KDC decision could escalate poverty

| Friday September 24, 2010 00:00

This, according to Leo, is occasioned by the desire to cut costs and that the current levels are high and unsustainable. The reductions are too steep.

In the past, community home-based care-givers who where given an allowance of  P950 will now receive P650 suffering a hefty reduction of P300.

In the past, orphans were given a total package of P850 to purchase food on a monthly basis but this will now come to an end with council reducing the figure to P500 a month.

Equally affected will be the destitution allowance which will be reduced from P640 to P450.

There is no doubt that these changes will affect most of the beneficiaries negatively. A lot of the beneficiaries have no other source other than these hampers provided by councils. In fact, the food coupons given by councils do not only benefit the beneficiaries. In some instances, these benefit the entire family, most of whom are poverty stricken. We are aware that many people who are poverty stricken are not covered by these safety nets on the basis that some are able bodied or they have close relatives that can afford to take care of them.

With the extended family slowly diminishing in most of our communities and the paucity of  poverty eradication measures, the council's cost saving measures could lead to serious social consequences.

Food prices are ever rising and there is no doubt that the decision will hit hard on some of the families. This could exacerbate poverty and even lead to widespread hunger.

The admission by the council chairperson that some Basarwa communities who live on the outskirts of the Central Kgalagadi Game Reserve chose to go back into the desert once they were discontinued from these welfare programmes are revealing.

These people felt that life in the game reserve was better than what is supposedly a better life outside.

This is an indictment on us and we believe the council will do everything in its power to ensure that once these people decide to come out of the game reserve they will come up with some affirmative action programmes to try and re-skill them so that they can be gainfully productive.

The worst of these decisions is the cutting of an allowance paid to home-based care givers. We are aware that care-givers are volunteers and not employees. Given what they do to our less fortunate brothers and sisters we find it callous that council could reduce their allowance when their services are needed most. This might just discourage care-givers to volunteer and this will come at a great loss and suffering to those who subsist purely on the help and care they get from these volunteers.

                                                                         Today's thought

                'The current social welfare programmes values were relatively high and unsustainable.'

                                                                      - Motlhophi Leo