The decision of the three Dakarite members of the Progressive Federal Party parliamentary caucus to quit the party was hardly a surprise – and the basic cause of the split had little to do with ideological differences.
But the timing of the move and the way it was done certainly was a surprise, both to the PFP and to political observers. And their decision is a serious blow for the PFP – party leader Colin Eglin called it a "setback" – which before the May 6 election was confidently operating its "turbo-charging" strategy believing it would not only win seats but would also enable it to become part of an alternative anti-apartheid government.
It had been generally 'expected that the three – Peter Gastrow, the party's national chairman and MP for Durban Central, Pierre Cronje, MP for Greytown, and Pieter Schoeman, a member of the President's Council and the PFP candidate in North Rand, in the May 6 election – would move in the direction of Jan van Eck, the independent MP for Claremont who resigned from the PFP on August 17. But they have moved in a different direction and in the process have made a significant shift on detention without trial, supporting its use in defined circumstances.
The split between the three Dakarites and the rest of the caucus began in the tense, and often heated, caucus meetings after they returned from the talks with the African National Congress. The party leadership was infuriated by the fact that they had not discussed the matter beforehand and had not even notified Eglin who learned, second-hand, about their participation shortly before leaving for a holiday.
They argued that the party, which was badly bruised by its poor showing in the election, had paid a heavy price at the polls for its stand in regard to negotiations with the ANC and the Dakar summit, and its implications should have been discussed beforehand within the party. They were also angry about the way the party leadership came to hear of their involvement.
The Dakarites defended their decision, pointing out that talking to the ANC was already party policy. A compromise decision was taken but it was clear that the leadership, at the urging of its chief whip, John Malcomess, and the often controversial Harry Schwarz had won. It was believed in some circles that the three would resign then, and they would have done so if Van Eck, who wanted his decision to resign from the party to be separate from the three Dakarites, had not pre-empted them.
Signs that all was not well came early in September when Gastrow, in a strange speech, defended detention without trial. It now seems clear that speech was made as a public signal to Wynand Malan and the Independent movement that they were talking the same language, ensuring that he would not be regarded as soft on security. Apart from this shift there is little difference between the political position of the new National Democratic Movement and the PFP.
Clearly, the NDM believes it will be more successful than the PFP, particularly because of its image, in winning verligte white votes and it will be able to become a home for dissident Nationalists. Moreover, Malan's performance in parliament since the May 6 election as the representative of the new movement has been ineffective. It is also clear that problems over the role and position of Dr Denis Worrall have arisen. T
The NDM has already been dubbed the No Denis Movement. Quite how these problems with Worrall will be resolved is uncertain but it hardly augurs well for the new grouping that tensions over one of its star performers have already risen. Reports that six National Party MPs are on the verge of joining the NDM have been dismissed by Malan.
This article originally appeared in the Weekly Mail.
