The Great Debate UK
from Africa News blog:
100 years and going strong; But has the ANC-led government done enough for its people?
By Isaac Esipisu
Although the role of political parties in Africa has changed dramatically since the sweeping reintroduction of multi-party politics in the early 1990s, Africa’s political parties remain deficient in many ways, particularly their organizational capacity, programmatic profiles and inner-party democracy.
The third wave of democratization that hit the shores of Africa 20 years ago has undoubtedly produced mixed results as regards to the democratic quality of the over 48 countries south of the Sahara. However, one finding can hardly be denied: the role of political parties has evidently changed dramatically.
Notwithstanding few exceptions such as Eritrea , Swaziland and Somalia , in almost all sub-Saharan countries, governments legally allow multi-party politics. This is in stark contrast to the single-party regimes and military oligarchies that prevailed before 1990.
After years of marginalization during autocratic rule, many African political parties have regained their key role in democratic politics by mediating between politics and society. Multi-partyism paved the way for genuine parliamentary opposition and the strengthening of parliaments in decision-making. However, several shortcomings still remain: many African political parties suffer from low organizational capacity and a lack of internal democracy.
Dominated by individual leaders, often times lifelong chairpersons and “Big Men”, youth and women remain marginalized within party structures.
Is the “golden era” for UK schools over?
- Tim Rudd is senior Researcher at Futurelab. The opinions expressed are his own.-
Whatever happens in the general election, the “Golden Age” of new school buildings programmes is expected to change significantly next year.
The funding commitment to what was originally envisaged as a 55-billion-pound Building Schools for the Future programme will no doubt be re-evaluated, leaving a string of questions.
What has the actual impact been from this investment, the largest in UK education for the past 50 years? Have the benefits been solid enough to invest further? Which areas will miss out if schemes are trimmed back now? Will it matter?
From many organisations involved in BSF the argument is clear. The new chairman of the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE), Paul Finch, has claimed that cuts to the programme would harm the prospects of “millions” of young people.
Low standard, depressing buildings lead to low morale and lack of motivation for pupils and teachers, he has claimed. He also points to the inequalities which will result from a scaling down of work, with a third of local authorities yet to have benefited from BSF, and the unfairness of a situation where schools in neighbouring districts will be in very different positions when it comes to attracting pupils and staff.
It’s hard to argue with the idea that a high-quality, well-designed and modern environment is likely to be conducive to attitudes to school and to health – although it should also be said that more evidence is needed.
It makes me want to weep that the mere spending of money can be considered to amount to a “golden age”. It would be a golden age if we started pushing up standards and keep doing so for several consecutive decades. Our schools need discipline and academic rigour. Giving more money to an educational establishment that doesn’t believe in educational excellence is a waste of time.
from Africa News blog:
Selling Africa by the pound
The announcement by a U.S. investor that he has a deal to lease a swathe of South Sudan for farmland has again focused attention on foreigners trying to snap up African agricultural land.
A few months ago, South Korea’s Daweoo Logistics said it had secured rights to plant corn and palm oil in an even bigger patch of Madagascar - although local authorities said the deal was not done yet. Investors from Asia and the Gulf are looking elsewhere in Africa too.
Investor interest in farmland – not only in Africa – grew sharply after food prices shot to record highs last year. Although commodity prices have fallen since, there is still anticipation of long term demand growth once the world emerges from its current economic troubles.
Philippe Heilberg, chairman and CEO of New York-based investment firm Jarch Capital, told Reuters he saw ripe opportunity for decades in south Sudan’s Mayom county. The deal covers land nearly twice the size of the Indian Ocean island of Mauritius.
Land is being leased from General Paulino Matip Nhial, Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Sudan People's Liberation Army (SPLA) - the armed wing of the ruling Sudan People's Liberation Movement (SPLM) in semi-autonomous South Sudan. Jarch Management is also buying an interest in a local company from Matip’s son.
But should Africa be handing out its land to foreign investors and will the local people and countries involved be the ones to benefit?
This commentary in the Financial Times made comparisons with the colonial grab for Africa’s resources and points out the damaging legacy that remains.
To be able to engage in commercial farming, Africa does not need to “lease” its lands to foreigners.Commercial farming has been used successfully for the production of cash crops in many African countries, for example cocoa in Ghana, Ivory Coast and Nigeria. In addition to rubber plantations, palm plantations, cotton, etc. in Ghana Nigeria , Liberia and many other African countries.The problem here is that only the cash crops needed for export have been produced this way.Efforts need to be made to produce foodstuffs for home consumption on similar scale.More importantly the preservation of perishable foods and their wider distribution all year round will have to be included in the planning.Such efforts are already being made in Ghana, and no African nation need to give away any of its lands to foreigners for any reason whatsoever.
