Admin
12 Nov, 2019
KZN provincial government is extravagant
The United Democratic Movement is perturbed by the news that the MEC for Education in the Province is using a hired motor vehicle for his official business that is costing taxpayers a whooping R100 000 per month. This is unbelievable if one considers that the ANC claims to be the government of the people and which represent the poorest of the poor. This is an illustration that the ANC led government does not practice what it teaches. The same government has made a lot of noise that it is going to do everything to save but look at this. This country is a now replica of Animal Farm. In five months’, time with this money a big luxurious motor vehicle in the range of a Toyota Fortuner can be easily bought. The big question that the UDM is asking, is this procurement of this hired motor vehicle in question a result of gross negligence or incompetence of officials or the department itself? Does this mean the motor vehicles of the state are not insured with a benefit of a provision of hired vehicles if it happened that they are booked for service or repairs? Courtesy cars should be available, This raises so much concern. The UDM KZN calls upon the Office of the Premier to do a proper investigation on this matter that will among other things find those involved who did not do their work. Whoever found wanting must pay back the money that has been spent unwisely. This is pure wasteful expenditure. End// Issued by: Boysey Gumede UDM-KZN Interim Provincial Secretary
Admin
01 Nov, 2016
Road map: towards the South African National Convention: A UDM perspective
This document is a suggestion of the United Democratic Movement (UDM) to find a way towards the hosting of a National Convention, as agreed upon in the Co-governance Agreement for Local Government between the several political partners. INTRODUCTION The participating political parties have agreed on four main challenges confronting South Africa i.e. poverty, unemployment, inequality and corruption, which requires that the nation unites around a strategic and fundamental interventionist programme of action. Our constitutional democracy is unitary in nature with elements of federalism. Government, the organs of state, legislation, the role of Chapter Nine Institutions and the national fiscus, fall within the national sphere. Accordingly, and if any strategic intervention is to be made, to aggressively address the four challenges, such intervention must be done at a national level – both in terms of form and content. After our meeting on 7 August 2016, of the Congress of the People, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), the United Front (UF), as well as the UDM, we developed a framework to form the basis of any discussions about co-operation and/or coalition. The aim of this proposal was to guide these parties in case they were approached by either the African National Congress (ANC) and/or the Democratic Alliance (DA) about the possibility of forming part of governments in certain municipalities. Our goal was to obtain a commitment to finding answers to the various challenges facing South African on the short, medium and long term. There is no denial that some national issues impact daily on how local government operates, e.g. water, land, electricity, environment, etc. During that period of negotiation, other parties joined this initiative, such as the African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP), the Freedom Front Plus (FF+) and the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP). Our discussions culminated in an agreement that was signed with the DA. The ANC was however not interested in engaging with us about our wish-list. The EFF, in the end, did not form part of any coalitions, but they indicated that they would support other parties in countering the ANC in municipal councils. The coalition partners agreed that after municipal governments were put in place, we would meet again to map the way forward in implementing the goals we articulated in our agreement. Some of the key issues, that were identified during out talks, were however not within the ambit of local government, but could only be addressed at a national level. As was articulated in our co-governance agreement: “These challenges include, but are not confined to, land reform, electoral reform, education and how it is financed, the independence of Chapter 9 Institutions, and the professionalization of the civil service.” One of the stated goals was to hold a National Convention to address these and other issues of national importance. There is no doubt that the agreements that culminated in the new dispensation were not cast in stone, they served a certain purpose at that point in the time. There are however still challenges that impact today and we need to review those decisions. An evaluation of the past 22 years, and identifying inherent deficiencies in the management of government, is a complex exercise that needs to have stakeholders give input so that we arrive at a holistic solution to South Africa’s problems. Some of the frustrations are people express with civil disobedience and the general anarchy are attributed to the agreements that were made at Codesa. The complaints about the lack of economic emancipation, struggles to get access funding, as well as land and property issues are well documented. We hear calls such as that the ANC sold out the people and that some of the concessions made, were not in the interest of the disenfranchised masses. THE PURPOSE OF THE NATIONAL CONVENTION A National Convention will provide a platform for stakeholders from all sectors of society, and South Africans in general, to find each other and map a way towards: • Economic emancipation of all South Africans; • Eliminating corruption • Land reform and property ownership; • Bolstering Chapter Nine Institutions; • Basic and Higher Education • Health and social welfare • Professionalization of the civil service; • Electoral reform; • Legislation governing the funding of political parties; and • Any other matters of national interest. We cannot deny that many policies have been developed and then chopped-and-changed. As an example, let us look at the Reconstruction and Development (RDP) programme right through to the latest National Development Plan (NDP). But this constant shifting of the goal-posts and the tensions between government, labour and business, scuppers implementation time and again. PARTICIPANTS AT THE NATIONAL CONVENTION To achieve the objective of maximum participation in the proposed National Convention and to ensure buy-in, the participation of the following participants is envisaged (but are not limited to): • Government departments (at all three tiers); • Parliament and provincial legislatures; • The National Planning Commission; • All Parastatals; • Chapter Nine Institutions; • Financial institutions like the Reserve Bank; • National Development Council; • Professional Associations and Governing Bodies; • The Judiciary; • Business; • Religious communities; • The media • Traditional institutions and bodies; • Labour and unions; • Civil Society and Non-Governmental Organisations; • Institutions of higher learning (Intellectual community) and student bodies; • Special interest groups and issue based organisations; • Women and youth based organisations; • Political parties; and • The South African citizenry. Certainly, to resolve the chronic challenges confronting our nation, we need to tap into our collective wisdom. Codesa delivered political freedom, but more still has be done with regards to economic emancipation and our economic policies in general. For instance, the divergent opinions of business, labour and government creates a situation where there is no consensus on what kind of macro-economic policy South Africa should have. The intention must be to ensure that all South Africans can participate fully in determining their future. In this regard, the National Convention will be a tool to ensure maximum and meaningful participation of all stakeholders. COORDINATION OF THE NATIONAL CONVENTION: NOT ANOTHER TALK-SHOP For a proper and a productive dialogue at a forum of this magnitude, the following important points must be considered: • As the initiators of project, the participating political parties, should have a meeting with Leader of Government Business in Parliament, Mr Cyril Ramaphosa, as soon as possible to unpack the idea of a National Convention and garner government support. • A National Convention Planning Committee (NCPC) should be appointed and convened to develop a framework to guide all participants at the proposed National Convention and plan what form it should take. • The NCPC should meet and discuss the appointment of an independent person with a certain gravitas as its chairperson. For instance, a person such as retired Chief Justice Ngcobo could be considered as a person who would ensure impartiality and who has the necessary knowledge and wisdom to make sure that participants, with divergent and/or conflicting ideas, can engage constructively and reach consensus. • This is a long-overdue exercise where we can make introspection as a nation. Government must fund the proposed National Convention, because a sponsorship model will not work. A scenario where a company could sponsor the event, but would also wish to be a participant, might be accused of “buying” influence to ensure a certain outcome. • It would be realistic to have the proposed National Convention somewhere in 2017/18. • The proposed National Convention cannot be just another talk-shop or a useless bosberaad. Should consensus emerge on the issues discussed, immediate action (with attending time-frames) should be taken to ensure that that the National Convention’s resolutions are implemented. For instance, if there is legislation that needs to be changed, Government must set the ball rolling as soon as possible. Such resolutions should not be subjected to more ideological debates in Parliament and changes to existing legislation should be ratified without delay. • The National Convention will also have to mandate the NCPC to manage and monitor the implementation of its resolutions. • The NCPC must always accountable to the National Convention, in other words, the people of South Africa. CONCLUSION We need to capture the lost ground. South Africa has been on the slippery slope with scandal after scandal, even at the highest office, and we need to reignite South Africans’ pride in their Country and confidence in government. We need to convince the world that South Africa is a well-run state and a worthwhile investment destination and not a junk status nation. The National Convention must emerge with a comprehensive blue print for a flourishing South Africa. We must remain committed to the Country and its citizenry and always put South Africa first. Thank you Prepared by Mr Bantu Holomisa, MP – UDM President
Admin
13 Sep, 2014
Holomisa: “Cut a deal! Go Home” President Zuma
Holomisa: “Cut a deal! Go Home” President Zuma Instead of a nation preoccupied with the scandals surrounding President Zuma, the United Democratic Movement (UDM) advises that we should rather deliberate his exit strategy. Since the advent of democracy, we have never been faced with a crisis of this magnitude i.e. allegations of corruption at the highest level. The African National Congress (ANC) has completely misinterpreted their mandate. They are clearly using their majority to do their utmost to protect President Zuma at all cost. People must understand that the president and his executive are not subject to the Labour Relations Act. It is therefore not necessary to prove his culpability beyond reasonable doubt, but the balance of probability shows that President Zuma must be relieved of his duties. We cannot allow a person to perpetually spend taxpayers’ millions and in the process flout the rule of law with impunity. It is clear that our system is flawed and the holes must be stoppered. We are at a stalemate; to name but two, the image of the country is dented and our economy is in shambles. Under Zuma’s leadership, there is an unrelenting charge against any body doing their work and maintains the rule of law. Politicians in the ruling party and some of their political partners, ministers and deputy ministers downward, protect President Zuma. They do not care how much damage they inflict. The UDM believes that South Africans cannot take lightly the unrelenting onslaught on public institutions, like the public protector, or quashing of any attempt to point out Zuma’s mistakes. With all the noise generated in his defence, Zuma keeps silent and yet he is the accounting officer of this country. The UDM suggests that we, as a people, must find an amicable way to relieve Mr Zuma of his duties. However such a package must be conditional so that we do not have another Zuma disguised in the system. He must go home and we will exonerate him, however such a package should include three things: A change in the Electoral Act that allows South Africans to directly elect their president in the 2019 elections. In terms of the executive, candidates for cabinet must first be vetted in public hearings to ascertain whether they are fit for office. In addition, the speaker, as the presiding officer of parliament, must come from outside politics and be a career professional. With the storm around the President, as well as the controversy around Belaka Mbete, regarding the R25 million stake she received from the granting of a licence to Goldfields mining company which constituted a bribe, is a toxic combination. Unfortunately South Africans gave the ANC the green light in the 2014 election thus endorsing this corruption. Something has to change, and it must happen soon. We remind South Africans of the history and controversy surrounding President Zuma. ARMS DEAL SCANDAL – SCHABIR SHAIK AND TONY YENGENI President Zuma fought a long legal battle over allegations of racketeering and corruption, resulting from his financial advisor Schabir Shaik’s conviction for corruption and fraud. Bulelani Ngcuka, the national director of Public Prosecutions at the time, investigated both President Zuma and the Mr Tony Yengeni after allegations of abuse of power. While Yengeni was found guilty, the case was dropped against Zuma, with Ngcuka stating, “…that there was prima facie evidence of corruption, but insufficient to win the case in court”. When Judge Squires delivering his verdict, Shaik was found guilty on two counts of corruption and one count of fraud. Judge Squires stated that there had been “overwhelming” evidence of a corrupt relationship between Shaik and Zuma. 2005: THE SUCCESSION BATTLE WITH FORMER PRESIDENT THABO MBEKI In June 2005, former President Thabo Mbeki removed Zuma from his post as Deputy President due to allegations of corruption and fraud related to the $5-billion weapons acquisition deal in 1999. 2005: ALLEGATIONS OF RAPE AND THE INFAMOUS SHOWER COMMENT In 2005 Zuma was charged for rape, but was acquitted. The trial generated political controversy when he, as head of the National AIDS Council, admitted that he had not used a condom when having sex with the woman who had him accuses him of rape. He did this, despite knowing that she was HIV-positive and said in court that he took a shower afterwards to “cut the risk of contracting HIV”. 2007: ARMS DEAL SCANDAL CONTINUED: THE NATIONAL PROSECUTING AUTHORITY INDICT PRESIDENT ZUMA In late 2007, the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) indicted Zuma to stand trial on various counts of racketeering, money laundering, corruption and fraud. A conviction and sentence to a term of imprisonment of more than 1-year would have rendered Zuma ineligible for election to parliament and consequently would not have been eligible to serve as president. In 2008, Judge Nicholson held that Zuma’s corruption charges were unlawful on procedural grounds in that the National Directorate of Public Prosecutions did not give Zuma a chance to make representations before deciding to charge him, a requirement of the Constitution, and directed the state to pay legal costs. In 2009, the NPA dropped all charges against Zuma and co-accused French arms company Thint in light of new revelations about serious flaws in the prosecution. 2013 – SOUTH AFRICA’S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC Central African Republic dictator François Bozizé, sent his son Jean Francis Bozizé, then the CAR’s defence minister, to Pretoria to cut a deal with Zuma to send enough South African troops and weapons to halt the Seleka rebel advance on the capital, Bangui – but far fewer than promised arrived. Long frantic talks were held with Zuma, just three days before Bangui fell, to remind the the president to honour a back-room deal. 2013 – GUPTAGATE President Zuma was reportedly directly implicated in the so-called Guptagate scandal, but he denied having prior knowledge or involvement in the landing of the Gupta wedding jet at the Waterkloof Air Force Base. 2013 –NKANDLA… SECURITY OF THE PRESIDENT President Zuma was accused of having used taxpayer funds to make improvements to his private home in Nkandla. He was accused of deceiving parliament about the use of funds for his security, instead of using them largely for personal expenses. Zuma and his cabinet protested the allegations, claiming that the expenditures were for necessary security facilities of the head of state. 2014 – THE “SPY TAPES” – ARMS DEAL DEBACLE WILL NOT GO AWAY Speculation flourished that the Zuma team resisted releasing the so-called “spy tapes” at every turn, when supposedly the contents show the more than 700 corruption charges against him were part of a plot to nip his presidential ambitions in the bud. Yet, in announcing his decision to drop the charges in 2009, then-acting National Director of Public Prosecutions Mokotedi Mpshe made it plain that there was nothing on the tapes that would have fatally damaged the prosecution’s case. Instead, Mpshe argued there had been an abuse of process. The timing of the charges had been manipulated for ends other than the legitimate purpose of a prosecution, which was to secure a conviction. He alleged the former head of the Scorpions, Leonard McCarthy, and his NPA counterpart, Bulelani Ngcuka, had discussed when to charge Zuma with the aim of maximising damage to his campaign for leadership of the ANC. President Zuma and his protectors milked the delay in handing over of the “spy- tapes”. It was never Zuma’s intention to produce the spy-tapes. Instead he opted to use public funds to fight a legal battle from start to finish. THE BLURRED LINE BETWEEN STATE AND PARTY There is a disturbing trend that reared its ugly head over the past years. The ANC will stop at nothing to protect President Zuma. They disrespect the judiciary and laws of this country. They hurl insults at the public protector tha has done a proper job of making transgressors face the music. THE ANC OF YESTER YEAR AND THAT OF THE PAST FIVE YEARS. There is marked difference between the style of late former president Nelson Mandela and that of former president Thabo Mbeki, versus that of President Zuma. In fact, Zuma has forgotten what the ANC values yesteryear were . The best way of putting it, is to say that his actions are un-Mandela, un-Mbeki and un-ANC. TO THE DETRIMENT OF SOUTH AFRICANS One cannot help but think that President Jacob Zuma is the proverbial cat with nine lives. The past five years have exposed that the Zuma-regime is not serious about alleviating poverty. The millions of rands spent on President Zuma’s legal fees is an insult to South Africans who are forced to pay for his ever-increasing legal bill. President Zuma is using the public purse as a slush fund to protect him and his family. One wonders how much money slipped into Mr Michael Hulley, President Zuma’s attorney, own pocket. He is after all a business partner of the Zuma family. Maybe President Zuma’s style is not that far from quiet diplomacy. However his idea of quiet diplomacy is literally staying mum, or he pleading that he did not know. It is time for the president to stop wasting taxpayers’ time and money and face the music especially amidst the noises about his health.
