/ 15 June 2007

December 7 to December 13

Mbeki’s PR blunders

President Thabo Mbeki finds himself in a whirlpool of controversy because of how he manages communications, especially media relations.

He has been criticised for providing a self-serving view that stifles the public’s right to access to government information, discourages public debate, assaults those who have the audacity to criticise his views and enforces conformity to his own version.

He has been attacked for withholding and treating basic government information as a state secret. Denials and self-defence statements are issued, leaving stakeholders with speculation and suspicions.

William Gumede has written that government often blatantly denies or distorts obvious facts and, when the truth comes out, offers no explanation or apology. The denial of real-life events erodes the credibility of government and shows disrespect for citizens.

The belief that in no circumstances should the president admit to making a mistake, or that his government has done something wrong, is self-destructive.

Apologies have positive spin-offs. When Jacob Zuma was criticised over his rape case, he apologised pre-emptively, publicly and unreservedly. He emerged from the scandal unscathed — in fact, strengthened.

Today he is the most popular political brand in the country.

Mail & Guardian editor Ferial Haffajee wrote in The Media that “throughout his presidency, Mbeki has granted more interviews to foreign newspapers and broadcasters than local ones. He is a foreign policy president and has entrusted foreign media with his vision and his intellect.”

The strategy has alienated the country’s mainstream media, except the SABC. The fact is that political careers can be made and broken through the power of public opinion. — Thabani Khumalo, Umlazi

At its 1991 Durban conference, the ANC took a decision to create the position of national chairperson because of Oliver Tambo’s ill health. Tambo was a unifying figure and we hoped the new official would be the same.

We now understand our mistake in electing Mosiuoa Lekota to this position. He has been guilty of outbursts on the SABC, SAfm, Radio Metro and in last week’s M&G, where he laid bare the filthy strategies of the Mbeki camp to further tarnish Zuma’s image.

He has called Zuma mentally unstable (akabhadlanga) and a tribalist — despite the fact that JZ was nominated by a range of provinces. We did not respond because we felt he would eventually remember that he has a responsibility to unite the movement.

Lekota claims Zuma has been protected by the party. He forgets that the national executive committee took a decision to give Zuma support.

He has decided to speak outside ANC structures, even though the national general council decided that only the secretary general can speak on ANC matters.

He says Polokwane delegates must be told the truth “because we are not prepared to sacrifice the ANC for the sake of one man”. Seeing that he has begun telling us the truth, he should tell us more about the arms deal. We read with keen interest the snippets from Andrew Feinstein’s book.

Like a coward, he talks to the media because he knows there will be no direct political engagement and readers will take what they read as Bible truth.

It is amusing that he only started speaking when his name was not mentioned by any of the nomination lobbies.

He is not doing the ANC or himself a favour; in fact, he is destroying himself.

And he is doing nothing at all to stop us delegates to the conference from voting for uMsholozi; rather it strengthens our belief that there is indeed a conspiracy to stop him.

Lekota should not pretend to be acting in the ANC’s best interests when he is really driven by vengeance because of Zuma’s role in sacking him as Free State premier. — Arthur Zwane, ANC regional chairperson, Emalahleni-Newcastle

Lekota’s attack on Zuma was the last kick of a dying horse after the Mbeki camp was embarrassed and humiliated at the provincial conferences. — Moses Gama, Katlehong

Support for Zuma soared beyond all expectations when, portrayed in the eyes of many as a wronged man and victim, he paradoxically became the people’s hero. Would he have had such an impact if he had merely stayed on as the deputy president?

And support for Mbeki’s running for a third term has gained momentum because many people would rather see him continue than face the unthinkable: Zuma taking the president’s oath in 2009.

Surely there must be men and women more up to the task? — Deborah Gunter, Knysna

We kept asking ourselves how Robert Mugabe could still be president of Zimbabwe, despite the outcry about his policies and human rights abuses.

Ask no more; South Africa is on the same track. Sometimes the loyalty of people to their emancipators can go a long, blinded way. — Phumla Khanyile, Soshanguve

Did internal political jockeying lead the ANC Women’s League not to nominate a woman as its candidate for president, but instead a man steeped in the disgrace of alleged corruption, vulgar misogyny and ill-informed beliefs on Aids, and who has proved himself irresponsible in managing his personal finances?

The league has betrayed its own purpose and its declared policy of 50% of women in Parliament and a woman president. It has failed the millons of South African women who united as the Women’s National Coalition in 1991, under the leadership of Frene Ginwala, to address gender equality.

Virtually voiceless in the women’s movement since then, has the league no confidence in its own members?

We have been fobbed off with “that’s the democratic process in action” as a reason for overlooking Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma, who has served South Africa well in establishing the president’s gender advisory committee.

Affirmative action is good enough for the league in terms of race. Why not in terms of gender equality? — Doris Ravenhill, co-founder of The Women’s Lobby

Mbeki has made a terrible blunder — he has delivered us to Zumaland, a world of corruptibility and lack of ethics. — Muntonezwi Khanyile

If Zuma is the torchbearer of “backwardness”, as Mazibuko Jara argues (November 30), why did the ANC tolerate and accept him for nearly 47 years?

Why did the ANC delegate our emancipation to him by making him head of intelligence, a member of the national executive committee for decades, deputy general secretary, national chairperson, KwaZulu-Natal chairperson, member of the national working committee and deputy president of the party and South Africa?

If Jara’s ranting is stripped of its revolutionary jargon, he comes out as nothing more than anti-Zuma. — Tebogo Tsheole, Parklands, Cape Town

With Zuma leading the ANC presidential race, with a high probability of becoming the president of South Africa, I feel pessimistic about the country’s economic future.

Most of Zuma’s followers base their support on his alleged socialist or communist stance, as opposed to Mbeki’s “neo-liberal” stance, which is more business-friendly.

Socialism and communism have failed severely in the past. — Shadrack Mukhari, Chiawelo, Soweto

Someone on Talk Radio 702 pointed out this week that government/municipal job application forms have so many questions about devious conduct and criminal charges that if Zuma applied for a job he wouldn’t get a first interview. So why is it so easy to become a president? — Michael

Hearsay, not facts

The article “Towards a more civil service” (November 2) contained factual inaccuracies about the department of water affairs and forestry.

The same inaccuracies were reported in an earlier story headlined “Fiasco in forestry”. We want to provide the correct information to ensure that future articles on the department are based on accurate information, rather than hearsay.

The article puts the number of senior managers who have resigned this year at 52. If that number had resigned, the department would be paralysed. Only 11 senior managers resigned from January to October 2007, of a total of 96.

You also say the department is “racked by factional conflict”, a statement that must have been based on information obtained from a former disgruntled employee. Anyone currently working in the department could not have said this because it is without foundation.

There are no “factions” or factional conflict in the department. On the contrary, there has been a great deal of effort in building a strong and unified team so that the department is able to deliver on significant projects.

One of these is the eradication of buckets in formal established settlements, carried out in partnership with the departments of provincial government and affected municipalities.

Our sanitation team has worked flat out to improve the lives of people who are still suffering the indignity of using buckets. It was most disheartening for them to read that we will not achieve this target and that there are still 200 000 buckets remaining.

The most recent data, available from the department, is that there are less than 70 000 buckets of an initial number of about 250 000 and that construction is under way to replace each of the remaining buckets.

The target has always been to eradicate bucket sanitation in all formal settlements established before 1994. It does not refer to the buckets in recently established informal settlements, which are being dealt with through the government’s human settlement programmes.

The Mail & Guardian describes the department of water affairs and forestry as “struggling”. We hope that by putting the record straight, you will see that we can effectively discharge our mandate and work with other spheres of government to address the legacy of apartheid and provide water and sanitation for all. — Linda Page, department of water affairs and forestry

Hlophe issue perverted by race

I read with interest the article by Serjeant at the Bar, “SA in the mirror of John Hlophe” (November 23).

I was one of the proposers of the resolution at the Johannesburg Bar calling on Judge Hlophe to resign. Perhaps naively, I did not believe it would be racially divisive. Unfortunately, the fundamental issue of judicial integrity was perverted into a racial one.

The right to debate and speak out was threatened on the basis that the topic was too divisive. Advocates for Transformation (AFT), who represent some, but not all, black Bar members, chose to boycott the meeting rather than enter into the debate.

In the end the resolution was not passed and an alternate resolution was passed, calling for a postponement until further information was obtained.

If the AFT had declared Hlophe’s conduct unacceptable, not because of his race but because of the position he holds in society, the unity of the Johannesburg Bar would have been strengthened.

The AFT would have entrenched its integrity and silenced its critics.

Instead it called for its members to boycott the meeting and resign from the Bar Council. The unity that the AFT purports to hold so dear has been threatened and the remaining members of the Bar once again face the threat of a split in the Bar. — Sharise Weiner SC, Advocate of the High Court

Heavy toll

We agree with Alan Whiteside and Scott Naysmith (“A country on the edge”, November 26) that the Aids pandemic is exacting a heavy human and economic toll on Swaziland. However, the International Monetary Fund’s policy advice has stressed the need to dedicate more resources to priority social spending, including healthcare.

In recent discussions the IMF team urged the government to re-orientate spending to these priorities while containing public expenditure to levels it can sustain.

Sound macroeconomic management is essential to support the faster growth Swaziland needs to reduce high levels of poverty. — Wipada Soonthornsima, IMF mission chief for Swaziland

In brief

I am writing about job vacancies you might have. I am applying with my friend Marina Racheva. We would like to work in your beautiful reserve. Working in such a place, surrounded by wild animals and nature, will be a pleasure for us. Travel and wildlife are usual things for us. We are used to working hard and find it normal. — Nikolay Tsvetarski, Sofia, Bulgaria

Sudan should be boycotted for bringing Islam, the Prophet Muhammad and the Shariah into disrepute and ridicule over its arrest of the British woman who let children call a teddy bear “Muhammad”. This was in no way tantamount to “inciting religious hatred”. — Mahmood, North Beach, Dump-by-the-Sea

As a Muslim I feel outraged by the recent Saudi decision to punish a rape victim and later increase her sentence and penalise her lawyer for complaining about the toughness of her sentence. Ditto the sentence in the Sudan “teddy bear” case. — Saber Ahmed Jazbhay

The government’s announcement that it is to scrap visa requirements for Angolans and Zimbabwean citizens wanting to enter South African is irresponsible. The country already has a huge illegal immigration problem. We should put our own people first. — John Green

Congratulations to Pearlie Joubert for her article “Men who speak with fists”. We have interesting experiences in that regard here in the US, starting at kindergarten level. Five-year-olds are continually reminded to respect one another’s personal space and never lay hands on one another. — Teresa de Kock, Georgia, US