Heed the gods, Zuma, they are getting angrier
Sona is traumatising. You don’t need to take a second glance at it to see the government, under Zuma’s leadership, is wavering between extremes – and is confusing and lacking in focus and direction.
Compare, for instance, his speech this year to the one year, when he was generally praised for announcing a raft of austerity measures aimed at cutting back on the runaway public expenditure bill.
Zuma, not known for financial literacy, appeared to have confounded expectations when he listed the fiscal belt-tightening gestures to lift South Africa out of the economic doldrums and increase growth. “Compatriots, we have made an undertaking to spend public funds wisely and cut wasteful expenditure, but without compromising on the core business of government and the provision of services to our people,” he said.
“Overseas trips would be curtailed and public officials requesting permission to travel will have to motivate strongly and prove benefit for the country. The sizes of delegations will be greatly reduced, and further restrictions on conferences, catering, entertainment and social functions will be instituted.
“Compatriots, we will go through a difficult period for a while, but when the economy recovers, we will be proud of ourselves for having done the right thing.”
In a country, where corruption and the embezzlement of public funds are a way of life, Zuma’s rigorous austerity measures resonated with South Africans.
In his speech last week, however, not a single word was uttered about these austerity measures. There was no reminder, no update on how much the government had saved, whatsoever. Nothing!
The Sona is an important event on any president’s calendar, and is supposed to take stock of where the nation is and win its confidence about the direction it is headed to.
Instead, Zuma lulled the nation with a largely threadbare, uninspiring speech packed with stilted content that we have become accustomed to.
It’s not difficult to see why. There was, perhaps, no good story to tell in this regard.
Nothing worth mentioning about gover nment departments and municipalities together taking South Africa forward by cutting the waste and channelling the funds to the more pressing issues of skills development and job creation, among others.
The ink had barely dried on his speech last year when reports surfaced of how how several municipalities had racked up millions of rand on entertainment bills that far exceeded their income.
It emerged that the eThekwini municipality had planned to splurge R3.7 million for rap superstars TI and Nicki Minaj’s performances in Durban.
That came fresh after the uproar over reports that the council was sending a huge delegation on a luxurious ship for a three-day “cruise summit”.
It took a fierce pounding from the opposition parties for the council to abandon the plans.
Since then, reports have con- tinued to surface of other municipalities embarking on wasteful expenditure.
However, more disconcerting was that some national departments and parastatals appear to have, since the pronouncement of the austerity measures, done the complete opposite, as starkly evidenced by their ongoing tussle with the Treasury over the control of the public purse.
This is the new year, so South Africans are now fed with the not-so-new populist slogan that is radical economic transformation. Why? It all seems convenient after the bruising local government elections.
There’s pressure to bear from all political fronts, not so?
If anything, the real currency about radical economic transform- ation that the president and most of his comrades know, it seems, lies in self-aggrandisement, as political analyst Lesiba Teffo observed.
“The point is nobody still attaches any value to radical economic transformation because the state is so corrupted that it has come to represent almost nothing. Some people might even argue it’s just a scheme devised to enrich the limited few, the political elite and the connected few.”
Another political analyst Ralph Mathekga thinks the shift to radical economic transformation indicates the glaring incoherences in Zuma’s speech, and by extension, the government’s programme. “The shift in the language, from austerity measures to populist expenditure in areas such as the economy and land restitution, highlighted the tensions between the government departments and the Treasury.”
He argues austerity measures are a currency foreign to Zuma and most of his cabinet ministers. “Austerity is mostly the language of the Treasury, because they want to cut out the frills across various departments. But then you have some cabinet ministers saying the money allocated to them is not enough and are generating the narrative that the Treasury is not pro-poor.
“So we can expect to see people (ministers) demanding to be given blank cheques and the president not doing anything to support and defend the Treasury.
“That is why you are going to see great deal of disparity between the Sona and the budget.”
The ANC often likes to say that criticism against it is driven by regime-change agendas, but the groundswell of discontent sweeps even within its own ranks.
Businessman and former ANC national executive committee member Tokyo Sexwale was scathing of his comrades this week, warning them against abusing the names of the “selfless leaders” such as Oliver Tambo and Nelson Mandela.
“People are stealing. Right from the lowest position to the highest office they are stealing. People are taking from the public pocket.
“Even the devil can quote the Bible. People quote these leaders‚ ‘Tambo said‚ Mandela said’. Don’t use their names‚ speak your own truth…”
It was absurd to hear Zuma, in his response to opposition MPs, saying “our people elect members every five years to represent them in Parliament and to fulfil the tasks outlined in the constitution for the legislative arm of the state.
“The majority of members of Parliament understand the serious responsibility that they have been entrusted with and conduct themselves in a manner that gives hope to South Africans.
But any righteous leader would know that the fault lines lie with him, because of what he, as the head of the state, has come to represent.
Opposition parties are therefore sending a clear message to him that they are trying to defend and uphold the constitution.
Hey, they are saying: “You, Mr President, are not worthy of that office because you violated the constitution.”
Teffo believes the only way Zuma can redeem himself is to resign, which would help the ANC salvage its waning popularity.
“Any man or woman of integrity would have accepted that ‘I failed you’ and fallen on his or her sword.”