Johnali Beukes
Despite government and the civil servants reaching an agreement to prevent the widely-supported strike, the question of liveable wages and falling standards of living remains at the forefront of the current economic crisis.
The Namibia Local Business Association (Naloba) suggested that government returns 10% of their tax portion to the cash-strapped civil servants, increasing their net salary. Other creative solutions include the suggestion that the tax threshold be raised, as well as the persistent call by the BIG coalition for a universal basic income grant.
Pre-pandemic, Namibia had already found itself in a calamitous economic position. Now facing a cost of living crisis that has everyone pinching pennies, real consideration must be given to the country’s leaky social security net.
Worrying statistics have emerged around the ever-rising level of poverty in the country, post-Covid-19 lockdowns. The World Bank’s assessment that 1.6 million Namibians have been pushed into poverty with little redress should have raised greater alarm bells in the corridors of power.
On the brink of a commercial oil discovery, Namibians must rally to have the government structurally address the prevalence of poverty. The likelihood of the Dutch Disease and the Paradox of Plenty increases exponentially where poverty and immense wealth inequality already exist. As it does in Namibia.
While extensively praised for avoiding the Dutch Disease and insulating the economy against artificially high currency rates, the Norwegian model of wealth-creation seems unattainable for our government, given Namibia’s historical socio-economic context. However, that is no excuse to abandon the majority of the population to a dire fate.
Oil discoveries often result in some form of Dutch Disease as vast swathes of the population and the country’s resources rush to a high-paying sector with little technical skill requirements, and even fewer transferable skills.
Where a single income is said to support nearly seven dependents, and the largest employer has only now agreed to a 3% increase, the ubiquity of working poor people in Namibia is unquestionable. Another misused natural resource will only exacerbate this phenomenon.
Having begun a BIG programme, where marginalised communities and those who qualified for food banks now receive a N$400 stipend each month, more work needs to be done on data- collection in order for the Social Protection Policy to be successful.
Most would agree that in the current global economic crisis, a meagre N$400 is not enough to survive on for one, much less a family of seven. Most would also agree that the government’s coffers have run dry.
The lack of updated data hamstrings any effort to meaningfully address poverty in the country. Any amendments to the tax threshold to allow for disposable income in impoverished households requires updated relevant statistics on income levels across household and tax lines.
Recommending an expansion or increase of BIG is mooted by the lack of information on the expanse and success of the current programme. Without the relevant data, all one can do is speculate on the success of a BIG, and speculation is worth nothing in a cost-of-living crisis decimating the livelihoods of those who do not have the luxury of substituting down.
The horrific reality that Namibians employed in informal sectors may earn as little as N$500 a month illustrates the dire situation we currently find ourselves in.
What spells even more worry is the relationship between poverty and the social ills that already plague our development as a nation. An increase in violent crime is inevitable when people are faced not just with hopelessness and despair from unemployment, but from the outright inability to feed themselves and their families.
Too often, criticism of BIG stems from a classical view that handing poor people money somehow makes them lazy. This is despite that same school of thought considering increased disposable income to be the greatest incentive to increase productivity.
While educated minds who will never know what the unceasing bite of cyclical poverty truly means debate whether low-income households deserve to be given money, more and more Namibians forego their basic necessities and human rights every day.
Just as the government is willing to foot upfront billion-dollar capital investment in industrial projects which may take decades to bear fruit, it should be willing to do so in social welfare projects.
The lack of workable updated data may be the most significant hurdle in any material attempt to eradicate poverty in Namibia, as is the lack of political or social will.
Understanding that state coffers are empty does nothing to soothe the ache of starvation, nor cloth or house the thousands who endure the pain every day. The knowledge that it may be too large an undertaking for an already strained social security net similarly does not excuse the fact that wealth inequality worsens year-on-year.
If Namibia truly stands on the brink of an economic miracle in becoming a green hydrogen and oil powerhouse, it would not do to abandon a majority of the country’s citizens. Lest we forget the unequal society from which independent Namibia was born, where only a small minority was served, much less enjoyed the benefits of our rich natural resources.
Perhaps the BIG is simply a passing fad that in due time will prove to be an unsuccessful waste of time and money. But more should be done, more can be done because simply saying that there is no money soothes no aches, pacifies no anger, and spits in the face of those who know what truly having no meaning feels like.
* Johnali Beukes is an Economics, Political, and International Studies graduate of Rhodes University.