission to Parliament.The intention been to promote the co-ordination of policy.

How far have we come? Has Nedlacpromoted economic growth participation in economic decision making and improvementsin social equity since the watershed period of 1994/95 ? I will look at each of thesequestions briefly.

Has Nedlac promoted economic growth?

This is both the most illusive and yet the most critical of theindicators. Whilst Nedlac as an institution could notdirectly ensure higher rates of growth and economic development, we are convinced that bypromoting social dialogue and consensus on many economic and social issues, this institution has contributed indirectly to the growingconfidence in the South African economy. (confidence which is critical in order for us toattain high rates of investment). Although there has not been a simple climb towards 6%rate of economic growth as we hoped, nevertheless the projected growth for the end of nextyear is both positive and encouraging. Clearly democracy has been generally good for theeconomy, and to the extent that Nedlac is part of theinfrastructure of democratic expression and practice in South Africa, it has, by itsvery establishment, created a positive atmosphere.

Economic growth on its own is not a necessary and sufficient conditionfor development. Tackling unemployment and poverty is an important variable in theequation for national development. The Comprehensive Labour MarketCommission, back in June 1996, specifically identified the need to ensure thatmacro-economic policies, industry policies and labour market policies work togetherfor employment growth. Has Nedlac helped to achieve this objective? Not yet- it is clear that there has been a tendency for the various Chambers to work in relativeisolation from each other. Although this is not to detract from some of the important workdone in the Chambers -including, for example, the Workplace Challengeinitiative of the Trade and Industry Chamber. The industry policy research programmes havealso played an important contribution, such as in footwear and electronics.

Two important national gatherings will take place in the next two months or so. The first one is the conference onpoverty and the second is the PresidentialJobs Summit. We are convinced that if properly handled, both these gatherings could make substantialcontributions towards alleviating poverty and unemployment. At the Jobs Summit inparticular, employers, the trade union movement and government will meet to hammer intoshape a common strategy to attack the problem of unemployment. This common strategy shouldbe based on alignment of existing initiatives and introduction of new ones. The groundworkfor the Summit is been laid by the parties to Nedlac and others. Butmore closer to home and frankly speaking, the credibility of this institution will betested by the calibre of its contribution to the summit. Can the social partners stretchtowards a national goal including, but also going beyond,their sectional interests? Government will be publishing its plan at the beginning of Juneand the public will be invited to consider their response so that we can all benefit fromthese in finalising our inputs to the Summit. We are convinced that it is an opportunityfor Nedlac in particular to rise to new heights and demonstrate to alland sundry that it is able to provide a forum in which the "greater good" isable to triumph over sectional interests and ideologicaldifferences. We urge everyone here to take up the challenge for our country's sake.

There are, we think, a range of optimistic signs which auger well forthe Jobs Summit -not least of which is the spirit in which the recentnegotiations on Skills Development and Employment Equity Bills have been concluded. Inboth instances the employers and trade unions accepted the end objective and found ways toachieve common cause (albeit with reservations) on the way the objective is to be arrivedat. There was also a shift away from "line by line" negotiations, and a movetowards negotiations on principles which has assisted efficiency and effectiveness.

The undertaking from employers to support a levy equivalent to 1% ofpayroll for skills development, and the willingness of the trade unionmovement to accept this level as a starting point, is also a powerfulsignal that government, labour, business and the community organisations are prepared tomake a real and meaningful contribution to solving the problems of this country. We wouldlike to take this opportunity to commend everybody for this.

The second evaluation question is easier to answer:

Has Nedlacpromoted participation in economic decision-making?

Certainly it has. It has greatly contributed towards to the credibilityand legitimacy of labour legislation and has promoted debates on economic, social and developmental issues. The list of agreements over thefour years is remarkable. And even where there has been no agreement on all aspects ofpolicy tabled, the process of negotiations and consultations has facilitated wide ranginginformation dissemination, debate and education on the issues associated with policy andlegislation and therefore laid the groundwork for better implementation.

At times we have tended to dramatise areas where we are not yet findingcommon ground and this has been expressed through extreme forms of adversarialismand rank posturing. To the extent that this is true, we think that it is important that wedo not make Mount Everests out of antholes. However, there isevidence that new trends are beginning to emerge into which social dialogue in Nedlac iscontributing. For example, the work done by the Social Plan task team in Nedlacprovided an important input into thedeclaration signed by all participants at the Gold Mining Summit convened by the National Union of Mineworkers in February this year.The fact that the NUM was frustrated by the pace of events and took a parallel initiativein no way detracts from the role of Nedlac. Cabinet has now approvedthe Nedlac Framework Agreement on the Social Plan that will in turn assist the miningindustry and other sectors.

Participation in decision making about labour legislation hascontributed to the acceptability of the legislation. For example, the fact that over 80%of disputes heard by the CCMA areeither resolved or sent to arbitration is testimony to the fact that the Labour RelationsAct has been imbedded into our labourrelations fabric. This acceptance is due in no small measure to the process by means ofwhich this labour law was finalised.

However, there is a caveat here - the parties at Nedlac have tended to focus heavily on the process of arrivingat legislation. Once legislation is passed, there seems to be a much lower sense ofurgency and engagement with issues of implementation. The Nedlacparties tend to delay the implementation of legislation. We have been unable to appoint anew chair to the CCMA Governing Bodyand the Essential Services Committee still remains without a labour representative for thesame reason. This presents government with a very serious problem - as our performance isnot .measured by good policies so much as by performance. Nedlacneeds to address this problem urgently if it is not to be seen as an obstacle toimplementing policies.

The final question was:

Has Nedlac promoted improvements in social equity?

Many of the Bills, ILOConvention ratifications andCodes of Conduct passed by Nedlac have had this as theirexplicit objective. The formal legislative framework for greater equity would appear to bealmost in place: Ratification of ILOConventions on abolition of forced labour, discrimination, part-time work, freedom ofassociation are important in this regard. Of course, the BasicConditions of Employment Act, in protecting the most vulnerable, contributes to equity asdoes the Employment Equity Bill.

The challenge for Nedlac in the period that liesahead, is how can the Nedlac members assist in ensuring that thepartnership established at the policy level is translated into real improvements in thelives of ordinary people. Enforcement of rights and obligations is partially a formalprocess of litigation and punishment - but is much more effectivewhen it does not depend exclusively on punitive measures. Shop stewards and managers onthe front line need to actively participate in the implementation of the agreementsreached. We need to create a culture where paying your TV license not the only "right thing todo". Issues such as:

• paying your workers the set rate,
• ensuring healthy and safe conditions on the mine and in other workplaces,
• not employing children, tendering in a way which gives new entrepreneurs a chance, giving a day's work for a day's pay

are all equally important.

The role of the Nedlac members doesnot stop even here - in government we are accustomed to being the mainparty to bring issues to the Nedlac table for negotiation and the sole partyheld to account for implementation of agreements. But is this correct? It is time, wethink (and we have raised this issue previously from this podium), that other parties should begin tobring issues to the table, and it is time for other parties to be held to account forundertakings given and the consequences of actions taken. If the government is to tableits budget for discussion, why do the trade unions not discuss implication of theirbargaining strategies and why do the employers not need to presenttheir pricing and investment policies - which after all have an equallyimportant effect on general economic performance?

Another issue to ponder is: What is the relationship between Nedlac and the other multi-partite bodies established for specific social or economic policies? The issue was raised in the negotiations on the Skills Development Bill - should Nedlac or the National Skills Authority oversee the establishment of institutions for the implementation of the skills policy? It is our view that the role clearly belongs to the dedicated agency, in this case the National Skills Authority. Identifying Nedlac's "core business" - and sticking to it, is necessary to ensure the agency remains focused and effective.

These issues will no doubt come up at the Jobs Summit and during themonths ahead. As the legislative programme recedes and the elections approach, there willbe more time for reflection on implementation challenges and on the challenges that lieahead.

We have created a vibrant and living organisation in Nedlac - which has made remarkable progress in its short history.. New challenges lie ahead and it will have to change and adapt along with the society in which it is embedded - "to (continue) to strive to promote the goals of economic growth, participation in economic decision-making, and social equity."

Thank you.