Admin
19 Aug, 1998
Electoral Bill 1988
Statement by UDM Deputy Secretary The United Democratic Movement has been asked to forward comments in writing with regard to the proposed amendments to the Electoral Bill in particular and we would like to comment on certain aspects with regard to party funding. The proposal in this regard does not do anything to address the fundamental inequality that is created by act 103 of 1996, the Funding of Political Parties Represented in Parliament Act. (state funds, at present budgeted somewhere in the vicinity of R53 million).The funds can be allocated to practically any political purpose, with the only real restriction that it should not be used to pay parliamentarians. Therefore, quite clearly, these funds can be used for election purposes, and is in fact intended to be used as such. Although couched in terms which created the impression that it should be used for administrative purposes, such uses frees other donations and funds of such parties for use in election campaigning. In any event, there is no limitation on these funds being directly allocated to campaigns. If this act had to be in position during the 1994 election. It would have meant that practically all the money would have been allocated to the National Party and no funds allocated to the African National Congress, which was then not represented in Parliament. If a similar provision had been in place prior to the last election in the United Kingdom, it would have meant the bulk of the funds would have been allocated to the Conservative Party, which then had the majority in Parliament, and much less to the Labour Party, which won by a landslide, and result might have been different if the ruling party had access to the state funds in proportion to the representation that it had before the election. In cases where there is a delicate balance between the parties, especially in relation to a sensitive issue such as the two thirds majority, the availability of funds might make a substantial difference in the eventual outcome of the election and consequently also to the manner in which the country is governed. Thus to provide funds to those parties represented in Parliament as is presently enacted, substantially affects the operation of multi-party democracy in South Africa. According to opinion polls the United Democratic Movement already can rely on support equivalent to, and surpassing that of, parties already represented in parliament. It would therefore be a fundamental disadvantage if a party like the DP, with 5% support should receive funds from the fund created by Act 103, and a party like the UDM, also with at least 5% support, receives nothing. Similarly it would be unfair if the DP, with 5% current support, received 1% of the funds based on its support 5 years ago, and a party with 1% current support received 20% of the fund, based on its support 5 years ago. The funding could thus lead to fundamental distortions in parties’ capacity to campaign. The proposed allocation of election funds to all parties does nothing to redress this imbalance. According to the proposal it would mean that parties represented in Parliament would then receive monies twice: Once through Act 103 (and probably a substantial amount at that), and then again in terms of the proposed clause 106, whereas parties are not represented would only receive monies in terms of clause 106 . The only way in which a free and fair election can be possible, accepting the existence of act 103 of 1996, is if the election act makes provision for the further funding of parties that are not represented in Parliament, with reference to the monies already allocated to parties represented in Parliament. Thus it should be a balancing provision. In the absence of this, the IEC cannot certify that a fair election has taken place. It might be free, but it cannot be a fair election if some parties are benefiting from state funds where other parties have no access to similar funding. A further objection that the UDM has to this clause, is that it is of no practical assistance to anybody. In the first place the 5% seems to be intended to cover the required deposits, and it makes absolutely no sense for the state to require money as a deposit and also to provide for it in this manner. The rest of the (95%) fund that will be available after election will be of no use for election purposes if it cannot be accessed during the campaign. It will also not serve as any leverage for the purposes of obtaining finance as nobody is likely to advance monies against the future uncertainty as the possible outcome of an election, no matter what the predictions and polls might indicate. The only situation that will alleviate the present imbalance is if Parliament allocated funds to the parties not represented in Parliament with reference to the support that a particular party has: both those represented and those not represented, and that the second fund thereafter is applied in such a manner as to ensure that parties are funded, as nearly as possible, proportional to their current support.
Admin
13 Aug, 1998
Closure of Richmond police station
Statement by National Secretary The UDM has learned with shock about the closure of the Richmond Police Station and the redeployment of the personnel of the station. The UDM finds it strange that these police officers were accused by the Minister of Safety and Security, Sidney Mufamadi, of involvement in the happenings in Richmond. When these police officers then call for evidence to these allegations, they are being redeployed. They are now redeployed and expected to continue to do their work with allegations of involvement in Richmond violence still surrounding them. To the UDM, this appears yet another attempt by President Mandela and the ANC government to manipulate the security forces and use them as political tools. The UDM would like to know whether the newly deployed police officers were former MK members. We doubt also whether the provincial government of KwaZulu-Natal was consulted on this move. The UDM as a peaceful organization working towards true multi-party democracy reiterates our call for an Independent Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the violence in Richmond and other parts of KwaZulu-Natal.
Admin
05 Aug, 1998
Party political funding in perspective
Statement by UDM Deputy-President The reaction of the parties represented in parliament on the question of funding political parties outside of parliament must be seen in perspective. Currently parliamentary represented political parties are receiving funds from two state sources. They are receiving in all nine Provincial as well as in the National Legislature an amount of R4 489-00 per month per member. This is over and above the normal salaries paid to members. Secondly, they are receiving funds from the Public Funding of Represented Political Parties Act of 1997. An amount of R53 million was budgeted for under this act to be divided proportionally amongst the parties as they are represented in Parliament per year. STATE FUNDING RECEIVED PER MEMBER NATIONAL PARLIAMENT Political Parties Seats R per Month R per Year ANC 252 R 1 131 228,00 R13 574 736,00 NP 82 R 368 098,00 R 4 417 176,00 IFP 43 R 193 027,00 R 2 316 324,00 FF 9 R 40 401,00 R 484 812,00 DP 7 R 31 423,00 R 377 076,00 PAC 5 R 22 445,00 R 269 340,00 ACDP 2 R 8 978,00; R 107 736,00 ; ; TOTAL R21 547 736,00 STATE FUNDING RECEIVED PER MEMBER PERMANENT MEMBERS NATIONAL COUNCIL OF PROVINCES Political Parties Seats R per Month R per Year ANC 32 R143 648,00 R1 723 776,00 NP 11 R 49 379,00 R 592 548,00 IFP 3 R 13 467,00 R 161 604,00 FF 5 R 22 445,00 R 269 340,00 DP 3 R 13 467,00 R 161 604,00 TOTAL R2 908 872,00 STATE FUNDING RECEIVED PER MEMBER TOTAL NUMBER OF MEMBERS ALL NINE PROVINCIAL LEGISLATURES Political Parties Seats R per Month R per year ANC 266 R1 194 074,00 R14 328 888,00 NP 82 R 368 098,00 R 4 417 176,00 IFP 44 R 197 516,00 R 2 370 192,00 FF 14 R 62 846,00 R 754 152,00 DP 12 R 53 868,00 R 646 416,00 PAC 3 R 13 467,00 R 161 604,00 ACDP 3 R 13 467,00 R 161 604,00 MNF 1 R 4 489,00 R 53 868,00 TOTAL R22 893 900,00 TOTAL AMOUNT OF STATE FUNDING RECEIVED PER YEAR PER MEMBER POLITICAL PARTIES Political Parties R per Year ANC R 29 627 400,00 NP R 9 426 900,00 IFP R 4 848 120,00 FF R 1 508 304,00 DP R 1 185 096,00 PAC R 430 944,00 ACDP R 269 340,00 MNF R 53 868,00 TOTAL R47 349 972,00 As far as the second source of already existing state funding (tax payers money is concerned, the calculation looks as follows: PUBLIC FUNDING ACT OF REPRESENTED POLITICAL PARTIES R53 000 000,00 Party Share of R53 000 000,00 ANC R 33 390 000,00 NP R 10 865 000,00 IFP R 5 697 500,00 FF R 1 192 500,00 DP R 972 500,00 PAC R 662 500,00 ACDP R 265 000,00 Total R53 000 000,00 The amount of R4 489-00 per member per month is suppose to be the amount that was previously called constituency allowance. With this amount, each representative is suppose to service the constituency they represent. It is however a well known fact that individual representatives of certain parties never see this money and it is actually used to finance operational costs of parties. The South African electorates bear witness to this – just question them on the interaction they have experienced over the past four years with individual members of Provincial and National Legislatures. The already “fat cats” see in the call of the UDM and other extra parliamentary parties, for the equal funding of political parties during the elections, the possibility of another gold layered bowl of cream from which they can drink. The point they are missing is that the creation of yet another state funded source is not what it is about. It is about the leveling of the playing fields for parties participating in the 1998 General Elections. If this issue is not going to be addressed the UDM will be forced to continue with its Constitutional Court Case to rectify the situation. The election might be declared free, but with this skewed state of affairs, it can never be called fair.
Admin
05 Aug, 1998
Tobacco Law: another example of the ANC’s inability to produce effective laws
Statement by UDM President The intervention by President Nelson Mandela in an attempt to save the South African Formula One Grand Prix and an estimated R400 million in foreign investment is a clear indication of the ANC producing ineffective and unworkable laws. How can the ANC government consider the effective implementation of this law if only days after cabinet passed it, then the President needs to intervene? The UDM supports the enforcement of smoke free public areas and no one can argue that everything possible must not be done to enforce the ban of sales to minors. That smoking is a health risk one does not argue with either. Nevertheless, just how ill considered Zuma’s Tobacco Law is, is illustrated by the forced intervention of President Mandela. Not only must the freedom of choice and the effect that this law will have on the employment provided by this industry be considered, but one also needs to question the process of arriving at the law and the research that went into this law. Did government for one moment consider the effect that this law will have on the sponsorship of numerous sporting events and the development of sport in general? Is the President going to intervene every time that such an event comes under threat as a result of this law, if not, why then this preferential action by President Mandela? Actions where the President and senior officials of the ANC enter secret discussions also make this law very vulnerable to corruption and manipulation by those in power. This type of action reminds one of the days when a minister instead of parliament ran government. The UDM calls for the suspension of this law until proper consultation with labour, the industry and those benefiting from sponsorships have been conducted. It is ironic that in a country where abortion is legalized, the death penalty scrapped that government in the case of smoking sees itself as the moral guardian of society.
Admin
03 Aug, 1998
UDM makes submission to Portfolio Committee on Party Funding
Statement by UDM President The UDM made a further written submission to the Portfolio Committee on Home Affairs regarding the Electoral Bill. In its first submission, the UDM commented on the Electoral Bill and in its latest submission it concentrates on the burning issue of funding of political parties. Senior Council J.C. Heunis and Advocate A.M. Breitenbach prepared the UDM’s submission. (Submission to the Portfolio Committee is attached). The UDM, because of the “anti-defection” clause in the Constitution is not represented in National Assembly or any of the nine Provincial Legislatures. That disqualifies the UDM from receiving funding from The Public Funding of Represented Political Parties Act, 1997. This, despite market research that indicates the UDM to be the third largest political party together with the IFP in the country. Nine months after the launch of the UDM in September 1997, the UDM had more than 650 branches throughout the country and more than 50 000 paid up members. The UDM has received funding and recognition from a number of international foundations, including the New South Africa Foundation (Netherlands) which funds political parties represented in Parliament but extended funding to the UDM after assessing the significant political role played by the UDM in South African politics. The UDM also enjoys full recognition by all foreign missions to South Africa. It has held formal meetings with a wide range of Ambassadors, High Commissioners and foreign delegations and a number of foreign missions sent representatives to the UDM’s first national conference. It is clear that the UDM is not a marginal party. The UDM is playing an important and still growing role in the development of multi – party democracy in South Africa as well as in the realignment of politics. Continuing less than a year before elections to fund only representative parties would be inimical to free and fair elections and the anti-discrimination provisions in the Constitution. If Parliament fails to address this issue eloquently, the UDM will be compelled to launch urgent proceedings in the Constitutional Court.
Admin
17 Jul, 1998
Appointment of Super Attorney General
Statement by National Deputy-Secretary The UDM congratulates Bulelani Ngcuka with his appointment as national director of prosecutions. While The UDM believes that he does have the personal qualities for the position the UDM is however alarmed about the independence of the judicial system by what is yet another political appointment. An independent judicial system is a prerequisite for the embodiment of the South African constitution. The obligation of ensuring an independent office rests with Mr. Ngcuka. Watchdog organisations and political parties will have to strongly monitor the independence of the office of the national director of prosecutions. The UDM is alarmed about a marked trend in Mbeki’s appointments of essential positions and of centralising certain vital functions in his office. Mbeki’s management style through these appointments start to portray the image of a power hunger, wants to control everything, person. The growing trend to appoint politicians in key positions in society is setting the alarm bells off. It can not be healthy for democracy if so much power is vested in the office of one person and if essential positions in the country is filled by politicians.
Admin
17 Jul, 1998
Farm murders; appoint an independent judicial commission of inquiry
Statement by Deputy-President The continuous and systematic murders of farmers have passed a point that it can simply be brushed aside or explained away. Four times more farmers are murdered than the rest of the population. Government must take every possible action in order to ensure that an immediate end is brought to the senseless killings on farmers and the subsequent destabilization of the agricultural work force and industry. As in the case of Richmond, the UDM is calling for an Independent Judicial Commission of Inquiry into the farm killings. No progress seems to be made by the normal law enforcement agencies and the measures implemented by the ANC government are obviously unsuccessful. Communities are loosing trust in the government’s ability to protect them. The UDM previously called on government to make known the information they do have on the murder of farmers. Up to now they have failed to do so and there is a growing suspicion that the killings on farmers might be a well-calculated and executed strategy to remove farmers from their land. This very dangerous prospect needs to be fully investigated and answers need to be provided. Failing to do so will lead to further suspicion and the ANC government will have to take responsibility for this. I have arranged meetings with Police authorities during which our views and recommendations will be presented. Farmers are not only feeding the nation, but they are providing jobs to thousands of families. With every single killing taking place more and more farmers are loosing hope and are forced to leave their farms to safeguard their families. This more than often disrupt a total community, results in the loss of job opportunities and agricultural productivity dropping. The UDM would like to express its sympathy with the next of kin and the family of the latest victim Mr. André Breytenbach from the farm Ruigtevlei, Soekmekaar in the Northern Province. Mr. Breytenbach was murdered on his farm last night.
Admin
15 Jul, 1998
Richmond: Nkabinde’s house attacked
Statement by National Deputy-Secretary The house of Sifiso Nkabinde, National Secretary of the UDM and UDM KwaZulu-Natal Chairperson, was attacked last night. Nkabinde who was in the house at the time of the attack was not injured. At approximately 00:15 last night fire was opened on his house. Nkabinde fell to the floor and immediately telephoned the SAPS in Richmond. On the arrival of the patrol, Nkabinde switched on the light in his house, connected to his shop. Gunmen ran from the shop where they broke in and stole, amongst other things, cigarettes. The gunmen fled the scene. On investigating his property items lost by the attackers when they left the scene was found. Amongst these were a police pager and a pocketknife with a name on it. The spent cartridges found on the property were also police issued. Eyewitnesses saw the attackers arriving in a police Nyala of which the registration number is available. The Nyala returned to the scene to look for the attackers who fled and it was witnessed that they picked one of the attackers up in a kombi and fled with him. The UDM is disgusted with the incident and the obvious involvement of the newly deployed police in the area in the attack. Those police deployed by Mufamadi. The UDM can not but ask whether that is what President Mandela had in mind when he said that he would make use of his own means to put an end to the violence in Richmond? The UDM asked for talks, the UDM asked for an Independent Judicial Commission of Inquiry – all of it flatly refused by the ANC. The truth in the Richmond killing fields must come out and the ANC government can obviously not be trusted to bring that truth to the fore. We again repeat our call for an Independent Judicial Commission of Inquiry and ask political parties in Parliament to assist in bringing this Commission about so that the senseless loss of life in Richmond can end.
- 01
- 02
- 03
- 04
- 05
- 06
- 07
- 08
- 09
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- 31
- 32
- 33
- 34
- 35
- 36
- 37
- 38
- 39
- 40
- 41
- 42
- 43
- 44
- 45
- 46
- 47
- 48
- 49
- 50
- 51
- 52
- 53
- 54
- 55
- 56
- 57
- 58
- 59
- 60
- 61
- 62
- 63
- 64
- 65
- 66
- 67
- 68
- 69
- 70
- 71
- 72
- 73
- 74
- 75
- 76
- 77
- 78
- 79
- 80
- 81
- 82
- 83
- 84
- 85
- 86
- 87
- 88
- 89
- 90
- 91
- 92
- 93
- 94
- 95
- 96
- 97
- 98
- 99
- 100
- 101
- 102
- 103
- 104
- 105
- 106
- 107
- 108
- 109
- 110
- 111
- 112
- 113
- 114
- 115
- 116
- 117
- 118
- 119
- 120
- 121
- 122
- 123
- 124
- 125
- 126
- 127
- 128
- 129
- 130
- 131
- 132
- 133
- 134
