Author, award laureate, and journalist Rabbi Sermula raises the issue of the government spending 1.45 billion rand on mobile classrooms, while the Gauteng province needs approximately 200 new schools.
Although temporary solutions are sometimes necessary in times of crisis when children cannot wait for the construction of permanent buildings, the problem arises when the temporary becomes permanent.
The population of Gauteng has significantly increased since 1995, growing from approximately 1.4 million to 2.8 million people, which has led to a deficit of thousands of classrooms. The government claims that mobile classrooms are needed to combat overcrowding while permanent infrastructure is being developed.
Minister of Infrastructure Development and Public Works Lebogan Mabile explains this situation by citing population growth, pressure on existing schools, and the lengthy process of creating permanent infrastructure, arguing that the government cannot simply alleviate overcrowding while waiting for every new school to be built.
However, the author believes that if a school requires 30, 40, or even 45 mobile classrooms, the solution ceases to be temporary. In such cases, the issue shifts from crisis response to adequate future planning.
Acknowledging that the sum of 1.45 billion rand was not necessarily wasted, as it is unknown how much was spent on each classroom, sanitary unit, installation, transportation, or associated infrastructure, what is more important is that these expenditures speak to management methods.
South Africa, according to the author, has become very good at creating temporary solutions: from temporary housing when permanent housing is unavailable, to sending water tankers, patching roads, improvising in overcrowded hospitals, and using mobile classrooms in overcrowded schools.
But at some point, a temporary fix turns into a permanent reality. This is where the 1.45 billion rand figure becomes an example of what happens when the government spends money to buy time but does not use that time to build what the country truly needs.
A mobile classroom should serve as a bridge between an urgent problem and a final solution, but a bridge is only useful if it leads somewhere. If a child starts first grade in a mobile classroom and years later finds the same walls, the bridge subtly becomes the endpoint, which should concern everyone.
It is important to understand that this is not about containers, budgets, or procurement documents, but about children whose education cannot be suspended while adults discuss infrastructure plans. Therefore, every penny spent on a temporary solution must be accompanied by the question: when will the temporary state end?