October 31 to November 6 2008

Not left but upwards

The recent announcements made after the tripartite alliance economic policy summit are evidence of the continued falsehoods being peddled by the current leadership of the ANC, the SACP and Cosatu.

These self-proclaimed left champions announced, after the ANC national general council in 2005, the ANC policy conference in July 2007 and the Polokwane conference of the same year, that there had been a decisive shift to the left in terms of the ANC’s orientation. Just as their claims of a conspiracy against the ANC president, the judiciary being counter-revolutionary or the Scorpions unfairly targeting ANC leaders are cynical ploys to cover up the various transgressions of some of the leaders in the movement, so too is this ‘jerk to the left” not true. It is simply about centralising power.

ANC economic policy has always been a mixture of market and state-led. The debates about Parliament amending money bills, VAT exemptions, prescribed investments and widening and deepening the social-security system are all debates that have been going on in the ANC for years. The summit only agreed to consider these proposals, so nothing new there. The big issues of contention — doing away with inflation targeting, the basic income grant and others — were all clearly ruled out by the president of the ANC, the minister of finance and the governor of the Reserve Bank. If anything, this is evidence of the consolidation of the policy agenda set in place under the previous two presidents.

The big proposed changes are on planning and coordination of government work (‘The future of the state”, October 24). In this regard the proposal of a council of state and a planning commission were apparently agreed to. There is no doubt that government planning and coordination could be improved. But this is not the central problem in government. After all, Cabinet is where collective decision-making takes place, or rather is supposed to. There have been clusters of ministries for a while now. So why are these new structures being proposed?

In the case of the council of state, it is clear. This is about centralisation and commandism — hardly appropriate when all over the world governments are recognising that what is needed is increased devolution of implementation capacity. Instead, these proposals are the South African version of the ever-recurring mistakes of the dogmatic left-increased bureau­cratisation. The sinister aspect of this is the potential to put in place a small clique of individuals who wield great power. In the current political climate this is cause for concern. Just like the so-called street committees being proposed, which will in fact be used to intimidate and provide opposition to the Zumarites, this proposal is a cynical one.

There are many government departments, provincial governments and municipalities that have worked well and many that have not. A proper study of these will reveal what the real problems are: not policies but the failure to implement them. That is a function of political leadership and public administration. The fact that incompetent and sometimes corrupt political leaders and senior civil servants are often protected, retained and even promoted is one of the reasons for the failure to deliver. Governments all over the world function effectively with systems similar to our own. We need to elect politicians who can get the job done and appoint civil servants who are qualified and capable.

All that these proposals will result in are more bureaucracy and bigger salaries for those super-ministers; in fact bigger budgets all around but nothing for the poor and the working class. — Philip Dexter

Having read Jeremy Cronin’s article (October 24) on a two-tier Cabinet with interest, and agreeing with him on the need for planning and coordination, it remains arguable that the means he suggests need further thought.

The two-tier system was tried back in the 1950s in Britain, in Winston Churchill’s last administration, and was dubbed the ‘overlords system”, but it failed on the question of accountability and was abandoned.

The present system in Britain is one of an inner and outer Cabinet rather than a two-tier system, so seemingly avoiding the problem of accountability, that necessary condition of democracy. In South Africa we still have to answer the question of accountability. Where does power lie in practice — inside or outside Parliament? — Terence Beard

Dark force closing in on Mda

The letter ‘Storm in a teacup” (October 24), defending Zakes Mda against Stephen Gray, was signed Aryan Kaganof. Is this the same person who wrote and directed the most abhorrent, ghastly and extremely dangerous anti-multiculturalist film ever made in South Africa’s cinema history? SMS Sugar Man is hate-filmmaking that has pooped on South Africa’s new-media cinema landscape.

It overtly frames multicultural sexual relationships within the apartheid construct. This is obvious in all the almost-porno sexual encounters between white women (portrayed as prostitutes) and black men (portrayed as black diamonds). Dare I wonder what, say, Tokyo Sexwale and his dear wife would think of Aryan’s creation? This ghastly film also reveals an insensitivity towards the sacrifices made to transform society.

Honourable Zakes Mda, beware. It seems a dark force is closing in on you.

Kaganof shows a tendency to smooching and is clearly hoping to rebuild a semblance of a career on the back of a globally respected man of letters!

I observe, through my teary eyes, that while preoccupied in your efforts to cleanse yourself from the filth which has been defecated by this Gray upon your reputation, another someone is simultaneously trying to cleanse themselves of particular controversies by using you as a PR stunt.

Kaganof’s hate-film was rightfully banned from various film festivals (National Arts Festival, Grahamstown 2008, to mention one). Please be aware of Kaganof’s attempts to smooch up to your exalted presence.
To Kaganof, what planet are you from? Honourable Mda, never fear. These mongrels’ defecations will decay very soon, leaving in their wake nothing but fertile soil on which you can grow more beautiful literary fruits. Mail & Guardian, it’s good to listen to criticisms, but not from the poopoo people, because their smells stay at your house after you’ve entertained them. — LS Mgoduka

Lackey

The SABC has in the past two months sycophantically reduced its constitutional mandate as a public broadcaster to a partisan political lackey chasing after the current ANC dissidents. The SABC has unashamedly chosen to give support to the ‘Shikota” hypocrites who have been in government for more than 10 years and have done nothing to curb the current high crime rates, unemployment and diseases.

It pains me to see our hard-worked taxes being flushed down the drain by Snuki Zikalala under the command of his slave-masters’ puppet SABC board, while many citizens, including the police, are being assaulted and butchered by criminals. — Vincent Masoga, Germiston

Want loyalty? Get a dog, Angie

People use the expressions ‘dog eat dog” and ‘his bark is worse than his bite”. A dog can be used to attack others. Dogs generally hunt as a pack and, ultimately, every dog has his day. The last time I checked, people acquired dogs if they were looking for blind loyalty, unquestioning affection and, of course, to protect themselves. It is therefore an interesting choice of words to say, as Angie Motshekga did, that ‘now that the dogs are leaving, there will be peace and we will be stronger” in the ANC.

Loyalty to the ANC is dissipating by the day. The irony is that these words reflect the contradictions in the ANC, because most people would feel secure and stronger with their dogs near them.

We are proud dogs with respect to the unfolding political scenario. The offensive language used by the ANC leadership simply adds to the growing polarisation of South Africans and strengthens our resolve to defend our democracy. It is another confirmation of the levels of arrogance and intolerance in the ANC.

Hello! We have a democracy, you gave us the country back, our liberation has been achieved. What is left to do is to unify the nation, heal the divide, build a coherent vision of our future. We must use everything we have to become a successful nation, create employment, eradicate poverty, reduce levels of HIV/Aids, and reduce the income gap, among many other challenges.

That’s what you should be concerned about, Ms Motshekga, not about who leaves the ANC. It is not possible for just one group to have a monopoly, even if it has a majority. I would suggest that you stop the insults, name-calling and character assassination, because they say more about you than about those who have left the ANC. Rather invest your energy in restoring the confidence of South Africans and the world in our political and economic stability. We are not prepared to mortgage our future to politicians who are not prepared to be accountable, responsible, respectful and mature. — Reverend Nomakhephu Bulana, Gauteng

Let’s hear South African voices

I would like to find out why South African stories or contributions are excluded from your exciting series, Voices of Africa.

Do you not think that in light of the xenophobia drama we had recently, it is exactly this kind of attitude that excludes South Africa from Africa? Because why call it Voices of Africa if South Africa is excluded and yet it is very much part of Africa? Why not call it Voices from Kenya or Tanzania? That way it will help Western tourists to know that Africa is not one big, homogeneous village but a beautiful collage of vibrant, independent countries that make up the whole. Please consider my views. — Bonolo

Charlotte Bauer, Voices of Africa editor, replies: South African contributions are excluded from this series because South African newspapers are full of South African stories. So the aim of the series is to give our readers in South Africa a peek over fences into our neighbours’ backyards. However, when we go live online (plans in the pipeline), we will extend the invitation to South African correspondents because everyone will be able to access the Voices of Africa series.

Rotten egg

The M&G is a well-balanced and informative paper. But now I stumble across a rotten egg in your basket. Lev David’s ‘Of puritans and Palin’s underthings” (October 24) had me wondering whether he had wandered into your offices by mistake, lost on his way to some seedy tabloid. I understand politicians are delightful topics of derision, but this scrapes the bottom of a depraved barrel. It attacks someone who, heaven forbid, has declared her politically incorrect religious beliefs. I am sure no one would wish to peek into Mr David’s underthings. — Jo Els, Tarkastad

In brief

Gwede Mantashe says former presidents Nelson Mandela and Thabo Mbeki will campaign for the ANC in next year’s elections ‘as disciplined cadres of the ANC”. What a joke! When ANC members disrupt Terror Lekota’s rallies with threats to kill and police need to be called in, the phrase a ‘disciplined cadre of the ANC” is fast becoming an oxymoron. — Gavin Kandier, Lenz

Lekota and his ilk should not think people are unaware that they are unable to accept the democratic outcome of Polokwane. All they have in common is their hatred of the new ANC leadership. They think they can take us back to the depressing days of intolerance, quiet diplomacy, denials and beetroot. — Zola Gwanya, Mmabatho

I refer to the article ‘Concourt post still not filled” (October 24). There is a considerable difference between my saying I am suitable for appointment to the Constitutional Court because I am married to a ‘previously disadvantaged” wife and contending that, as a result of my marriage, I have a racially mixed family which has been enriching and given me insights that would be valuable if I were to serve on the Concourt. It was the latter sentiment I expressed during the interview. — Nigel Willis, Johannesburg