Africa, Credible Future - Can Micro Loans Make a Macro Difference?, Development & Aid, Gender, Global, Global Geopolitics, Global Governance, Headlines, Human Rights, Poverty & SDGs

Q&A: “It Was Not Your Typical ‘Complaining’ Environment”

Interview with Vuyo Mahlati

JOHANNESBURG, Oct 17 2007 (IPS) - The second IBSA (India, Brazil and South Africa) heads of state summit took place Wednesday in the South African capital, Pretoria, with the aim of deepening South-South co-operation. But, the gathering hasn’t only been about talks between country leaders.

Various IBSA forums have also occurred in South Africa’s commercial centre, Johannesburg, ahead of the summit – including the first-ever Women’s Forum. This three-day meeting began Sunday, attracting about 60 women from the three countries.

The event was convened by Vuyo Mahlati: chairperson of the South African Post Office, and head of South African Women in Dialogue, a non-profit that works to improve the situation of women through consulting government, the private sector and civil society groups.

IPS writer Tafi Murinzi sat down with her at the forum to find out more about how South African, Brazilian and Indian women can join forces to tackle the challenges facing their countries.

IPS: What is the basis for women from India, Brazil and South Africa working together?

Vuyo Mahlati (VM): There is a lot that women in these three countries have in common. We are all from developing countries and countries with economies that are growing, (but) we still have a long way to go. The focus is on those areas where we still need to collaborate in order to deepen South-South co-operation within the context of IBSA, and at the same time for us to begin to look at what we can we do to learn from each other (and) jointly strengthen the areas that still need advancement.

Poverty eradication is an area we felt we needed to focus on because feminisation of poverty continues to be an issue. Together, we will begin to focus on the challenges and obstacles that make it difficult for women to participate in the mainstream economy.

The other areas we dealt with are areas of capacity building, with a specific focus on non-traditional skills like ICTs (information and communication technologies) and value-addition. Another sector we looked at is the area of trade. We believe that trade agreements and trade issues generally need to have a gender perspective. But, we are also calling for trade agreements that are working towards equality in terms of the gap between rich and poor, urban and rural – which are some of the areas that affect us.

IPS: What experiences did the Indians and Brazilians bring to the forum in this regard?

MV: Each country had to share best practices. We for instance dealt with areas of access to finance, specifically focusing on micro-finance. India shared some very interesting examples around micro-finance. South Africa, in terms of programmes around violence against women, we shared some experiences from our side. Brazil shared a programme in terms of the inclusion of women in skills development. The other area we looked at was HIV and AIDS. We felt that, again, the feminisation of HIV and AIDS is an area we need to look at.

IPS: Won’t the distances and language differences between IBSA countries make it difficult for women to work together?

MV: We’ve started co-operating already. We’re looking further in terms of doing research together, so basically the issue of language is not a barrier. We went to India, the Indians came to South Africa, together with the Brazilians. Already there (have) been interactions, and already there are projects and programmes that are coming up.

IPS: Which sectors were delegates at the forum drawn from?

MV: It was a combination. Government ministers were represented. We had women from self-help groups and co-operatives in rural areas. We had representatives from some of the associations that are there. We had women coming from statutory bodies in the gender machinery, like the (South African) Commission on Gender Equality. So, it was a cross-section. You had professional women and business women.

What was good about this is that it was not your typical “complaining” environment. It was an environment where people were making a comparative analysis such as, “This is what’s happening with us: we have this piece of legislation, and it has helped us this way.”

One of these was the area of women trafficking. The experiences (under discussion) also exposed us to the problem from a rural-urban perspective, even before we got to international trafficking.