Daniel Steinmann
1 May 2008
column
Despite its communist origins, I believe Workers Day is one of the more important annual events that we must reflect upon.
In a European context, Workers Day celebrates the achievements of the workers' collective, i.e. the rights of workers, the protection of their jobs and their own protection in the workplace. In an African context, the general understanding of Workers Day is far from that. For Namibians, it usually fades away in a well-peppered line-up of public holidays making life for businesses particularly difficult during this time of the year. Yet, in its essence, for us Workers Day is supposed to commemorate the input, effort and sweat of the millions of African workers who contribute, often unseen and unsung, to their respective economies.
But Workers Day also has an ominous side. I would like to believe that on this day, we also remember the fact that in Namibia, a very substantial portion of our population does not have cause for celebration because they don't have any work.
It is one of our sad realities that despite being a capital exporting nation, we cannot provide every willing and able-bodied Namibian with a job that will take care of him and his family. Inevitably this situation forces us to revisit our progress, and our future planning.
In this regard, I am an avid supporter of government's so-called pro-poor policies, but I perceive several anomalies that demand more attention and clearer policies.
The only really clear policy is tax-based. This is all good and well if you have a job and you fall in the low-income category. But if you are one of the estimated 40% unemployed, then a tax rebate is of no use. For the unemployed and for broad empowerment and development, the policies tend to be vague resembling political statements instead of implementable policies.
I believe it is sufficiently proven that job creation and economic growth goes hand in hand. Further, if I take the State of California as an example, then it has also been shown quite convincingly that broad-based economic progress with benefits for all rests on a multitude of small successful businesses.
A similar case can be observed in the exponential growth of the Export Processing sector in Ireland.
I am mentioning these to argue how important it is that we must put even more focus into developing the so-called SME sector.
Now I realise there is some confusion about the definition of an SME in our setting. Some planners try to make the consensual definition more inclusive by talking of micro enterprises where the small business literally consists of only one man. Perhaps for us to make the implementation of our policies clearer, we should focus on businesses in the SME sector employing between one and ten people.
This should immediately indicate that a large portion of typical Namibian SMEs would exist for self-employment. This is most often the case with artisans and technicians and where people work in a cyclical industry like tourism.
Still, I believe that in an organically growing economy, small businesses will eventually become the mainstay of large-scale employment. People employing themselves invariable need assistance, and depending on the ability of the owner, many of these micro enterprises turn into more than just a one-man show.
This is not to say that we do not need investment in big business, - of course we do. As examples we have the big mines. These companies are usually substantial employers but in many instances, since the mines are often so isolated, their suppliers consist of other companies that cannot be covered by our SME definition. Yet, recently I became aware of a Walvis Bay company that has not only brought a new capability to Namibia, but has also generated employment far bigger than just its own immediate circle. Namdock operates the floating dock in Walvis Bay. It is a joint venture company between NamPort and private marine engineering firms. By itself it employs less than 300 people directly, but by being dependant on the input of around fifty smaller suppliers, Namdock creates far more work than what is visible.
I think that is the way to go if we want workable policies for employment creation. Very similar to what happened in California with the personal computer revolution. But for that we need pro-growth policies, - clear ones.
f I say what a hassle it is for a manufacturing company to register as a manufacturer with the Ministry of Trade & Industry, to become eligible for certain tax rebates, then one realises our pro-growth policies are not nearly as clear as our pro-poor policies.
And yes, while it is important that we do have the latter, and that they are implemented, it is equally important that we also have the former, and that's what is printed on paper in terms of tax benefits, actually becomes reality for those bigger companies. That way our policies help to sustain and grow the nucleus, pulling up with it all the smaller employers.
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Namibia Economist. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
