The current state of the country is almost unthinkable if it were not reality. Covid-19 has exacerbated a bad situation into one that is desperate. With the economy already struggling prior to the implementation of Covid-19 protocols, according to the StatsSA 2020 first quarter report both employment and Gross Domestic Product took a hit, with unemployment reaching 30% and Gross Domestic Product decreasing by 2%. Shifting into the Covid-19 era with an economy in recession arguably is a worst-case scenario situation and now we are attempting to plan from behind, which is an almost impossible task because we now need to manage panic, anxiety, fear etc.

Without knowing the official data on the impacts that this pandemic will have on the country as of yet, it is clear that marginalised communities are in a dire situation with food insecurity incrementally increasing due to lockdown regulations limiting economic participation. To combat this the Covid19 Relief Grant (R350 per month until the end of October) as well as Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) has been made available, but still a further response in the form of a Basic Income Grant (BIG) has been called for. What is different about the Basic Income Grant is that it would be an unconditional income transfer to all citizens. The BIG may seem to be a new idea due to its sudden popularity not only in South Africa but globally, however it has a long history in social policy discussions in the country. Dominic Brown in his article ‘Universal basic income – and Idea whose time has come’ indicates that the idea was first mentioned as early as 1997 in the White Paper of Social Welfare, and then again in the popularly known Taylor Committee Report in 2002. The intention was to address extreme poverty, which the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals currently define as “people living on less than $1.25 a day.” 

The devastating impact that the Covid-19 pandemic has had upon society, has resulted in a re-emergence of the BIG conversation and its application. According to recent reports in News24 and Bloomberg a figure of R500 ($29) per month was proposed to the ruling party as being appropriate. The News24 article indicates “R500 is almost enough money to survive on, the document said, quoting a food poverty line of R591 a month in 2019.” The obvious reason for an introduction of BIG is to tackle food insecurity being faced by many. However it has the opportunity to goes beyond that, and have an impact on structural issues such as youth unemployment and poor work conditions. 

Youth Unemployment

Our current welfare mix does not consider a sizeable proportion within our society, those between the age of 19 and 59 years old. This group are either those who have aged out and are no longer eligible to qualify for the child support grant or are too young to receive the old age grant. According to the StatsSA 2020 first quarter results youth unemployment, those between the ages of 15-34 years old, stands at 41.7%. An important contributor to the increasing unemployment rate among the youth is the increasing labour force participation rate but decreasing absorption rate, which is the proportion of the working-age population that are employed. Due to the structure of the current welfare system it inadvertently leaves the brunt of the responsibility to find work and/or deal with not having found employment on the shoulders of the youth, instead of the economy and education and training facilities. 

It is well known that a key component of a healthy economy and society is a labour supply that is appropriate for the economy it exists in. However, the decreasing absorption rate that is being experienced in the country should be an indicator that there are issues on either the demand or supply side. The demand side being sectors that absorb labour has been extensively discussed, but what about supply. 

The purpose of education is to not only provide a safe space for learning and growth of young people but also empower them with the necessary skills to take that next step, either into further education and training and/or the labour market. However, a large amount of young people who enter the public-school system will leave (those who sit to write final matric examinations) without the necessary skills to enter the labour market because of its poor quality. The reality facing South Africa is that the education system does not serve the function of preparing students but society continues to blames them for not coping and failing to make the jump into adulthood. Arguably, a BIG would be able to assist with this predicament by firstly, providing the youth with an income to manage and negotiate this transition. And secondly, spreading the accountability of a poor public education system across all stakeholders. 

Dignified Work

The debate surrounding dignified work is a complicated one because it is always placed in opposition to the jobs-for-everyone stance. There has been movement toward an emphasis on dignified work with the introduction of the minimum wage bill as of 1 January 2019. Its effectiveness as of today is debatable, especially when considering the unregulated occupations such as domestic work where uneven power relations and undefined work responsibilities leave space for abuse of power. However, a universal income grant arguably could contribute toward progression by challenging such spaces.

An underacknowledged impact of a BIG would be its contribution to further emphasising dignified work. It is reflected upon by Ivor Chipkin and Jelena Vidojevic in their article ‘Unviversal Basic Income Grant: When nothing is affordable, we had better choose the best unaffordable solution’ that the earlier proposals of the BIG were rejected by government because “the thinking of the Thabo Mbeki administration when he rejected “hand-outs” to the poor in favour of the “dignity to work”.” With time and research between then and now it has been proven that social welfare through cash transfers has actually had positive outcomes in learning and nutrition of children as well as encouraging labour market participation. Furthermore, a BIG has the potential of positively contributing toward the expansion and solidification of dignified work because of its emancipatory capabilities. 

An unfortunate taboo exists within societies, one that reflects the saying ‘beggars can’t be choosers’. Reinterpreted is that the poor and marginalised should accept what is provided regardless of quality. Thus, the privilege of choice is reserved for the higher earners in society but this should not be the case if we are serious about the goal of dignified work for all. The emancipatory power of the BIG is reflected upon by intellectual and universal income advocate Guy Standing. He argues that it introduces choice into the equation when entering the labour market. And choice allows for potential workers to not only negotiate but set standards that employers are required to meet. This is not revolutionary, history has shown that empowerment of the labour force has had positive change. What is different is the growth and creation of work that does not possess unions to negotiate wage and protect workers. A BIG is a creative and timely response to this, by providing job seekers with money and this the option to negotiate and choose from a more empowered position and not one of severe desperation. 

The current debates surrounding the implementation of a Basic Income Grant reveal that the initiative has a potential to have a significant social impact. Firstly, empowering and alleviating the pressure on a youth that are left to fend for themselves even though they were not armed with the tools to face the hardship of adulthood. And secondly, it also presents an opportunity to further entrench the goal of dignified work by empowering workers with the option of choice and thus forcing employers to consider work conditions. However, with that said the BIG should not be viewed as a ‘silver bullet’. Even if executed and implemented perfectly it cannot work in isolation if we are to really turn around the country’s current predicament. The public education system requires extensive work to be able develop and train a youth and; the economy needs restructuring to produce work opportunity that allows for mass self-actualisation as well. We need to stop the search for ‘silver bullet’ solutions and accept that it is going to take concerted long-term effort.