Climate change policy in SA needs to involve all stakeholders not just a select few
A National Treasury Climate Resilience symposium was hosted by the government at the CSIR from July 15 to 17 in Lynnwood, Pretoria. The future of the South African energy landscape is being shaped and decided at the symposium.
The theme is: “Moving the needle on Climate Change and Just Transition, the role of the National Treasury.” The movement has made bold decarbonisation statements. The topics covered within the symposium are:
∎ Integrate climate objectives into macro-fiscal and finance policy.
∎ Improve government coordination by mainstreaming climate change considerations into the intergovernmental fiscal system.
∎ Profile National Treasury’s contribution to climate action.
∎ Advance and promote policy advocacy, green growth, and collaboration to address a just transition in tackling climate change action across sectors.
I believe a symposium of this nature should have included members of the national and provincial legislatures and local government. A symposium of this magnitude cannot be held in the absence of key and critical stakeholders such as lawmakers, unions, civil organisations, activists and community-based organisations.
How can laws and instruments of new legislation be discussed in such a vacuum of key stakeholders? This is the irony with our government. How do you run a country with the majority of its active citizenry and civil society absent from key decision-making? It is essential that at key national conferences and symposiums that broad participation takes place. This is undemocratic.
The 6th and now 7th administrations have erred on this undemocratic processes in the past, and this National Treasury Climate Resilience symposium was no different. The question is why is the government abusing public trust while using public funds to advance its selective interests and agendas? It makes a mockery of proper debate and contribution to formulating future policy and what works for South Africa.
Multilateral global institutions cannot just impose policy on South Africa without proper engagement with layers of society on the policy mechanism in design.
Last year at the COP28 UN Climate Conference, it was reported that the then minister of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE) refused to give conference access passes to the COP28 conference hall to stakeholders aligned to the nuclear industry. This is totally unacceptable.
Ministers in departments are there as representatives of the nation and all the people of South Africa, not a selective group of interests. They are not in those positions of privilege for the mere sake of serving particular vested interests. Parties in the government and those serving within Ministries serve at the pleasure of the president who is the public representative of all South Africans.
So it is surprising to still notice a continuing culture of ministers hosting selective closed-door government conferences and symposiums, while at these conferences the future of all South Africans is decided by those attending the conferences.
The funders of the symposium are well-established global institutions and local organisations with the World Bank, the Presidential Climate Commission, AFD Groupe, Pink Programme, US Agency for International Development, and Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft Confédération Suisse just among the few donors of the symposium.
These symposiums are very important national policy discussion platforms.
A big concern is on the question of who informs and advises our leaders?
It is worrying that not more scientists, experts and academics are included in these advisory circles. Climate-based organisations have a set agenda and are paid to promote that agenda, without giving the full picture.
For example, this can be seen in the speech delivered by President Cyril Ramaphosa at the Climate Resilience symposium that focused on the recent Cape weather.
While this led to a a state of disaster being declared in the Western Cape, which has left thousands homeless by severe weather, Ramaphosa’s speech just conveniently labelled it climate change, but without Ramaphosa’s speech.
The president said, “This Climate Resilience symposium is taking place at a time when we are witnessing first-hand our extreme vulnerability to the impacts of a changing climate.
“The storms that hit parts of the Western Cape over the past week have caused devastation to homes, communities, businesses and infrastructure.
“These adverse weather conditions temporarily brought container ship traffic to a complete halt at the Port of Cape Town.
“Rough seas resulted in cargo vessels losing containers overboard and others being extensively damaged,” he said.
“The Port of Cape Town has the country’s second-largest container terminal. Though it handles a variety of cargo, the biggest exports from the port are agricultural products.
“Having perishable agricultural products stuck in the port or in transit for an extended period results in financial losses for exporters.
“This in turn impacts the agricultural sector, and given its importance to our economy, there is a knock-on effect on the economy as a whole.
“This is just one illustration of the fact that climate change is as much an economic issue as it is a scientific, social justice, human rights and development issue.
“It has a direct and material impact on activity across the economy,” Ramaphosa said.
The president stated that the current changes in the recent weather changes in the Cape area, in particular, were attributed to climate change. That is not scientific.
Frequently changing weather patterns are often labelled climate change without research to back up the claims.
Seventy percent of Cape Town’s rainfall occurs from June through to September. Cape Town in July usually receives high rainfall, averaging around 110mm for the month.
There is no doubt that the rainfall average for this season is higher than normal. However, it is too early to categorically say this is climate change vs weather.
Weather patterns change frequently over a short period of time. The seasonal changes associated with weather patterns result in high and low temperatures, heat waves, heavy precipitation, tropical cyclones, flooding rivers, drought and overall floods – these are normal weather conditions.
Climate change on the other hand is a study focused on a long-term observation of the global climate conditions impacted by human activity. These slight changes in overall climate changes are reflected in a steady rise in the Earth’s global temperatures-levels. The climate change-levels are attributed to a rise in global temperatures increase of 1.5°C to 2°C changes in temperature-levels.
You cannot attribute all weather change such as heavy rains and storms to climate change. It is simply not correct. While climate change is a reality, one needs to use the label with care.
South Africa deserves well-researched policy and climate change is no different. The government and National Treasury need to not only talk to narrowly-focused climate organisations, but include other key stakeholders. Only then can everyone be on board. If not it is just another e-toll type of exercise without unified consent.
Crown Prince Adil Nchabeleng is president of Transform RSA and an independent energy expert.
* The views in this column are independent of Business Report and Independent Media.
BUSINESS REPORT