Motsoaledi facing tough call on alcohol ads ban

Unlike those whose job description is restricted to petty inter-ministerial squabbles and cheque-fetching, Motsoaledi’s passion for his job is unrivalled. Can’t we have more ministers like him?

His knowledge of the latest developments in medical science and health trends is inspiring.

He is a rare breed who cites studies from science journals without written speeches.

In all the right things he says about healthcare, he does not speak with two mouths. He hardly contradicts himself.

He has moved the country a big step from the dark days when matters of life and death were reduced to concoctions like ubhejane.

Motsoaledi is no ideologue. He is as pragmatic as one would expect of a leader in charge of a portfolio for which he is well-trained and knowledgeable.

He speaks with the necessary confidence on all the matters that have to do with his portfolio.

His relationship with the media is not petty because he does not shoot the messenger – he generally gets positive media coverage even when he criticises journalists.

He also responds positively when we expose the rot in the healthcare system. For example, Sowetan’s story on the death of 500 patients within four months at Mankweng Hospital in Limpopo was followed by a swift response from Motsoaledi, who launched an investigation to normalise the situation there.

Unlike big-headed politicians who believe they are entitled to public office and to whom accountability is a foreign concept, Motsoaledi is not unnecessarily defensive. I hope this accolade isn’t coming too early.

Recently, Motsoaledi championed the use of cheaper anti-retroviral drugs . He also is pushing ahead with the ambitious national health insurance (NHI) plan, piloting it in several sites around the country.

Embedded in the NHI is the much- needed revival of primary healthcare and increasing access to healthcare in general.

It’s early days to say whether or not it will succeed, given the massive funding required. But one cannot take away the fact that the man is driving the project with the requisite sense of purpose.

He has done away with cadre-deployment in the highest echelons of hospital management. This has brought about the removal from hospitals of unqualified and, in some cases, incompetent chief executive officers.

Now, hospital CEOs are appointed on merit and have the necessary skills and qualifications.

Motsoaledi comes across as someone who abhors corruption. Those close to him speak of how he tried to deal with public works corruption scandals relating to construction of health facilities.

Having realised that government was overcharged by public works contractors, he hired an engineer who gives him a second opinion and has helped him save government millions in inflated public works-related costs.

If Zuma was genuinely concerned about the escalating costs of building his Nkandla compound, he should have sought advice from this dedicated minister.

But, in addition to the good things Motsoaledi is doing, he espouses controversial ideas that have implications beyond his otherwise laudable approach to reconcile lifestyle and healthcare.

At the heart of his philosophy, it seems, are his attempts to promote healthy lifestyles as a way to prevent the burden on public healthcare facilities.

But a closer look suggests that his plans to ban alcohol advertising may have far-reaching consequences for the kind of society that South Africa is, or should be.

This plan, and the mooted regulation of certain ingredients like salt in food, is based on genuine concern for the health of citizens.

This has sparked a debate which needs not only medical professionals, but also sociologists, economists and political scientists.

There are risks. How many more harmful things are we going to ban from being advertised?

Alcohol is an easy target because not only does it cause health complications if abused, it also has been proven to be the biggest cause of road accidents.

What about people who shoot movies or music videos that idolise liquor? Are we going to ban such content from our television? Is the ban targeting the brands or the idea of consuming alcohol?

If a ban on advertising fails spectacularly to diminish the thirst for the unholy waters, what would be the next step?

Are we going to implement a rationing system and give drinkers monthly quotas that are enough for their (good) health?

But there are other things that we know are harmful.

Are we going to ban the advertising of unhealthy foods, like burgers, and high- sugar content products such as fizzy drinks?

These questions go to the heart of the kind of society we want to be.

There are three possibilities.

First, a free society in which an individual’s choice reigns supreme.

Second, we could be a free society in which education is so strong that freedom actually means not only the right to choose a lifestyle, but doing so wisely.

Third, we could be a free society in which education is weak and the state resorts to coercive measures to tame harmful conduct.

Given these stark choices, it’s unlikely our competent minister will emerge unscathed from the ongoing debate.

Mpumelelo Mkhabela is the editor of the Sowetan

subscribe

Would you like to comment on this article?
Register (it's quick and free) or sign in now.

Speech Bubbles

Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.