A whiff of ‘Prague Spring’ in parliamentary meetings

MEMBERS of the public who witnessed the first meeting of the ad hoc committee established to conduct an inquiry into the SABC board may have needed to double-check that they were indeed watching a broadcast from the South African Parliament.

So conditioned are we to schoolground one-upmanship, name-calling, obfuscation and rote recitations of the party script that to see MPs collaborating across party lines, thinking on their feet and making meaningful individual con- tributions has become a rare exception.

The term “voting cattle” has, sadly, come to epitomise much of Parliament’s deliberations.

But the ad hoc committee dispatched so briskly with its work for the day, enthusiastically agreeing to work through weekends and caucus days if necessary, that there is a real possibility the SABC’s one-man board will be dissolved before it can think up yet another ingenious way of keeping Hlaudi Motsoeneng safe from the clutches of accountability.

There were flashes of dis- cord over whether to invite former public protector Thuli Madonsela and in what capacity, but a sense of purpose, and even reason, dominated proceedings.

EFF MP Mbuyiseni Ndlozi gently chided the ANC’s committee chairman, Vincent Smith, for what he felt was his dismissive approach to the inputs of the DA’s Phumzile van Damme, reminding him that many young black women followed the proceedings of Parliament, and Smith duly apologised.

The committee was going to work as a team, with the same objectives and ideals, Smith declared, with the ultimate goal of “ensuring that Parliament takes its rightful place as an equal but autonomous arm of the state”.

It was also about restoring faith in state- owned enterprises and the public broadcaster, in particular, said the ANC’s Makhosi Khoza.

All of this is reminiscent of the “Prague Spring” that bloomed in the period between Thabo Mbeki’s loss to Jacob Zuma of the ANC presidency in December 2007 and Zuma’s inauguration as head of state in 2009.

With the Zuma faction in command of the party, members of Mbeki’s executive and officials from the entities reporting to them faced a frequently hot reception in Parliament.

Ironically, the SABC and a board newly minted by Mbeki was one of the areas of contention.

But no sooner had the Zuma administration settled in – and especially once the opposition began turning up the heat on the president’s numerous scandals – than the ANC benches, in particular, assumed their accustomed supine position, culminating in the shameful handling of the Nkandla saga, for which the Constitutional Court saw fit to rebuke the legislature president).

To this day, Parliament has not acted on the court finding that the president violated his oath of office and the constitution.

Which is why, bracing as it is to see Parliament flexing its atrophied muscles again, the spirit in which the ad hoc committee has set about its work must be seen in the light of renewed factional contestation in the ANC .

It is too soon to say whether this awakening is yet another seasonal event related to the ANC’s succession cycle, or the ( along with the product of a realisation that its tractable posture in Parliament has the unintended consequence of alienating its supporters. Or both. In the meantime, questions remain for the ad hoc committee. It showed its fighting spirit by agreeing unanimously to summon Communications Minister Faith Muthambi as the political head to which the SABC reports.

But when it comes to writing its report, will it make any effort to trigger consequences for Muthambi’s role in the SABC debacle?

Hlaudi Motsoeneng