EFFSC in Governance at UFH: We have a good story to tell! by Lindokuhle Mponco

 Introduction

The EFFSC gained majority status in the SRC of the University of Fort Hare on the 18th of October after a decisive victory against Neoliberal forces by successfully presenting a plan, and a programme that espoused the radical demands of the student populace. The EFFSC set out on a path of ensuring there is a tangible programme of infrastructure development, increase in bursaries and scholarships to curb the growing unfunded character of our student populace, increase in the enrolment rate of the institution as epitomised by the spirit of Sizofunda Ngenkani campaign, termination of the services of Norraco, removal of Blade Nzimande, creating a credible system of ensuring bed capacity increases while opening the room for deviations where practical impossibility exists, increasing standards and living conditions, increased investment in sports & recreational development, resolving the transport crisis and making strategic headway in increasing the fleet, fostering developmental programmes for all minority groups, and providing a dialectical approach to policy implementation, and understanding in as far as the institution is concerned. In this article I will explore our successes and failures in ensuring this programme of radical development is implemented. I will also dialectically analyse the subjective and objective factors that led to some triumphs and defeats, while providing a political diagnosis of the current political terrain, and how the tenure of the EFFSC led to the current material conditions in as far as the political sphere is concerned.

 

The Programme of the EFFSC-led SRC: Successes & Failures

The programme of the EFFSC was steeped in Marxist-Leninist praxis, and a Fanonian understanding that the University of Fort Hare was in a period reactionary deliberately mischaracterised as the 'decade of renewal' while in practical terms the institution was entering a phase of rapid neo liberalisation not only of the administrative functions, but also of the student governance space. The programme of the EFFSC was therefore built on the ultimate principle that the EFFSC must defend radical student activism by advancing a radical programme of action which seeks to promote student democracy, and project the student voice. It was not only limited to that but also expanded to tangible developmental programme which is steeped in infrastructure development. Thus, the EFFSC from the onset pursued a radical programme of action in a bid to radically shift the paradigm and shift the tides of history in as far as University of Fort Hare is concerned. By shifting the tides, we must understand it as re-radicalising the student populace, while ensuring that service delivery across the board improves. However, the immediate impediment of this revolutionary programme which would ideally serve as a bridge towards a more radical, and outrightly socialist outlook was the Institutional Management's concern for cost cutting, and financial sustainability, which is a cornerstone of neoliberal economics and politics.

 

The infrastructure development programme which can be clustered into two major projects (asbestos removal and smart classroom project) were projects that we immediately pursued outside of the operational issues such as outstanding allowances, and registration refund. The asbestos removal project was already in its initial stages, and we simply emphasized the part of implementation and ensuring it is done within the timeframes that would enable students to see the tangible work being done. Indeed, we saw that happening in both campuses with the project being fully completed in East London Campus (Main Building), while the project in Alice Campus is 60 - 70% complete given the fact that many buildings have asbestos. Amid contractors downing tools and a maintenance department which is understaffed, we have managed to make headway, and the completion of renovations at the Library in the Main Campus (Alice) stands as a one tangible site of victory in the war against asbestos. The infrastructure developments were not limited to asbestos removal but also the renovation of the Health Centres in both campuses, and East London Campus bearing the most rapid evidence of such. The only thing that needs to be done is outside painting and fitting in new signage. In Alice, more needs to be done, however, the challenges in the maintenance department have crippled the efforts to have a rapid solution for Alice Campus. It has become a definitive priority point for the next term, and as such developments in that area will be heightened. The Smart Classroom Project has been another project which has been pursued by the EFFSC-led SRC to ensure that our classrooms are aligned to the demands of the fourth Industrial Revolution. As such, this project is nearing completion phase with many of the renovated venues in both campuses exhibiting and demonstrating the transition. Once again, East London campus due to its size has demonstrated a more rapid development in that area. As a result, the developments must be welcomed even though we must emphasize that more needs to be done, and more should be done.

 

The improvement of service delivery has been another imperative of the EFFSC-led SRC programme of action. In many areas we experienced service delivery improvements (Health Care Centre, HIV/AIDS Unit, Disability Unit, GBVP Unit, SCU), while Residence Department and Financial Aid were largely hampered by the NSFAS accommodation pilot project, and the dissolution of the NSFAS board, which has affected aspects of NSFAS pre-funders (Funza Lushaka & COID), while Transport Department was in free-fall mode, with SRC interventions and ideas being the saving grace to a total collapse. The evident failures and weaknesses in some areas of Residence Department can be laid squarely at the feet of the Department of Higher Education, more particularly NSFAS. The Accommodation Pilot Project while trying to provide a framework to a largely unregulated environment of private student accommodation, failed to provide accommodation which met the necessary standards that indicate an improvement in standards of living. The pilot project is a mess from the starting point (allocation) to the final point of payment for a student (payment to landlord). This is also heightened by the random and somewhat arbitrary defunding of NSFAS beneficiaries which endanger, and cause precarity in the lives of students. The confusion created by NSFAS on the status of pre-funders (Funza Lushaka & COID) in as far as the pilot project is concerned has also caused another gap, which proves that NSFAS was not ready to implement this programme.

 

Financial Aid & Bursaries has also been dragged into this mess, and as a result a large amount of focus has been spent on resolving the contradictions, and issues that arise from the failed experiment that has been the pilot project. This project while well-meaning, has led to students being subjected to staying in accommodations which do not even qualify for B grading or A grading due to the deficiencies and ineffectiveness of the NSFAS accreditation system. The NSFAS accommodation pilot project has been a failure which has added more problems than provide solutions as it has opened students to slower service delivery and maintenance resolution mechanisms. We have had to deal with landlords and in some cases, drag NSFAS to the picture to ensure they pay landlords so that services that should be rendered are rendered. While that has been a shared problem of the Residence Department and Financial Aid, Residence Department had to deal with the crisis of allocation, which was expertly resolved in collaboration with SRC. We ensured that no student sleeps in a hallway, under the bridge or in the streets. As a result, we have surplus beds in accredited accommodations of close to 409 in East London campus, while in Alice we have managed to successfully convince NSFAS to allow a deviation to the pilot project. We are not happy with the paltry sum of R2500 per month for accommodation, we are pushing for an increase to R4500, however, this battle will be thoroughly pursued by those who know it, and those who understand it from its roots. Not Johnny Come Late Organisations that seek to render student governance into a popularity contest.

 

We have also managed to improve maintenance issues in both campuses where the institution has direct control and intervention. For the first time in a long time, June renovations of residences became a reality, with some continuing with ongoing minor renovations and maintenance upkeep. It must be stated that these gains have not been made solely from an individualistic perspective of Office holders, but from the collective effort of strategic intervention by Campus Heads, and assistance and technical & tactical support by Student Services Officers who have managed to ensure that the Department moves from crisis to crisis largely intact, and still providing its basic service of housing students in adequate accommodation, even though some students are subjected to less than adequate. The gaps have been identified, and the gaps will be plugged by the only Organisation that possesses a proper Scientific method of resolving issues, and implementing its programme, the EFFSC. 

 

Financial Aid & Bursaries has largely experienced swings from good to bad then bad to good due to the evident impact of NSFAS being put under administration, and the transition from Dr. Blade Nzimande to Dr. Nobuhle Nkabane. These transitions have played a role in even how NSFAS has carried itself throughout the year. This has also played out and trickled down to the NSFAS pre-funders who have been largely insulated from the crises of NSFAS. However, the blame cannot be solely attributed to NSFAS's inefficiencies and inadequacies. The blame must also be apportioned to certain staff members who have made it a habit to work when they want to and when they don't want to. In some cases, they have tried to sabotage the work of the SRC in trying to resolve the longstanding financial issues that have been gripping the campuses of this Institution. However, we must also be cognizant of the fact that Financial Aid was under one of its most testing periods given the situation within NSFAS, and the uncertainty that came with the election outcomes on the direction of the Department as a whole. We must also register the fact that we have seen an increase in the number of funders and sponsors. Through diligence, and hard work we have managed to inspire confidence, and as a result we have seen a return of many SETAs not only within faculties, but with the Fort Hare Foundation, and Financial Aid itself. While Financial Aid & Bursaries, Fort Hare Foundation, and certain Faculties have managed to argue for the scaling up of intake, this has been offset by the defunding crisis of NSFAS largely effected by wrong course codes.

 

When registration concluded, and the enrolment painted a picture of the highest intake in the history of the University largely due to a radical concessions document which we won after five tense meetings, and a brief shutdown and boycotting of registration for 3 - 5 days in both campuses. We proceeded to investigate how many students were funded and unfunded, and upon zooming in we discovered that we had close to four thousand unfunded students, with the bigger portion being postgraduates. We then found that most unfunded students were affected by course codes and began a process of rectifying them in a rapid manner, after making preliminary submissions to NSFAS in November 2023. The matter was said to be resolved in April 2024, and we realised in June 2024 after defunding started that this matter was still not resolved. We then pursued a radical programme of getting NSFAS and DHET to account, and in August 2024 we received a breakthrough with the year adjustments being made. We are now heading to the stage of ensuring that all students that were wrongfully defunded due to course codes receive their allowances. We are pushing NSFAS to fix the adjustments so that funding statuses change, and students can receive their long overdue money. We are also proud that we have permanently resolved the issue of course code across nineteen course codes across all faculties. We have provided a permanent solution to a longstanding problem. 

 

On enrolment, we have fared extremely well. We have ensured the institution surpasses its target, and ensured that approximately eighteen thousand students are registered, with East London Campus having a record number of approximately seven thousand six hundred and sixty-five students. This is the epitome of the spirit of Sizofunda Ngenkani and has become the permanent feature of the EFFSC in governance. We have managed to also secure spaces for seventy-one LLB students who were told the course is full, until we discovered that it was not, and an adjustment had to made. As we speak those students are registered with most of them having funding, while a few are affected by the dual registration issue which should be resolved in a matter of days. We have also scored a major success by ensuring that a cohort of Speech Therapy graduates and are accepted by HSPCA after degree accreditation issues which led to a public spat. We have also managed to ensure that students are not excluded for baseless reasons from graduation lists. 

 

The transport crisis has been a crisis which has been gripping the institution. The promise of ten buses came and went and never came to life. This has left us with the reality of an ailing fleeting and shrinking department in terms of staff configuration.  We are witnessing a department that is being gutted by corruption going through the pangs of reform. However, the lack of staffing is causing crises which lead to delays, and insufficient number of shuttles to carry students through. This has been a constant cry of students which we have carried through in meetings, however, the practical implementation from the said department has been lacking. Our call for the increase in the fleet, sale of the old fleet to generate cashflow, and to recoup some money has fallen on deaf ears, and corrupt hands which we saw being displayed in newspapers and tv news. We have witnessed the hard work, and the efforts being pilfered by crony staff members who have no interest in student welfare. We have nothing to say to them but let the law take its course! We also welcome the SIU investigation into the Institution, and we see this because of the constant noise we have made on corruption preceding our majority, and even in our majority status.

On policy and transformation, we managed to raise the issue of Charters of Institutional Committees being staff oriented. Fortunately, these charters are expiring, and our contestation is influenced and driven by the fact that we will have the chance to amend these charters towards more SRC and substructures of SRC representation. We are also driven by the fact that we will be able to resolve the deadlock emanating from the Prospectus committee which has failed to adopt a Prospectus for close to two years due to the challenge we made for more student representation. We have managed to produce a stalemate; however, we are noticing that the emergence of these new organisation is a sponsored ploy to undermine this policy battle for the soul of the institution. We are also proud of our contributions towards the amendment of the Gender Inclusivity Policy popularly known as the GBV policy. We have made proposals for a policy that is steeped in the realistic shift within the sector after the introduction of the NSFAS pilot project and the NSFAS transport/shuttle service project. We also made contributions that seek to uphold the principles of justice, and innocent until proven guilty.

 

Lastly, we have ensured maximum support is provided to the fledging women's soccer club, and the rugby squads. However, we note that for many other sporting codes largely based in East London Campus the experience has not been ideal. We hope to plug the gaps and rectify where it needs to be rectified. We also want to pursue a programme which shall see us integrate paralympic sporting codes even though that is an ambitious pipeline project within the framework of radically shifting the University of Fort Hare towards a progressive, inclusive, and revolutionary University. However, where we have excelled is in integrating minority groups, such as students living with disabilities, LGBQTIA+ community, and international students who could have felt othered if the environment was Afro phobic. We have ensured that we collaborated with the GBVP Unit, International Affairs, and the Disability Unit on programmes, even culminating into a fully-fledged programme for Students living with Disabilities titled I Am Able. We worked with the Student Governance & Development Unit to pioneer a Political Organisations & Society Induction to ensure we train future leaders and familiarise them with the processes. The exam prayers albeit with different conclusions also provided religious solace for students during a trying time of exams. Another development programme we seek to pursue is the Food Parcel Distribution programme for Unfunded Students due to us understanding the precarity of being unfunded. Due to the bureaucratic red tape, we have been gripped with delays whereas we requested this programme in April 2024! This slowness has been nothing but a politically motivated attack at this programme due to the fear that certain departments would be outshone by the SRC. We have noted this as an attack on the capacity of the EFFSC to deliver such programmes.

 

 

Political Terrain as we head to SRC Elections

During these achievements which I have briefly outlined, we have been plagued by internal conflict which stems from a gap that existed between the deployees and the BSTTs which led for the most part of the SRC term. This gap manifested in the lack of support from the leadership of the time, smear campaigns, and direct plots with the opposition to destabilise governance so that an impression can be created that the deployees in office are failing, thus paving a way forward for their recallment. These tendencies manifested themselves strongly towards the end of the first semester of the 2024 academic year, leading to the suspension of Fighter Yamkela Situnda from the SRC due to a concocted plot by former members of the EFFSC who are now contesting the Organization under the banner of another organisation which is mimicking the campaign of MKP. This political terrain developed from fact that the leadership of the time thought that the SRC Deployees were 'unaccountable', 'not radical enough', and 'generally incompetent' while the scorecard for the most part indicated another reality.  It is largely through a sponsored propaganda and distortion campaign whereby we have seen a shift in the political terrain towards an open contestation of the EFFSC. The split which we have seen must be identified as such since it is undeniable that these counterrevolutionaries once belonged to this political home of the dejected masses of the poor and the working class called the EFFSC. They fled after the upper structure disbanded them for abusing the constitution to purge deployees and collaborating with counterrevolutionary elements to undermine the victories of the EFFSC in governance. 

 

They then left with their supporters and followers who some have been naively caught in their web of lies, propaganda, and misinformation. Some even claim they are doing this to save the EFFSC, yet they are violating its constitution in the process. This is a flagrant departure from the Party, and a spit in the face of the Organisation and must be treated as such. There is no practical nor ideological perspective because their motive is solely based on careerist aspirations. They mostly consist of leaders who would never be considered for strategic leadership roles due to their anarchic characters, and their unwillingness to abide by the principles of democratic centralism. Here, we have students who have chosen to lead students to an amoeba of an organisation which has no form or shape but a stolen name and identity. They left because they refused to be disciplined, to be led, and to be guided by scientific politics and ideological perspectives steeped in Marxist-Leninist ideology because they wanted to do as they please with no guidance. The use of populism and attacking of EFFSC and SASCO has been their campaigning tool, and the distortion of the conditions and the cause thereof is a producing a divided student populace which is being distracted from the enemies; DHET, Management, and GNU. 

 

We have no option but to defend our good story, which is yet to be completed, and can only be completed by the defence of our gains against a management sponsored attack through the form of propaganda, and sponsored organisations which have no ideological imperative but to divide and kill the EFFSC, SASCO, PASMA, and DASO to usher in a liberal and individualistic, populist, and depoliticised Student governance terrain, in a highly political University.