ANC shows signs of caring what voters think

THE African National Congress (ANC) seems to care more about election results than ever before, which could be the most important change in politics since 1994. A confidential document circulated by the ANC to its MPs and leaked to a Sunday newspaper was criticised by opposition parties and commentators because it says it will ignore private members’ bills as it rushes to pass laws “necessary for election”.

In reality, it may show that democracy here has entered a new phase, in which competition between parties matters more. This is likely to make the government more democratic — and more open to laws which many in business may find “populist”.

The document says legislation should enhance the profile of the ANC in the “eyes of the electorate” in the run-up to the election. MPs should avoid controversial laws and in particular those that might upset the National House of Traditional Leaders, presumably because its members are assumed to influence voters.

It wants to give priority to laws “with a significant bearing on the lives of the working class and poor” and to delay those “likely to raise controversy or be used against the ANC in the election campaign”. Bills it considers vital to its election prospects seek to cut red tape delaying infrastructure projects and to change land ownership, to prevent public servants from doing business with the gov-

‘Opposition parties elsewhere wouldn’t dream of expecting the majority party to do them favours in election season’

ernment and introduce other measures hailed by anticorruption activists, and to force the government and some companies to employ women in half of senior positions.

On one level, the document is unremarkable and it is hard to understand why anyone made a fuss of it: governing parties in most democracies try to look good before elections by giving priority to what they feel will win them votes and by avoiding helping their opponents. Opposition parties elsewhere would never dream of expecting the majority party to do them favours in election season.

On another level, it is remarkable because it suggests a change in the way in which the ANC sees elections. In the run-up to previous polls, it felt no need to send similar messages to its MPs. It expected to win comfortably and it knew that no one was likely to change their vote because Parliament passed a law or blocked another. The document suggests that it is, for the first time, worried enough about how it might do in the election to want the law-making agenda to give it the best possible shot — and that it respects voters enough to believe the way to their hearts is to pass laws that serve their interests rather than mobilising people behind calls to the blood, as some other governments, including during apartheid, would do.

This is an important advance for democracy. A governing party worried about losing votes will obviously be more eager to please citizens than one that thinks it will win whatever it does, and a government that thinks voters want it to fight corruption, speed up infrastructure and empower women is more likely to behave democratically than one that thinks that they can be whipped into a frenzy against its opponents.

So the document might show that tensions within the ANC, and disaffection among its voters — illustrated last week by its loss in one of three Tlokwe by-elections — have prompted it to begin seeing elections as governing parties with uncertain re-election prospects do: as a time to reach out to voters. This is important: politicians who worry about voters at election time are more likely to care about them between elections. The biggest barrier to effective government since 1994 has been the ANC’s insulation from voter pressure— it had no incentive to try harder. The document suggests this has changed.

One consequence is that a long-standing business worry, unfounded until now, may be more real — that the ANC will seek at election time to retain its voter base by passing “populist” measures that displease business and the affluent. In the past, this did not happen — the ANC knew it didn’t have to woo voters with new measures and was more concerned not to alarm property owners. The credit amnesty, committee approval of labour laws despite business opposition, and the land and women’s empowerment bills suggest election cycles do now influence ANC thinking.

This is no catastrophe for business — the government still does not want to alarm it and so the measures are limited. One effect may be to force businesses to up their political game and give more thought to how to influence decisions in a democratic society, which they arguably should have done long ago. But it does herald a new environment to which all interest groups will have to adapt.

Of course, none of this may last if the ANC does better next year than it expects. But the pressures it faces are not temporary and so the shift will be needed sooner or later. Our democratic prospects are brighter than many suggest — even if the democracy the document promises is a little delayed.

Friedman is director of the Centre for the Study of Democracy.