Poetic Licence: While We Wait for the Schools

A striking concern arises as the government allocates R1.45 billion to mobile classrooms, amid Gauteng's need for approximately 200 new schools. This does not imply mobile classrooms are inherently problematic. In crises, temporary solutions can prove beneficial. Children cannot be urged to endure brick-and-mortar schools while engineers deliberate, advertisements are placed, and contractors dispute over paperwork.

The issue escalates when temporary transitions into permanence. Gauteng's learner population has surged significantly since 1995, expanding from around 1.4 million to 2.8 million. Consequently, the province grapples with a shortage of thousands of classrooms. The government contends mobile classrooms are essential to manage overcrowding while constructing permanent infrastructure.

MEC for Infrastructure Development and Public Works, Lebogang Maile, highlights the reality Gauteng faces: a rapidly expanding population, strain on existing schools, and the time-consuming process of building permanent infrastructure. This argument is plausible. Government cannot merely hope to alleviate overcrowding while awaiting the completion of each new school.

Once a school requires 30, 40, or even 45 mobile classrooms, the question shifts from whether the government responded to an urgent crisis to whether it adequately planned for an impending future. While it's unclear whether the R1.45 billion expenditure was entirely wasted, the spending raises questions about our governance. South Africa has developed an expertise in temporary solutions.

When permanent housing is unavailable, we provide temporary accommodation. In cases of water shortages, we dispatch tankers. When roads deteriorate, we repair them. When hospitals are overwhelmed, we improvise. When schools become overcrowded, we introduce mobile classrooms. Yet, at some point, the temporary solution becomes the permanent norm.

This is where the R1.45 billion becomes a story of how government spends money to buy time, but neglects to use that time to construct what the nation truly requires. A mobile classroom is intended as a bridge between an immediate problem and a permanent solution. However, a bridge is only beneficial if it leads somewhere. If a child enters a mobile classroom in Grade 1 and remains in those same walls for years, the bridge gradually transforms into the destination.

The discussion is not about containers, budgets, or procurement documents; it's about children whose education cannot be put on hold while adults debate infrastructure plans. Every rand allocated to a temporary solution should carry a more crucial question: when does the temporary phase conclude?