We are prepared to land
CONTRARY to an allegation that has been known to come at me, I’ve never said any unpopular thing for the sake of being unpopular. What I confess to is from time to time saying unpopular things when in my judgement the unpopular thing is true.
Here are eight things that I think are true about the great secret ballot row.
First, the whole subject is sickening. Mighty minds, mega money and mountainous attention go into making it easier for our nation’s supposed tone-setters to lie.
Second, it is also a cheat. None of those MPs were put in Parliament by voters’ faith in their wisdom or their judgement. They are in Parliament because they contracted with the ANC to do what the ANC says. To tell them “forget that now, follow your conscience, in secret”, betrays 11.4 million ANC voters.
Third, the widely cited idea that an open vote is unfair on the poor MPs who’d like to vote anti-Zuma is misleading. The “danger” to the pro-Zuma lot is exactly identical. If Zuma lost, they’d be equally susceptible to vengeance from the new winners in the intra-ANC war.
Fourth, the notion of a secret vote for MPs is disgraceful.
For us the voters, a secret ballot is indispensable, no one ever needs to know who we support. For politicians who have sought our vote the rules are the opposite. They can’t “represent” us by voting in ways that we can’t see.
Fifth, there’s no more mixed-up an idea than one happily doing the rounds now, that a secret ballot advances transparency.
The aficionados of this idea mean that anything is good if it kicks non-transparent Zuma out, but plain English says nothing is less transparent than secrecy.
Sixth, the honourable thing is to seek a whip-free vote, parties authorising members to vote by conscience.
That eradicates the underhandedness, and if it leaves ANC MPs in terror, tough. Wellpaid leadership roles mean times of taking a stand, rare as it may be.
Seventh, old people will recall an institution called sub judice, stopping the media from influencing judgments, hopefully freeing judges from worrying that they’ll be savaged if they do what their strict reading of the law requires.
Well, pity the Constitutional Court justices, most or all living in worlds where Kick Zuma Out is high fashion. They must reach their conclusion amid a one-way storm of warning that the public knows best; a wrong result will get them pilloried everywhere from their bowls clubs to their supermarkets.
Eight and last, how overblown is anti-Zuma hysteria?
You’d think that as soon as he goes off to snooze in his socks on Nkandla’s stoep, the ship of state turns toward the warm welcoming trade-winds. Nooit!
Less crookery will, presumably, be generated in the corridors of power, but in terms of damage done, crookery is by-the-way next to their attempt to order economics to obey their statutes. And the only change they make to that is to redouble it every time it fails.