logo


Home Projects Democracy and Public Power LOCAL GOVERNMENT TODAY: CAN THE ANC TURN THE CRISIS AROUND?
LOCAL GOVERNMENT TODAY: CAN THE ANC TURN THE CRISIS AROUND? PDF Print E-mail
Written by Michael Blake   
Thursday, 13 May 2010 11:33
I thank the APF for inviting me to address this conference.

I was asked to do a presentation on the crisis in local government and the ANC government’s response set out in the document adopted by Cabinet in December 2009, titled Local Government Turnaround Strategy.


Government’s account of the crisis and it proposed solutions

For the second half of 2009, the ANC government was furiously busy producing this strategy. The government claims that the drafting of the TAS involved “the most consultative processes ever undertaken on local government in this country.”

There has been more than a hint of haste and panic. The local government elections are coming up in 2011 in society; and, especially over the past two years, in society, the economy, the government and the party, a range of crisis features have gathered momentum.

How serious is the crisis

Governments are rarely happy to admit that there is a crisis. However, facts are stubborn things. In April last year, the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Sicelo Shiceka, addressing SALGA, admitted that, “many of our municipalities are in a state of paralysis and dysfunction”.

Commenting on the State of Local Government report, the TAS acknowledges that even the ‘good practices’ of municipalities are “overshadowed by a range of problems and challenges that is placing the local government system in distress.”

The TAS notes that 209 municipalities out of 285 experience between medium and very high vulnerability. As many as 69 fall into a category of very high vulnerability.

The State of Local Government report indicated grave concern about “the escalating loss of confidence in governance as expressed through 2009” and that, “There is now a lack of citizen confidence and trust in the system.”

The TAS admits that there is popular perception and real concern in government that “the entire Local Government system is in distress”. This includes a sense that municipalities are:

·    “failing the poor:
·    “not working properly”
·    “unaccountable to citizens”
·    “marred by excessive levels of corruption, fraud, maladministration”
·    “centres of factional conflicts, political infighting and patronage.

The TAS states that the loss of confidence in government, especially at municipal level, “has been publicly evidenced in the spate of community protests during the course of the year, which may be seen as a symptom of the alienation of citizens from local government.”

According to official statistics, in the period from 2004 to 2007, there was a total of about 30 000 protest actions in South Africa, of which 3 000 resulted in ‘unrest’. These protests have escalated right up to the present.

So there is much to be turned around.

There is panic in the air

Despite the combination of clearly systemic problems, an extraordinarily short period is set to give effect to the strategy. Immediate political considerations, rather than genuine strategic concerns, were clearly uppermost in the minds of the President and Cabinet. The intention is to “restore the confidence of our people in (the local government) sphere…by 2011.”

Every municipality is supposed to complete their own TAS by the end of March 2010. This leaves just over a year for the turnaround to be realized by the time of the municipal elections. Given the depth of the crisis and the fact that many of the identified problems have existed since the new local government system was set up 10 years ago, it is evident that a high degree of voluntarism is at play. It is more than likely that the approach will result in a number of short-term measures to woo potential voters rather than to achieve the strategic aims of the document.

Root causes of the problems

Not surprisingly, the document fails to identify the real causes that lie behind the systemic problems experienced by municipalities and the communities they are supposed to serve.

There is a listing of all the obvious problems, including: a lack of accountability; poor financial management; service delivery failure; continued apartheid spatial patterns; the patronage, corruption, fraud and maladministration; and the faction fighting.
This is followed by a setting out of “roots causes” that include:

·    inappropriate policies and practices (these are not specified)
·    bad socio-economic conditions not addressed by the policies of the state
·    inter and intra-party conflicts
·    a breakdown of values
·    destructive forms of protests by communities, including non-payment of service charges

The document fails to set out a class perspective. Given the argument that Polokwane represented the triumph of working class forces against the (ruling) ‘class project of 1996, one might have expected a clear class line on the factors that make up the crisis of local government. There is no hint of such a ‘left’ perspective.

In the first place, capitalism is embraced without question. So there is no connection made between the identified failings in the sphere of local government and the inherent problems that arise from the contradictions and class antagonisms of capitalism.

Secondly, there is no assumption that the state and government in a capitalist context are by their nature institutional instruments of the capitalist ruling class.

Thirdly, there is not even an oblique reference to neoliberal policy or the influence of the 1996 Gear framework on municipal policy and practice.

Finally, the depth of the capitalist crisis and the implications for local government are hopelessly underestimated.

Each of these missing aspects will be touched on below.

The remedies of the TAS

Years and years of training and capacity building of municipal staff and officials have clearly not paid off. All the administrative, institutional and planning systems put in place to develop and implement Integrated Development Plans and all the financial systems to ensure effective budgeting, have also failed to produce the stated results.

There is little evidence that the remedies offered by the TAS will result in anything like a ‘turnaround’.

These remedies are hardly new. The uninspiring message is that municipalities have to do better than they have done up to now. The aim is the same as before: “to improve the organizational and political performance of municipalities and in turn the improved delivery of services.”

What comes through more strongly than before is a greater and more hands-on role for the national government in local government affairs.
All the key elements of the neoliberal New Public Management approach to government, i.e. running government on business lines, are re-emphasized.

We are told municipal leadership must be “accountable” and its administration “professional”.

There is the usual call for greater efficiency or ‘value for money’; as the TAS puts it, it is necessary to ensure that “every cent is well spent”.  

The document also highlights the need for “(o)ptimised revenue collection” and to “balance the books”. In other words, there will be no deviation from the principle of cost recovery; so poor working class residents can expect to be further harassed about outstanding service charges.

The TAS notes that in the light of the current capitalist crisis, municipalities will need to “take some very tough decisions” in drawing up budgets. In other words, we can expect service cuts, public sector wage freezes and even retrenchment of municipal workers.
The neoliberal message is the books must be balanced and a firm hand must be kept on expenditure, even though the needs of working class communities and households with will grow as a result of the crisis conditions in the economy.

The document states that, “Microeconomic and regulatory reforms are needed to ensure that a more competitive, labour absorbing economy emerges from the current global crisis.” This is a sign of yielding to the repeated call by the capitalist class for greater “labour market flexility”, i.e. more intense exploitation. This threatens to further ratchet the neoliberal aim of ‘getting more out of less’.

At the same time, the TAS repeats old promises to: expand programmes that alleviate poverty” and “increase public investment spending”, as well as “expand labour intensive employment programmes” and “protect work opportunities and accelerate skills development.”

The TAS also announces the launch of a “good citizenship campaign” directed at disgruntled township dwellers.  A call is made for “ethical behavior by all”, “loyalty to the Constitution”, “volunteerism and community service”, ‘partnerships’ and “national patriotism”. Despite the obvious differences, this smacks of the ‘hearts and minds’ campaign undertaken by the apartheid regime in response to the mass uprising of the 1980s.

As a priority, by 2014 the TAS seeks to ensure that “violent service delivery protests are eliminated”. In their place it envisages “(e)mpowered and capacitated organs of people’s power (street, block/section, village and ward committees”.




The promise and lie of community participation

Despite a number of policy and legislative provisions, the experience of ‘community participation’ has been a dismal failure. In the face of apartheid oppression and exclusion, the civics of the 1980s exercised incomparably more democratic power than local communities in a democratic South Africa.

Ward committees are supposed to be the chief vehicle of community participation, yet there is a statutory provision that limits the number of ward committee members to 11. Gauteng has a population of over 10,4 million people and a mere 423 ward committees; this means on average 11 people are supposed to represent and serve the needs of an average of 24 000 residents per ward.

The TAS promises to ensure genuine community participation. However, there is nothing in the strategy document that suggests that the marginalization of communities in process and the domination of these process by government and representatives of business and well-off ratepayers will not continue.


The origins and nature of the crisis

Two-stage ‘theory’ and the historical origins of today’s crisis

It is necessary to take something of an historical detour to grasp the roots of the present impasse.

The power of the tiny minority ruling class of White monopoly capitalists in South Africa was seriously threatened in the 1980s. The radical petty-bourgeois nationalist ANC became the main vehicle for restabilising capitalism in South Africa, after the sustained challenge by the revolutionary and socialist-inclined black working class and youth.

Sixteen years on, the ANC has lost all its anti-apartheid radicalism, it has been transformed into a bourgeois nationalist party and now runs an administration on behalf of the capitalist class. This is despite the pretensions of being a government with “a working class bias”.

The two-stage theory originated from Stalinism. Applied to South Africa, it argued that given the primacy of the ‘national question’, i.e. the denial of democratic rights to black people, we needed a first democratic stage of the national-democratic revolution. While the theoreticians of this perspective argued that no Chinese wall necessarily existed between the first democratic stage and the second stage of socialism, the working class today hardly appreciates the supposed benefits of the democratic state it fought so heroically for.

Today’s SACP theoreticians of this two-stage strategic approach at best argue that socialism is the future and that we should build it now. How far off the future is, no-one can really say; nor is there clarity about the meaning of building socialism ‘now’. What is apparently crucial is the transformation of the state and a struggle to give it a ‘developmental’ character.

Almost 90 years ago, the conservative sociologist Max Weber noted that although the Social-Democratic Party of Germany set out to transform the state, they failed to realise that this capitalist state indeed transformed them. Today the ANC and its Alliance partners repeat history.

The political victory of the monopoly-capitalist ruling class in the 1990s ensured that the radical petty-bourgeois nationalist ANC was won over to the idea of fully supporting the right of the bourgeoisie to monopoly ownership of the means of production, inscribed in the property clause of the 1996 Constitution. As a result, the ‘nationalisation’ clause of the Freedom Charter was scrapped, militant talk of socialism was drowned out and the mass organizations and structures of youth, students and residents - forged in the heat of the class battles in the 1980s - were demobilized and dismantled. The illusion was created that the people now governed and representative democracy would be richly complemented through community participation. The wholesale adoption of typical neoliberal policies marked the final political and ideological triumph of the ruling class over the ANC and its majority government.

However, these political and ideological changes went hand in hand with the leading sections of the ANC, with a variety of direct and indirect ties to the state and government, becoming bourgeois themselves.

Successful ideological class pressure, in the context of the collapse of the Stalinist regimes in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, now fully intersects with real material interests. It is no longer a case of the pursuit of naked self-interest by individual members of the formerly oppressed petty-bourgeoisie. The desire to feather one own nest, to grab your slice of the pie, to slurp up your share of the gravy, has been transformed into a more resilient and organic defence of class interests and bourgeois private property.

Neoliberal policies have led to the opening up of the local state to market forces. Through BEE black capitalists have been significant beneficiaries of this. There is now a close association between political power and economic power. The tenderpreneur phenomenon is but one aspect of this new reality.

Furthermore, affirmative action has also led to a significant section of the black middle class taking up middle and senior positions in local government. They too have become arch-defenders of the capitalist system. 

However, given the persistence of the crisis of accumulation, the size of the capitalist pie is limited and has shrunk significantly more with the onset of the world capitalist crisis.
This underpins much of faction fighting within government and the ANC, including in the local government sphere.

The state and government: serving whose interests?

By its own admission, the ANC government has failed its black working class constituency and as a result disaffection and disgruntlement is widespread and has been growing.

Why has a majority ANC government and the ANC as a party, leader of the mass liberation movement, dependent on the working class for votes, supposedly pro-poor and having a strong working class bias has it failed is stated mission so miserably; and, in the words of the TAS, “broken the trust and confidence of communities”?

Historically, the state is an outgrowth of class society. All states in history have been instruments of the ruling class over the exploited classes. Under capitalism the state has served to maintain the best conditions possible for capital accumulation, i.e. to guarantee the highest profit margins to capitalist corporations.

The state operates within a capitalist environment. The hierarchies within the state are a mirror of the class hierarchies within the capitalist system as a whole. These general features have taken on peculiar characteristics in South Africa today. Over the past decade and a half, the old apartheid hierarchies have been replaced by new ‘democratic’ ones. Many senior positions are still held by representatives of the old apartheid order. Of course they have adapted to the new democratic dispensation with its new language and discourse. However, they have played a key role in introducing to the new black incumbents how to exercise and maintain power that favours the interests of the ruling class. Furthermore, both black and white power-holders in the state have had to implement policies along the neoliberal lines advocated by the Washington Consensus.

While the system serves to bolster and promote the interests of the capitalist ruling class, an appearance is created of serving the needs of poor.

The working class in a perpetual state of crisis

Most of the working class in the townships and villages across the country has lived nothing but lives of crisis.

A report in last year suggested that South Africa had edged out Brazil and now has the dubious title of the most unequal country in the world. This inequality is class-based and simply reflects the concentration of wealth in the hands of a monopoly capitalist class coinciding with and largely causing the widespread mass poverty and unemployment at the other pole of society.

Low living standards, malnutrition (or even starvation), poor housing, ill health and the lack of basic services for the majority, coincide with lives of wealth, good health, luxury and privilege for the few. This is the backdrop to the local protests. Empty ANC promises, perceptions of growing inequality, experience of maladministration and corruption in government, have all fueled the protests and are reflected in the demands of the frustrated communities.

Metropolitan and large town municipalities are the hub of economic life in South Africa. They reflect the class inequalities that arise out of the process of capital accumulation in the neoliberal period we are passing though. The old apartheid spatial patterns have been reinforced by the logic of neoliberal capitalist development. 

Since 1994 a few million more rural people have migrated to the cities and towns building up a backlog of unmet needs (housing, water, sanitation, electricity, health, etc.) and swelling the ranks of unemployed. The pattern of gross inequality that characterized the urban centres under apartheid has been exacerbated under neoliberal capitalism. The retrenchment of a million workers in 2009 alone adds even further to the crushing weight of human suffering.

It is this mounting of working class frustration and suffering that has consistently surfaced in the form of countless local protest across the country.

Municipal neoliberalism: favouring the rich, attacking the working class

Neoliberal capitalist dynamics have been shaped and reinforced by a range of neoliberal polices at local govern level.

A few examples should suffice.

The ANC government has followed the neoliberal credo of granting massive tax concessions and breaks to those at the top of the social pyramid. For example, company tax that was 48% under apartheid has been slashed to a mere 27% today. Many billions of rands of potential revenue that could have been used for services for the working class, has stayed in the pockets of the rich.

A preoccupation with limiting expenditure was a major factor in the decision to choke off national transfers to local government: between 1991 and 1997 they were cut by 85% in real terms and there were further decreases of about 55% between 1997 and 2000.

The National Treasury under Trevor Manuel insisted that local government raise its own revenue but the means to do so is severely constrained.

Protection of the interests of the rich has also been guaranteed in the municipal sphere. Legislation has placed a cap on the amount of rates that can be raised by municipalities.  As a result, municipalities have only limited power to draw on rates revenue from the rich to cross-subsidise poor people.

When the apartheid authorities also experienced a fiscal crisis in the 1980s, it introduced a business tax at a local level, called the Regional Services Levy. However, the neoliberal ANC government saw it fit to scrap this tax on the rich in 2006 without replacing it with anything else. In the words of one commentator, “We must remember that businesses have enjoyed a tax holiday for a number of years saving billions of rand.”

Revenue from water, electricity charges and other charges are also limited by the inability of poor households to pay. Billions of rands are owed and municipalities have resorted to widespread disconnections to raise revenue. Much of this debt is owed by poor people unable to pay. A significant proportion is also owed either by provincial government or business.

The capitalist crisis has already begun to create an even greater squeeze on revenue and will push up the number of households in arrears. The 25% increase in electricity charges will exert further pressure on already suffering households, while municipalities will feel the need to adopt an even harder line on indebted households to boost falling revenues.

The neoliberal approach of the national fiscus lies at the heart of the crisis of local government. In 2001, a report on a study tour of municipalities conducted by the Portfolio Committee of the Department of Local and Provincial Government, PLG, report of, 2001) found that most municipalities visited were either struggling financially or were in crisis. It concluded that, “Financial issues, certainly, constitute the biggest challenge confronting municipalities”. The parliamentarians reported that many municipalities had little financial or economic resources, a tiny revenue base and a weak or understaffed administration.

Project Consolidate, the last effort by government to address the huge problems of local government, was based on a 2004 finding that almost half of all municipalities were in a state of financial crisis.

The State of Local Government report of 2009 states that, “Many municipalities can simply not leverage the funds they need for even moderate functionality.”

Finance Minister, Trevor Manual, has stuck to his guns and consistently argued that the problem was not so much a lack of finances as bad financial management. ‘You must learn to do better with less’, has been stock slogan of government. According to the State of Local Government report, this approach has been echoed in the recent Auditor-Generals report that identified “a lack of controls, mismanagement and lack of governance principles as the key reasons for the state of despair in municipalities.” (p56)

The Municipal Systems Act says service delivery should be as “cost reflexive” as possible. This neoliberal principle of cost recovery has brought misery to millions of poor communities across the country in the form of high levels of debt and service disconnections.

Even supposedly progressive policies have a limited redistributive impact. The indigency and free water and free electricity policies are hamstrung by low thresholds; while cross-subsidisation is kept in check by the capping of rates that municipalities can raise.

The transfer of electricity distribution from many municipalities to the proposed Regional Electricity Distributors (REDs) will also result in a significant loss of revenue.

Cross-subsidisation is also prevented by the fact that South African companies are charged low rates for water use and pay the lowest electricity rates in the world. This pro-capitalist policy is reflected in the White Paper on Local Government that emphasized that municipalities should not “unduly burden local business through higher tariffs”.

Moreover, service charges are a type of regressive tax, as the poor pay a far higher share of their total income on these charges than do better off households.

Poor residents are further burdened by an indirect form of revenue when they contribute their labour on a volunteer basis to lower the costs of service delivery; e.g. when they remove refuse, clear drains and sewers and dig ditches.

Service and infrastructure backlogs will continue to mount as the economic crisis bites. Especially in municipalities with a high incidence of HIV/AIDS, the mismatch between budgets and growing unmet needs will worsen.

Curbs on salary expenditure have also had a detrimental effect on the performance and capacity of local government. Many posts have been frozen or unfilled. Furthermore, there are serious skills shortages. The laws of the capitalist market seriously affect the capacity of local government to hire and retain skilled staff. The best and most qualified tend to go for better paid jobs in the private sector. The ‘brain drain’ impacts on all municipalities but is especially a problem for smaller or rural councils.

Decentralisation of functions to local government has been a significant trend in the neoliberal period. Municipalities have increasingly been forced to take on greater responsibilities but without being provided with the finance by national government. These are called unfunded mandates. In 2001 already, the Portfolio Committee that went on a study tour of municipalities could report that, “The cost of unfunded mandates and capital-expenditure burdens is clearly a problem for many of the municipal managers and councillors.”

Finally, the logic of neoliberal policy has resulted in the increased commodification, commercialization and privatization of municipal services and functions. Starved of cash by national government, legally prevented from substantially raising revenue at local level, facing massive finance and capacity constraints, public-private partnerships have been presented as ‘the only way to go’. In the words of Maggie Thatcher, “There is no alternative.

While public-private partnerships and the contracting out of services have served the interests on the capitalist in a general, and the emerged black capitalists in particular, the outcomes for the working class have, of course, been disastrous.


The capitalist crisis and the crisis of local government

The origins of today’s crisis lie in the 1970s. This period marked the end of the boom conditions that the capitalist economy experienced after the Second World War. Essentially the world witnessed a crisis of profitability associated with the over-accumulation of capital. Neoliberalism was a response to this crisis. It unleashed a series of attacks on the working class, all aimed at intensifying exploitation and thereby boosting profits. The truth is it never resolved the underlying conditions of stagnation in the productive economy. The period of neoliberal capitalism represented the predominance of finance capital as opposed productive capital. In this period, economic growth was largely an outcome of speculation or consumer-driven booms. The name of this new game was making-money-out-of-money. while lacking a foundation in the real economy.

From the early 1970s to 1994, South African capitalism experienced a protracted period of stagnation, interrupted only by a greater or lesser degree of economic turbulence. This pattern has continued since. International trends have played themselves out in South Africa. While in general manufacturing and mining have shrunk, the service sector grew and in the recent period boom conditions existed in the finance, insurance and real estate sectors. Meanwhile, mass unemployment and mass poverty persist and this country is now the most unequal in the world.

The world capitalist crisis has brought all the contradictions to a head. Earlier predictions by defenders of the system of a new period of capitalist equilibrium and growth have proven wildly off the mark. Today the Finance Ministry’s endless chant that the ‘economic fundamentals’ are sound and that fiscal prudence has laid the basis for sustained growth and enlarged revenue sounds decidedly hollow.

Across the world budget deficits are rising rapidly. For the G20 countries they stand at 7,9% of their combined GDP. Massive amounts of public money have been poured into bailing out big banks and corporations. Private debt has been ‘nationalised’. In the words of a World Economic Forum 2010 report, “Though their intervention proved vital, governments now need to avoid becoming the main cause of the next crisis.” This is easier said than done.

Government debt is at record levels across the globe while public sector retrenchments and cuts in services are the order of the day. According to David Cameron, the Tory Party leader in Britain, “Whoever wins the next election is going to face the most difficult set of public finances in this country for about 40 years.” One commentator said that, “Projections of public spending come in three sizes: bad, worse and Armageddon.” The crisis in Greece is a sign of things to come elsewhere.

New municipal debt balloon

Even before the onset of the capitalist crisis in the last few years, both national and local government have grown increasingly dependent on borrowing to raise revenue.

For example, South Africa needs about R473-billion to eradicate the backlog in municipal infrastructure. It was estimated that, after all other funding sources have been taken into account, 53% of the capital expenditure would need to be funded through new borrowing. Starting in 2007, this would amount to R242-billion over ten years.

By 2009 annual borrowing by municipalities had increased by almost four times since 2003/4.

Determined to cut back even further the contribution of the national fiscus to local government, the Department of Finance argue that big municipalities borrow at least R5 billion per annum. However, municipalities are regarded as relatively high risk customers and therefore high interest rates are charged.

According to South Africa’s National Treasury, “Unlike the national fiscus, most municipalities are not favourably positioned to absorb the impact of the local fallout from the global economic crisis.” As a result, additional money has been allocated to municipalities. The total of R11.3 billion, over the period between 2008/09 and 2011/12, amounts to 14.2 per cent annually.

However, the Treasury has warned municipalities to “invest time in understanding the implications of the current global economic crisis, and the slow-down in the domestic economy on their local economies.” They have been asked to take steps aimed at “eliminating all unnecessary spending on nice-to-have items and non-essential activities.”
municipalities will need to take some very tough decisions in the course of preparing their 2009/10 budgets and MTREF.


The challenge to working class organisations

What then does the crisis of local government and the Turnaround Strategy mean for the work of class-fighters like you in the APF?

The government will continue to downplay the real risk of a second, more devastating slump, while maintain a cheery optimistic stance. The next period, probably comprising a number of years, is likely to be characterised by continued political instability and economic stress and insecurity, as the major class forces square up to and clash with each other.

The crisis means that at local government level there will be less revenue, more people with municipal debt and also more people experiencing greater needs. This will further charge the class contradictions that have been building up in the recent period.

The evident loss of confidence in government expresses a growing class awareness of the true nature of the ANC government. This incipient class consciousness needs to be deepened through struggle and organization, propaganda and agitation. The biggest danger is that the local protests remain just that, i.e. that they do not become co-ordinated and organized on wider scale and coinciding with an all-sided political class consciousness on the part of a growing vanguard of the working class.

Here are a few ideas on how to respond to the crisis of local government:

·    Widely discuss the true nature and roots of the crisis at municipal level
·    Understand how local realities have been shaped by national neoliberal policy frameworks
·    Reach out to and support protesting communities and share this understanding
·    Develop an alternative to the neoliberal capitalist perspective of the ANC government
·    Understand how deep-rooted neoliberal policy and practice are and how they represent a ruling class response to the crisis of capitalism
·    Expose how existing neoliberal policy and practice exacerbates existing inequalities; and call for extreme redistribution measures based on heavily taxing the rich.
·    Also expose how policy and practice are aimed chiefly at promoting the profitability of the capitalist class at the expense of workers and working class communities
·    Reject the class collaborationist proposal of partnerships and social compacts with the ANC government
·    Debate the meaning of a revolutionary, as opposed to a reformist, alternative to the TAS
·    Expose the myth that the post-Polokwane regime represents a change in policy and practice
·    Understand the capitalist crisis and its impact at local government level
·    Draw up a programme of action and demands that seeks to systematically mobilise and unite working class communities and workers (especially public sector workers) around all the burning questions of the day and expose the class nature of the ANC government in all spheres and the bankruptcy of the capitalist system as a whole. In short, strive to build a mass united front of struggle that ultimately seeks to go beyond the bounds of capitalism and takes the road of socialism.

In and through such struggle, the working class will increasingly come to realize that it is impossible to turnaround the systemic problems caused by capitalism; the system itself needs to be overturned... and only the working class can do this!


Paper presented by Michael Blake (ILRIG)  to the APF’s Conference, 6-7 March 2010
Last Updated on Thursday, 08 July 2010 08:45
 

Events Notifier

«
<
September 2010
>
»
S M T W T F S
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 1 2

New Publications


Website by Kanata Software Developers.