South African National Dialogue disaster

The National Dialogue is lagging behind schedule and faces accusations from critics that it is a smokescreen — a costly publicity exercise benefiting President Cyril Ramaphosa and the African National Congress (ANC).

Proponents, however, describe the initiative as a platform for inclusive, honest conversations between communities, sectors, and government.

Its aim is to reflect on 30 years of democracy and chart a course for South Africa’s next three decades, according to the Presidency.

Despite these ambitions, the dialogue has already missed key deadlines and struggles to gain support from certain groups and political parties.

Following the first National Dialogue convention on 15 August, the government promised six to nine months of nationwide engagement, culminating in a second convention to share outcomes.

However, plans for these local and national discussions have stalled due to delays in appointing a steering committee.

On 17 October, the Presidency announced that nominations for sectoral representatives to the National Dialogue Steering Committee had been completed.

Yet, this process was supposed to conclude by early September—two weeks after the convention—meaning the nominations are a month and a half late.

The committee was intended to begin its work in mid-September.

According to the National Convention organising committee, citizen-led dialogues across the country were meant to start by October.

As of 27 October, the steering committee had not been finalised, and no dialogues had begun.

The Presidency told City Press that nominations from 26 sectors will now be reviewed by the National Dialogue’s group of Eminent Persons to ensure balanced representation.

The group will then submit recommendations to the president, a process expected to conclude “in the coming weeks.”

The entire National Dialogue process is scheduled to wrap up by early 2026, coinciding with the second national convention.

With at least six months of local dialogues still pending, a delay appears increasingly likely.

The project is expected to cost R412.8 million, according to the Deputy President’s response to a parliamentary question, down from an original estimate of around R700 million.

A political smokescreen

Several foundations, organisations and political parties have withdrawn from the National Dialogue, including some of the ANC’s Government of National Unity (GNU) partners, the Democratic Alliance (DA) and Freedom Front Plus (FF +). 

This also includes the Steve Biko Foundation, the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, the Chief Albert Luthuli Foundation, the Desmond and Leah Tutu Foundation, the FW de Klerk Foundation and the Oliver and Adelaide Tambo Foundation. 

Civil rights groups Afriforum and Solidarity withdrew as well, saying that the process has been “hijacked” by the ANC and is no longer citizen-led. 

Political parties that have boycotted the dialogue include the DA, FF +, ActionSA, Umkhonto weSizwe, and the Economic Freedom Fighters.

Many of these parties argued that the dialogue has been a costly, wasteful publicity stunt for the ANC and Cyril Ramaphosa. 

Leader of the Democratic Alliance, John Steenhuisen wrote in an opinion piece published by News24 that the dialogue is a “political smokescreen” that provides yet another excuse to defer making tough but urgently needed decisions. 

Steenhuisen highlighted that R270 million of the budget for the National Dialogue was to come from taxpayers, with the balance expected from in-kind donations and private contributions. 

He added that, if the over R400 million could be directed to practical purposes, 1,762 houses could be erected, or 1,800 graduates could be employed in Public Works and Infrastructure for a year.

The money, he said, could provide 7,500 bursaries for university students, or build five new primary schools. It could build 18 community clinics or one district hospital. 

A report from the first convention of the National Dialogue revealed that many participants who elected to join the convention said they were concerned that the dialogue would not translate into tangible action. 

Some further commented that the dialogue’s agenda was predetermined and limited conversation.

The process of the first convention mostly consisted of emotional statements, with limited space for solution-driven outcomes.

Facilitators also recommended stronger safeguards against political interference.

This will promote unity of the nation – Ramaphosa

Ramaphosa, addressing the nation at the first convention, said he called the dialogue in line with his mandate as president to “promote the unity of the nation” and “advance the republic.”

He said that at a time of profound challenges of economic hardship, unemployment, inequality and growing poverty, the dialogue would give everyone a voice and a chance to understand one another, to chart a way forward as a country.

Defending the National Dialogue from criticism, Ramaphosa said that it would “contribute meaningfully to economic growth, job creation, poverty reduction, lowering the cost of living and strengthening the state.”

“But most importantly, it will enhance public ownership of national decisions and a shared vision for the future,” he said.