Mr Speaker, I do not think anyone in this House can seriously quibble with the importance of the state delivering new infrastructure. It sounds impressive when the President lumps a whole bunch of infrastructure projects into one 75-minute address. Minister Gigaba accuses the opposition of rehashing last year's speech, when truth be told, most of the projects announced by the President this year are rehashed projects that have been on the agenda for some time.
Nevertheless, credit must go to the government for moving the decision- making process along, better late than never, I guess. While building new infrastructure should be celebrated by all in the House, the question that I was left asking after the President's speech was: what about the existing infrastructure? It is convenient for the President to ignore existing infrastructure; everyone knows in politics you get points for building new things. There aren't too many points to be gained for maintaining old infrastructure. But, of course, when the old infrastructure fails, as it has in many parts of South Africa, that does become a problem. So, well done on the new infrastructure plans, Mr President, but on the big infrastructure balance sheet, you are still in the red.
Let's have a quick look at the SA Institution of Civil Engineering report card for 2011. A grade of D minus, with trajectory downwards, goes to the bulk infrastructure of the Department of Water - which is aging as a result of insufficient maintenance; an E for operation and maintenance of wastewater treatment plants in rural areas; a D minus for paved provincial roads, a D for local electricity distribution due to aging or overloaded infrastructure.
The thing about infrastructure, new and old, is that one really needs it all to be functioning at the same time. This is not happening in South Africa, Mr President. Failing infrastructure, particularly in rural areas, increases the costs of business and makes the lives of South Africans less safe. It is evident from the President's speech that state-owned enterprises are at the forefront of delivering new infrastructure. Transnet is Minister Gigaba's "valentine", I trust the Minister paid for the flowers with his own money. [Interjections.] Mr President, not mentioning the infrastructure that should be delivered and maintained by the three spheres of government, does not make the problem go away. The state-owned enterprise-driven infrastructure is regionally specific. There are thus economic winners, both companies and workers in certain areas. What about the rest of South Africa? The rest of South Africa relies on government, whatever sphere, to provide the basic infrastructure and basic service delivery so that we can all go about our lives.
My colleague, the hon Steenhuisen, told this House yesterday about just how poorly managed government can be, using Limpopo as an example. The Minister of Co-operative Governance suggests that there is a plan, but we have heard it all before. It is all platitudes. If you do not address cronyism and cadre deployment, you will not address the ails of local government. The greater irony is that the worker who gets a new job on a mine in the Waterberg, because that mine now has reliable rail route to the coast for export, drives home on a potholed road. She visits a local Limpopo clinic when she is sick, only to find it out of stock of medicine. Mr President, while I celebrate the new infrastructure push by state-owned enterprises, we need functionality across government.
The Minister of Science and Technology and stargazing says we need to stop being afraid of our potential for excellence. I agree. This is a country that tolerates far too much mediocrity. The Minister should start with promoting excellence in ANC-run municipalities. The ANC has a tradition of rational leaders, the Ministers' cries are a bit defensive I think. But I would argue: where is this leadership in ANC-run municipalities? Where is the coherence in the Cabinet? The little spat between the Minister of Defence and the Deputy Minister of Agriculture, Mr Mulder, shows that the Cabinet is about as united as an ANC branch in Limpopo. [Interjections.]
Another question that I was left pondering after the President's address was whether the push to mine had actually taken into account the ecological limits to growth. The Minister of Mineral Resources said nothing in her address that reassured me about this. The New Growth Path is an unrealistic plan when it comes to what is feasible. We are a nation of miners and, yes, we must pursue this among other economic pursuits. What about the water constraints and the carbon constraints?
The President and other speakers have made much of the need to fight corruption. Yesterday, the Minister of Justice said all the right things about the importance of the Constitution and a need for an independent judiciary. Are the Minister of Justice and the President singing off the same song sheet? This very week, coincidentally, the same week that the DA's case is being heard in the Supreme Court of Appeal regarding the NPA's decision not to prosecute the President, the President said that the powers of the Constitutional Court should be reviewed and, among other things, the executive is going to tell us which of the rulings of the court, in their opinion, are incorrect.
The President was quoted this week saying: "How can you say a judge is correct when judges have different views and a dissenting judgement is more logical?" But, Mr President, the Constitutional Court has a large bench so that it can reflect a variety of views. As my colleague the hon Smuts said this week:
A majority judgement gives us the wisdom of the majority of the judges and we are bound by it, however much all of us at times may prefer one or more of the minority judgements.
So, at the end of this debate, I am still not sure about you and Cabinet's commitment to the independence of the judiciary. In fact, I noticed you clapped in appreciation when the hon Mlangeni bemoaned the fact that opposition parties use the courts to rectify wrongs in your government. The Minister of Justice did nothing yesterday to dispel fears about Cabinet's decision to assess the impact of Constitutional Court rulings. What exactly do you plan to do with the results of this assessment, Mr President?
It must be said that the President and the Minister of Justice ignored the crisis in our justice system. We have an Acting National Director of Public Prosecutions because the President appointed someone who, for all intents and purposes, has been found by the SCA not to be fit and proper. The Acting Director hardly inspires confidence; she was involved in engaging the political prosecution of Gerrie Nel, her immediate superior, in an attempt to prevent the prosecution of Jackie Selebi.
Let me ask this to the hon Chikunga, who has so much to say about the DA: if government is so serious about tackling corruption, why emasculate the SIU, the most effective anticorruption agency this country has seen; when Willie Hofmeyr has just had his most successful year to date? To compound matters, a mess is made of replacing Hofmeyr. First it was Heath, then it was Jiba, now Makwetla. Clearly the Department of Justice is in complete disarray.
Hon Chikunga, you tell us the fight against crime is going well, and you have a lot to say about crime statistics, but one in ten women reports a rape. The conviction rate by detectives is under 10% and whatever you might have to say about the murder rate coming down, it is still 16 000 murdered a year. Hon Chikunga, your focus on hon Mazibuko suggests you and the ANC are scared because in 2019 thereabouts, all of you will be a former shadow of yourself and we on this side will be the government. [Applause.]
The President would like us to believe that, with promised new trains, roads and dams, he is a President firmly in control. The undercurrent of his address is that all is fine; everything is in hand. But the state of the nation speech was revealing, not because of what it said, but because of what it did not say. So thank you for the planes, trains and automobiles, Mr President, but what about the governance system in general? You have not reassured this House that you have that in hand. I thank you. [Applause.]