Publications
Partners
THERE can be no question about the courage of those who took up arms against apartheid, both within South Africa and from countries that gave ANC and other exiles sanctuary from which to conduct their military and quasi-military campaigns.
There can also be no argument but that those who fought those battles deserve to be compensated in their latter years for the sacrifices they made.
For example, veterans of the Second World War were compensated – albeit modestly in the case of those who, like my late father, served the Allied forces in distant theatres such as Egypt, Ethiopia and so on.
As always, it was the United States that adopted the most innovative and constructive approach after the Second World War. In terms of its so-called GI Bill nurtured by Harry Truman, more than 8 million American veterans were able to attend university.
Partly as a result of that production of a whole generation of university graduates after the war who would otherwise not have had higher educations, more than 7 million jobs were created in the US between 1946 and 1953, when Truman voluntarily stepped down from the presidency.
It's been said the GI Bill had a greater impact on the American way of life and its economic growth than practically any other piece of legislation. It continues today providing veterans of conflicts such as the Desert War with university education, housing and other benefits.
And American veterans currently have access to military hospitals countrywide that provide first-rate care. Through the Department of Veterans' Affairs, the second-largest arm of the US government after defence itself, there are more than 170 medical centres, more than 350 outpatient, community and outreach clinics, 126 nursing home care units and 35 retirement homes.
The Veterans Benefits Administration in the US is responsible for initial veteran registration, eligibility determination and five key lines of business (benefits and entitlements): home loan guaranty, insurance, vocational rehabilitation/employment, education (GI Bill) and compensation/pensions.
The Veterans' Affairs budget is close to $100bn – or R710bn – reflecting the importance the US places on the maintenance of a well-motivated military.
All that brings us to our own department of military veterans that Jacob Zuma, grateful for the support of the veterans of the struggle against apartheid in his convoluted scramble to the highest office in the land, had rushed into being without any costing being done.
That was in contravention of a ruling in the Public Finance Management Act dictating legislation shouldn't reach parliament unless the financial implications had first been calculated. Zuma was in a hurry to get this act in place, as he'll need the veterans on his side when he campaigns to remain leader of the ANC next year.
One assumes the bulk – but certainly not all – of those veterans did their service in exile serving in Umkhonto we Sizwe or MK, initially under the control of the late defence minister, Joe Modise, who died wealthy following the arms deals.
It's uncertain how many beneficiaries there are of the act, as struggle accounting was understandably never an exact science. However, Business Day reports an amount of R4bn alone will be needed for former freedom fighters' pension fund payments.
In addition, the act also provides veterans with health services, housing, social assistance, disability compensation, education and skills development, assistance with employment and business opportunities and subsidised public transport.
As nobody seems to know how many veterans there are, how old they are, what sort of health they're in, what their financial situations are, and so on, it's impossible to budget with any accuracy. Further, there's the prospect of "veterans" emerging willy-nilly, claiming to have fought the good fight and thus deserving to partake of a cornucopia of assistance financed by SA's taxpayers.
Presumably, only a few thousand are involved and they will, as struggle veterans, have a fairly high average age and won't be a massive actuarial burden on the fiscus.
An eagle eye will have to be kept on the process of identifying who gets what, as on both sides – potential recipients and the public servants judging them – there will be temptations difficult to resist.
There can also be no argument but that those who fought those battles deserve to be compensated in their latter years for the sacrifices they made.
For example, veterans of the Second World War were compensated – albeit modestly in the case of those who, like my late father, served the Allied forces in distant theatres such as Egypt, Ethiopia and so on.
As always, it was the United States that adopted the most innovative and constructive approach after the Second World War. In terms of its so-called GI Bill nurtured by Harry Truman, more than 8 million American veterans were able to attend university.
Partly as a result of that production of a whole generation of university graduates after the war who would otherwise not have had higher educations, more than 7 million jobs were created in the US between 1946 and 1953, when Truman voluntarily stepped down from the presidency.
It's been said the GI Bill had a greater impact on the American way of life and its economic growth than practically any other piece of legislation. It continues today providing veterans of conflicts such as the Desert War with university education, housing and other benefits.
And American veterans currently have access to military hospitals countrywide that provide first-rate care. Through the Department of Veterans' Affairs, the second-largest arm of the US government after defence itself, there are more than 170 medical centres, more than 350 outpatient, community and outreach clinics, 126 nursing home care units and 35 retirement homes.
The Veterans Benefits Administration in the US is responsible for initial veteran registration, eligibility determination and five key lines of business (benefits and entitlements): home loan guaranty, insurance, vocational rehabilitation/employment, education (GI Bill) and compensation/pensions.
The Veterans' Affairs budget is close to $100bn – or R710bn – reflecting the importance the US places on the maintenance of a well-motivated military.
All that brings us to our own department of military veterans that Jacob Zuma, grateful for the support of the veterans of the struggle against apartheid in his convoluted scramble to the highest office in the land, had rushed into being without any costing being done.
That was in contravention of a ruling in the Public Finance Management Act dictating legislation shouldn't reach parliament unless the financial implications had first been calculated. Zuma was in a hurry to get this act in place, as he'll need the veterans on his side when he campaigns to remain leader of the ANC next year.
One assumes the bulk – but certainly not all – of those veterans did their service in exile serving in Umkhonto we Sizwe or MK, initially under the control of the late defence minister, Joe Modise, who died wealthy following the arms deals.
It's uncertain how many beneficiaries there are of the act, as struggle accounting was understandably never an exact science. However, Business Day reports an amount of R4bn alone will be needed for former freedom fighters' pension fund payments.
In addition, the act also provides veterans with health services, housing, social assistance, disability compensation, education and skills development, assistance with employment and business opportunities and subsidised public transport.
As nobody seems to know how many veterans there are, how old they are, what sort of health they're in, what their financial situations are, and so on, it's impossible to budget with any accuracy. Further, there's the prospect of "veterans" emerging willy-nilly, claiming to have fought the good fight and thus deserving to partake of a cornucopia of assistance financed by SA's taxpayers.
Presumably, only a few thousand are involved and they will, as struggle veterans, have a fairly high average age and won't be a massive actuarial burden on the fiscus.
An eagle eye will have to be kept on the process of identifying who gets what, as on both sides – potential recipients and the public servants judging them – there will be temptations difficult to resist.
