Co-operative Government in the Western Cape
By Dave Steward and Amore Rossouw
Recently, traffic reports on breakfast radio stations in the Cape region have routinely carried warnings that this or that road has been closed due to service delivery protests.
On 25 June one such protest occurred in Botrivier.
What
aroused suspicions was the fact that “Die Burger” received an SMS
notification from James Pheiffer, a local ANC leader, before the
protest actually began.
The incident raised, once again, questions
about ANC involvement in the instigation of service protests; about
the permissible limits of opposition politics; and about the
constitutional requirements of co-operative government.
The Botrivier protest was not the first
in the Theewaterskloof area. Earlier this year there were similar
service delivery protests in Grabouw and Villiersdorp. The trigger in
Grabouw was the lack of space for the large number of recent
immigrants from the Eastern Cape in the local Umyezo Wama Apile
School.
The incident culminated in an ugly clash between black and
coloured communities and an attack on the predominantly coloured high
school, which resulted in two classrooms being gutted by fire.
In the wake of the violence the DA’s
Western Cape leader, Theuns Botha, claimed that the violence
had been planned months in advance by an ANC task team established
with the objective of reclaiming power in Western Cape.
Botha accused
the ANC of attempting to bribe DA councillors and coalition partners
to support a motion of no-confidence in the Theewaterskloof Council
with a view to forcing by-elections. He added that if these tactics
failed “local activists are co-opted to foment violence under
the guise of ‘service delivery protests’".
According to Botha, affidavits had been
filed at the Caledon police station over a month before the violence
in Grabouw and Villiersdorp. They attested that ANC leaders had
recruited John Michaels, a local ANC affiliate, to facilitate the
bribery of DA councillors.
The councillors were promised jobs, cash
and leadership positions if they supported the proposed no-confidence
motion in the Theewaterskloof council.
According to the affidavits,
Michaels told DA councillors that the ANC would make their wards
ungovernable if the no-confidence motion failed.
The ANC succeeded in persuading a DA
councillor, Cathy Booysen, to defect but failed to obtain sufficient
support for the no-confidence motion. According to Botha the
subsequent unrest in Grabouw was designed to help Booysen to win back
her ward on behalf of the ANC in the by-election which took place on
28 March.
However, she lost and the DA retained the ward.
The most recent manifestation of the
ANC’s campaign to reclaim the Western Cape has been its reaction to
the provincial government’s decision to close 27 under-performing,
under-populated or under-resourced schools.
In a speech on 1 July the
ANC‘s Western Cape leader, Marius Fransman, took full advantage of
the propaganda opportunities presented by the proposed closure.
In
his speech Fransman:
• continually compared the DA
Government in the Western Cape with the pre-1994 “Apartheid”
government;
• consistently misled his audience by claiming
that the DA government was not prepared to consult with communities
about the proposed closures;
• repeatedly played the race card:
“The DA government has since 2009 shown that its commitment to delivery and engagement is only with the white constituency and for the protection of white privilege only. Our communities are only important to it when it is time to vote.”
• darkly threatened mass action if the ANC did not get its way:
“If the DA government of today does not want to engage with the community directly, then we must revert to the same tactics that made the “kragdadige” apartheid government listen to us by ensuring united community mass action in defence of our rights.”
• repeatedly played the race card:
“The DA government has since 2009 shown that its commitment to delivery and engagement is only with the white constituency and for the protection of white privilege only. Our communities are only important to it when it is time to vote.”
• darkly threatened mass action if the ANC did not get its way:
“If the DA government of today does not want to engage with the community directly, then we must revert to the same tactics that made the “kragdadige” apartheid government listen to us by ensuring united community mass action in defence of our rights.”
We should consider the implications of
Fransman’s rhetoric.
By continually comparing the DA government in
the Western Cape with the pre-1994 government, he was actually
questioning its legitimacy. By playing the race card he was
consciously fanning and exploiting racial animosity; and by
threatening to adopt the tactics against the DA government that the
ANC and its formations had used against the “kragdadige apartheid
government”, he came close to advocating insurrection.
He also lent
credence to charges that the ANC is actively fomenting unrest
and protests against the elected government of the province.
Full article can be found here:
No comments:
Post a Comment