Faint echoes of 1994 as fresh faces bring vitality to debates
New kids on the block, the Economic Freedom Fighters, enliven the National Assembly, ruffling feathers and offering new perspectives on old problems, writes Jan-Jan Joubert
FOR parliament, the past is fast becoming a foreign country. They did things differently there. Those who knew the first democratic parliament, elected in 1994, tell us it was a vibrant and pioneering place, with the ANC caucus in particular filled to the brim with interesting characters who wanted to truly contribute to the national debate.
It is said that, 20 years ago, female MPs increased their insufficient share of the ablution facilities by occupying the men’s rest rooms. One ANC MP, singer-songwriter Jennifer Ferguson, wanted to sing her first speech (thankfully, given the precedent it might have set for the less-talented, she was stopped), and debates and question time were vibrant.
This was indicative, perhaps, of a greenfields endeavour and a government without baggage.
Things became more dour. And the sands have been shifting rapidly since this year’s election. Not to take stock of this might mean missing a possibly pivotal moment, whether fleeting or more permanent, in the ever dynamic South African political discourse.
A few wide-ranging but linked issues are contributing to the shift. Prime among these are the election results, economic factors and the nature of the opposition to the ANC — the only governing party our democracy has known.
On May 7, the ANC achieved its worst election result yet, at 62.2%. Although its mandate, won against 28 opponents, was overwhelming by any standard worldwide, it represented a continued decline, a few drops of blood in the shark-infested sea that is politics. The ANC’s opponents have sensed weakness, and they are ready to strike.
In this, they are assisted by the economic and political climate that shaped the election result. After the change in pace and dynamics that Marikana crystallised for the trajectory of our economy and politics, it could never be business as usual.
In time, corrections will follow, but for the moment the momentum is with the unions, and the unions — with their unsustainable demands — are straining at the tripartite alliance leash.
Any ANC opponent will tell you that the party’s biggest weakness is at the top. President Jacob Zuma’s parliamentary performances since the election have been so poor that they have contributed to persistent rumours about his failing health.
He seems to read out what is put in front of him, but simply does not own it, and his lacklustre performance permeates the party’s parliamentary input, despite the best efforts of its energetic chief whip, Stone Sizani, and the pick of its debaters, such as ministers Blade Nzimande and Naledi Pandor, and deputy minister Buti Manamela.
The strongest example of Zuma’s slackness is his “the dog ate my homework” response to the findings public protector Thuli Madonsela presented to parliament on improvements to the president’s private Nkandla homestead.
What thinking South African still believes that his self-imposed deadlines for anything will be met? Trust is hard to earn and it can, over time, be lost, especially if one’s behaviour on Nkandla mirrors so closely one’s behaviour on providing the so-called spy tapes on which one’s freedom from corruption charges hinges.
One’s lawyers might smartly term it a Stalingrad defence, but in the end all but the most myopic loyalists must see all the ducking and diving for exactly what it is.
Unfortunately, the perceived weakness at the top extends to parliament.
The speaker of the National Assembly, Baleka Mbete, makes only rare appearances at the institution entrusted to her care, apparently because of prolonged illness.
No body can be expected to function without a head, and the drift from the chair is there for all to see.
Her predecessor, Max Sisulu, was a formidable presence with a feel for parliament and an understanding of the need for fairness if a presiding officer wants to earn and maintain respect. He was, however, pushed aside, and parliament is paying the price.
With the exception of house chairmen Thoko Didiza and Cedric Frolick, the chairing of this year’s budget debates was woeful and at times unabashedly partisan.
Opposition contributors to debates are reined in mercilessly but the chairmen do not act as decisively when ANC MPs act similarly, preferring to defer decisions. Those ANC members in the chair
Zuma’s lacklustre performance permeates ANC parliamentary input, despite the best efforts of its energetic chief whip, Stone Sizani
will learn that justice delayed is justice denied. If chairmen do not act more fairly, they will not be respected, and the buck for that will stop with the absent speaker of the National Assembly.
Shifts in voter preference mean the nature and composition of the opposition to the ANC have changed accordingly.
The DA caucus is much larger and its members seem individually stronger than before the election. Their inputs into the budget vote process showed skill, expertise and occasional flair.
The new DA caucus leadership does not, at this stage, seem to have frozen out gifted supporters of exiled former parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko, and is working energetically to weld the somewhat disparate views of the 89 DA MPs in the National Assembly into a happy whole, at least socially.
New DA parliamentary leader Mmusi Maimane always delivers a good speech, but whether it was smart politics for party leader Helen Zille to choose the Western Cape premiership above leading the opposition nationally is up for debate.
Like the ANC, the DA seems unsure of how to handle the Economic Freedom Fighters.
Some senior DA MPs believe the EFF should be assisted in mastering the tools and ways of parliament, but others caution against aiding the EFF in crowding the DA out of oppositional space in the national discourse through juvenile antics and populist rhetoric.
The EFF has certainly made a splash in its first two months in parliament. Focusing on the content rather than the much discussed form of its input into the budget vote debates, one must conclude that it is uneven and of course, at this early stage, untested.
Its best MPs are excellent, but some of its representatives are very much below par. Its analysis of South Africa’s challenges is frank and provides an earthy input that has been missing from parliament for too long, even if its ideology is confused, its proposed solutions potentially catastrophic and the impact of its analysis undermined by its often infantile conduct.
But anyone who wants to dismiss the EFF out of hand, or who wishes to ignore it, might want to read the memoirs of the redoubtable liberal Margaret Ballinger, who served as Native Representative MP from 1937 to 1960. She tells, from the ringside perch of a disaffected outsider, how a small but energetic opposition can unseat established and complacent larger opponents through the certitude of a potentially dangerous racially nationalist vision, as happened here between 1938 and 1948.
Indeed, those who cannot remember the past are bound to repeat it, more so in the revitalised, changing political reality that the current parliament, rather disturbingly, now reflects.