Is there anything new or different about the Independent Democrats’s (ID) policy platform?
We do have different policies from other parties — on women and child abuse, for example, and on the environment. We’re disappointed there’s no concerted campaign by all party leaders to dispel the myth that baby rape cures Aids. With the Institute for Democracy in South Africa, we’re also developing a policy on party funding. If individual MPs are accountable and must declare gifts, it’s logical parties should too.
But we haven’t spent the past six months inventing policies opposed to the government’s just because we’re in opposition. We want to change the opposition approach by asking: What’s government policy not doing that it’s supposed to? What’s the delivery situation on the ground? The excuse is that there’s no money, yet year after year departments can’t spend the budgets Parliament allocates them…
Hasn’t the ID launch further split and weakened an already fragmented opposition?
Nonsense. It’s a myth to believe a bigger opposition is more effective; numbers don’t mean quality. We need something new in South Africa, an opposition that’s not just anti-[African National Congress], that doesn’t rejoice when government fails, that’s not stuck in a racial mould. We’ve already got 60 000 members, and that shows South Africans want this too. It’s dishonest only to assess the government after 10 years; we also need to assess the opposition. Opposition politics has done more harm than good.
It’s wrong to rejoice when the country you love, that belongs to you, goes wrong. And when the government does something good, we’ll say so. Our approach is driven not by being anti-anyone, but by being pro-South Africa.
Some people say [Marthinus] Van Schalkwyk is attempting something similar. I hate being compared with him. I fought against apartheid; I didn’t wake up one morning and say: now I’ve got the people’s interests at heart.
You’re aiming at between 5% and 10% in the election, but in the Human Sciences Research Council [HSRC] survey, you’re off the radar. Is it possible Pat de Lille may not go back to Parliament?
We don’t accept the HSRC’s methodology, and I know they went to an outside expert to get their research panel-beaten. The Markinor poll showed we were already on the radar with 2% nationally in November last year. In the Western Cape, it gave us 10%. And we’re the only party that’s growing.
In six months you’ve already had a corruption scandal and expulsions in Gauteng. Greed and factionalism — isn’t this the same pattern as in other small parties?
The difference is the way we dealt with it — we went to the police, we informed the media. We won’t tolerate corruption and ill-discipline; otherwise we can’t hold the government to account.
Are you targeting the gay vote?
That perception arose because I was invited to address a gay group. I dealt with their concerns and queries; we had a lively debate — but I’m also invited to address church groups. We don’t target specific votes, because the party is issue-based.
Our Constitution protects all groups. But I don’t need to campaign for the rights of gay people; they have their own lobby group that’s already doing a good job.
You played a key role in challenging the floor-crossing legislation — and then crossed the floor to form the ID. Doesn’t this tend to confirm the criticism that you’re an opportunist?
I did nothing illegal or unconstitutional by crossing the floor, though some may see it as immoral. My defence is that 99% of those who used the legislation did so for personal gain; they wanted to secure a seat in the next election by joining the [ANC] or the [Democratic Alliance]. I didn’t take the option of joining a larger party; I looked at all the parties but couldn’t see one that would help me achieve my vision for South Africa. I took a major, major risk. I don’t have the security of a seat; I have to work damned hard to get back into Parliament. It was a step into the wilderness, a leap of faith.
By the way, I still make my party contribution to the [Pan Africanist Congress], because I made a commitment to them until 2004.
Those who accuse you of opportunism point out that your deputy, Temba Sono, is another floor-crosser, and that you have taken on board Lennit Max, who quit as Western Cape police commissioner under a cloud.
I’d be careful about repeating that claim against Lennit — the woman who made it is facing a defamation suit. Some people want to be so morally and politically correct; they point to a splinter in someone else’s eye and ignore the log in their own. Look at the Tertius Delports and other right-wingers in the DA, who were recruited for the purposes of swelling their numbers. Lennit and Temba came into the Independent Democrats by accepting its principles and policies. I know Temba sincerely detested being treated as a black member by the DA.
You say the ID will promote reconciliation, in a way that the ANC and DA do not. But in 1994 you reportedly called for white “settlers” to leave South Africa. You’ve also said the name “South Africa” reeks of colonialism, and that whites stole Afrikaans…
I’ve never said whites should leave — one of Robert Sobukwe’s lieutenants said that way back in 1958. He was expelled, but the statement’s been pinned on every PAC leader since.
On “South Africa”, it’s a fact that the country was colonised, and it was PAC policy before the 1994 election to change its name to Azania. The ANC won the election and kept the name — that’s democracy and I accept it.
As for Afrikaans, it was a dialect developed from the Dutch by black slaves. When the Nationalists came to power in 1948, they behaved as if it belonged to white Afrikaners alone. That was the context of my statement.
You hope to appeal to voters through your reputation as an HIV/Aids lobbyist. Yet four women with Aids are suing you for “outing” them in your authorised bio-graphy. Hasn’t this damaged you?
We must allow the case [in the Witwatersrand division] to take its course, but I’m confident the court will find I did not divulge their names. A parallel case has already been thrown out by the Pretoria High Court.
What is sad is that these women are fighting people that are helping them — someone must have told them they could get something for themselves. It’s very painful for me to be accused like this. I’m the only MP who’s sponsoring an HIV-positive baby, and I pay for the treatment of an HIV-positive mother.
You say you expect to hold the balance of power in the Western Cape after the election. Which parties would you join in a coalition government?
Suddenly, just before elections, everyone’s talking about coalitions. My position is clear — no coalitions. We don’t want to be contaminated by existing parties. And we believe we have a new vision and way of dealing with politics.