Zuma keeps them guessing till the end
Will he reply to criticism?
THE state of the nation address is usually a pretty pedestrian affair with the president simply being allowed to speak without interruption, but last week that changed, perhaps forever.
For 20 years, presidents Nelson Mandela, Thabo Mbeki, Kgalema Motlanthe and Jacob Zuma have delivered their speeches with the convention that there are no points of order or questions being observed.
Opposition parties, however, have sharply criticised the president during the debate that follows the speech. The president has been given an opportunity to reply in a solo slot on the third and last day of the debate.
Sometimes they choose to respond to the questions posed by opposition MPs. Mr Mbeki did on occasion respond, but more often than not declined.
Mr Zuma has taken the art of not responding to criticism in the state of the nation debate to a new level. Also, he responds mostly to MPs whose position he agrees with, such as his colleagues in the African National Congress (ANC) caucus.
In Tuesday’s opening salvos of the state of the nation debate, an MP described this year’s speech as a recycled version of the one Mr Zuma gave in June last year.
He had a point. For example, the one area that Mr Zuma could have addressed was the fight against crime, which has featured regularly in the criticism of his administration. Often he barely mentions crime and corruption in either his speech or his reply.
Clearly, part of the reason for this is that in successive administrations the ANC has held substantial majorities of more than 60% of the vote. The state of the nation addresses have demonstrated that big majorities, coupled with a proportional representation electoral system that places all power in the hands of party bosses, may be a barrier to accountability in Parliament.
It usually falls to praise singers in the ANC to attack the opposition, leaving the president to simply continue praising his own achievements in his reply. The two days of debate this year were no different.
It could have been due to the pandemonium in the House last Thursday when the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) broke the mould. Its MPs challenged Mr Zuma to tell the nation when he would repay the money spent on the nonsecurity features of the R246m upgrade to his private home in Nkandla. It was the first time in the democratic era that the largely ceremonial nature of the state of the nation address was disrupted by points of privilege and order, along with questions to the president.
The fact that the EFF MPs were violently ejected from the joint sitting shocked many.
And the way in which the address started may hold clues to how the debate will finish today. Will opposition parties disrupt Mr Zuma’s reply, demanding he respond to the questions raised in two days of debate? Or will he be allowed to fudge his reply as he has in the past?
Because the reply is the only order of business in Parliament today, it is likely that he will not be stumped by numerous points of order simply because MPs will not know whether he is going to reply to their questions until after he has finished speaking.
But Mr Zuma has been put on notice that he will be held to account on March 11 when he appears in the National Assembly to answer oral questions. EFF leader Julius Malema has warned Mr Zuma that party expects answers then.
Whatever happens today — rowdily or more subued — the state of the nation address and the debate on it will never be the same again.