Tarnishing Treasury latest in chameleon EFF’s dubious moves
We all loved the EFF when Julius Malema was Constitutionalist-in-Chief but what will it be next?
The EFF’s newest campaign is to throw mud at the Treasury: in the National Assembly Malema said Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene was “as corrupt as hell” and Floyd Shivambu referred to Treasury deputy director-general Ismail Momoniat as “a corrupt guy in Treasury known as Momo”.
It has also raised several questions about recent appointments at the Treasury, particularly of white officials, implying these were irregular and white people were getting preference.
The EFF has written to Nene to ask for his response to information it claims to hold, in particular that he should name who it was that “made” him deputy finance minister in 2009 and whether he delivered the goods for those people.
The implication seems to be that it was the Gupta family and that Nene has never fessed up to meeting them.
Nene will have to answer soon, and we are all waiting for the answer. What we do know, though, is that no matter how Nene made it into office, when push came to shove on the nuclear deal and on the South African Airways leasing contracts that Jacob Zuma’s friend Dudu Myeni was so keen to restructure, Nene stood firm. He told Zuma the answer was no.
The accusation of corruption against Momoniat requires quite a leap. Shivambu claimed in Parliament’s standing committee on finance that Momoniat had illegally and corruptly altered the regulations that would pertain to the Financial Sector Conduct Authority. He also implied that the Treasury’s appointment of a former official widely considered to be the expert on the twinpeaks regulation was irregular. Momoniat has answered the claims on the Conduct Authority in Parliament, which involve various bureaucratic processes and procedures.
Leaving aside for a moment the EFF’s racial campaign against white officials, there are other dimensions to the attacks on the Treasury that expose this as more of a political than an ethical concern. One of these is the EFF’s support for VBS Bank. The party recently wrote to Nene, Treasury director-general Dondo Mogajane and the Reserve Bank to lobby them against putting VBS into curatorship, despite evidence of its enormous failure and possible fraud. It has also taken up a partisan role regarding the Public Investment Corporation (PIC).
It sunk a discussion in the standing committee on finance on the controversy surrounding the PIC’s proposed investment in Iqbal Surve’s Sagarmatha. It has not directly supported the ANC and the DA in the campaign for greater transparency on PIC investments, saying that disclosure should only apply if similar legislation is passed for all asset managers to do the same.
The EFF recently implicitly gave its support to the PIC to fund Sagarmatha in a statement tabled at the PIC’s investment committee, in which it warned board members not to be fooled by public criticism of the deal as it was to be expected that white-owned companies would undermine a black entrepreneur.
WHETHER IT IS INDEPENDENT OR A LOBBYIST FOR PARTICULAR INTERESTS SWITCHES FROM MOMENT TO MOMENT
It may be a coincidence that the attacks on the Treasury and the defence of the PIC come when Nene is under pressure to investigate its CEO, Dan Matjila. Why the EFF chose to intervene in these issues seems odd, unless it is doing so on behalf of private interests.
It is this sort of ambiguity that is disturbing about the EFF. Whether it is progressive or regressive and whether it is independent or a lobbyist for particular interests switches from moment to moment.
The ambiguity is evident in the party’s political stance. Malema recently complained to journalists that he had been labelled “a fascist” after he raised the land debate in Parliament. But it was in that same debate that Malema said that he intended to “cut the throat of whiteness” — with reference to Nelson Mandela Bay mayor Athol Trollip.
Asked what he had meant, Malema said that “it was a figure of speech” intended to illustrate the party’s determination to deal with the arrogance and attitudinal supremacy of white people.
While it is true that the EFF is unapologetic about the way that it confronts racism, Malema also knew that he had brought the fascist label on himself.
The EFF is a party of ambivalent political tones with a direction that is not yet settled. What it becomes in this next phase of politics is uncertain. What is clearer, though, is that its leaders have interests and ambitions that reach beyond the realm of party politics. Paton is deputy editor.