It is as outrageous as it is hilarious. ((Zackie Achmat)), HIV positive head of the Treatment Action Campaign and a tireless campaigner for universal access to HIV ((antriretroviral)) treatment, is being charged with ((genocide)).
The charges are being laid by Treatment Information Group, headed by “Dr” Matthias Rath, a promoter of vitamins as a cure for ((AIDS)) and who has support from the Health Minister Manto Tshabalala-Msimang. She has been a recent victim of public humiliation at an international AIDS conference in Canada after declaring her affection for garlic and beetroot as a cure for AIDS. She has been absent with a “mysterious” illness for several months.
The accusation? Antiretrovirals are harmful and are causing deaths. Therefore, since Achmat is responsible for their introduction and use, he must also be responsible for willingly causing these deaths. Hence he is responsible for genocide.
It is a wild accusation and demands of an impartial international court that it decide on a matter of purely local conflict. It is one that the South African government may regret ever having come to light.
Whatever the reasons for President Thabo Mbeki’s stance on HIV, he is unlikely to enjoy an international finding in the ((Treatment Action Campaign))’s favour. He, and his health minister, have enjoyed the vagueness of their topic. Scientists are 99% sure of antiretrovirals but there are always studies that will show more harm than good.
A court case, however, must take a side and offer a judgement in someone’s favour. Scientists may not have the perfect cure for the disease but health professionals the world over are convinced that antiretrovirals can significantly prolong the life of HIV positive individuals. Most people can live a long and normal life on the drugs.
A finding in favour of Achmat, who is currently on antiretrovirals, will leave the government in a tenuous position. They have, to some extent, changed their stance on the link of HIV to AIDS but are dragging their feet as regards roll-out of medication. They still claim that antriretrovirals cause more harm than good.
This charge leaves it up to an impartial court in another jurisdiction to make a decision on their behalf.
In all likelihood the government will call on their minions at the ((Treatment Information Group)) to back down. Before they suffer another humiliation in their denial of AIDS.
A particular focus of development is always on the value of ((education)). Without a solid foundation it is impossible for people to look after themselves and they may remain reliant on whatever aid is available to them throughout their lives.
True to form, Gauteng education MEC Angie Motshekga has dropped her threat to close dysfunctional schools. “We will be able to turn them around,” Motshekga said yesterday of the 103 Gauteng schools with matric pass rates of less than 50%.
I have mentioned on numerous ... previous ... occasions that education is not only in dire straights, but also that the state seems woefully unprepared to introduce creative new mechanisms to improve standards. The matric results indicated a number of ((school))s who failed to pass any graduates at all.
The current system results in perverse incentives where the worst schools get extra cash to assist them out of their difficulties. This results in the ((moral hazard)) situation where ((teachers)) get paid MORE when they do a worse job. The ((unions)) encourage this situation. The incentive that results is that bad schools get worse and good teachers become demoralised. These good teachers either move to private schools where they are incentivised to do well, or they perform at the same mediocre level as other teachers, or they emigrate.
The best students congregate at private / independent schools and the overall standard for the poorest students drops.
With unions protesting that teachers may not be punished for poor performance and little incentive on the part of school management to improve there is little hope for this "turnaround". And while solutions are being painfully and slowly discussed, the latest crop of students is queuing up for the beginning of the school year.
Once again, we make the suggestion: instead of paying for schools, let's pay for education. Schools should not get subsidies. Learners should. Issue education ((vouchers)) directly to learners, rate every school in terms of their performance, issue these ratings to the public and then allow learners to choose their own place of education.
If that means that some schools are forced to shut, so be it. They don't deserve to be propped up if all they can do is ruin the futures of those entrusted to their care.
There is a naïve belief that, as the rich get richer, they consume more of the world’s resources and – in so doing – leave an ever dwindling amount of stuff over for the poor.
In which case, purchasing the new Apple iPhone must lead to poverty. As those from Naomi Klein, to UK-based Enough, to members of the far left, delight in continually saying, “The USA alone, with only 6% of the world's population, ((consumerism|consumes)) 30% of its resources.”
I did mention that they were naïve.
At worst the ((iPhone)) will have no material impact on the lives of refugees from the conflict in ((Darfur)) or those suffering under the dictatorship in ((Zimbabwe)). They are not involved in its production and none of the materials required for its manufacture are sourced from hopelessly impoverished nations.
At best the iPhone will result in a globally improving standard of living. Consider the phone in isolation. To come into existence required the work of designers, materials manufacturers, software coders, factories and assembly lines. The iPhone may become as iconic as the iPod; in which case – on its own – it will result in the creation of thousands of new jobs simply to produce it.
Consider now the iPhone’s impact on other phone manufacturers. If, as is to be expected from Apple, the phone is a ((technology|technological)) leap ahead of its competitors, then they too will have to invest in their own products just to keep up. More designers, materials manufacturers, software coders, factories and assembly lines will be required. This will create even more new jobs.
More importantly, though, is the change to the overall standard of living. The base level of technology will rise. Our base expectations from the products we buy increases. In other words, even though – initially - the iPod will only be affordable by the wealthiest societies in the world, the ultimate effect will be that the new technology will spread everywhere.
((Mobile phones)) were first the exclusive purvey of the very rich. As they became commoditised they spread to all reaches of society. Now, even a war zone like Somalia with no real government, has mobile phone access.
There are places in the world where it is completely uneconomical to offer formal ((banking)) services. Dangerous places where cash can easily be stolen. The ready availability of cellular technology has allowed sophisticated banking services to be offered in developing countries at a price that the poor can afford. MTN Banking, in South Africa, replaces a physical bank with a mobile phone, and requires only a phone call to subscribe.
((Cellular phones)) have improved the livelihoods of millions of ((poverty|poor)) subsistence farmers by allowing them to contact buyers and learn what consumers want. Daniel Mashva, a rural farmer in South Africa, uses his phone to dial a virtual trading platform and sells his produce direct from his small thatched hut on the fringe of the vast Kruger National Park. "I check the prices for the day on my phone and when it's a good price I sell. I can even try to ask for a higher price if I see there are lots of buyers."
It is consumerism which has resulted in the technological revolution that created cheap telecommunications. And it is this rising standard of living that is improving the lives even of the poorest in the world.
So, congratulations ((Apple)), we wish you every success in saving the world. Even if that wasn’t your original intention.
