Hon Speaker, it must be my complexion! [Laughter.] Hon President, Deputy President, hon members, as we conclude the debate on the Budget Vote of the Presidency, the question we should ask ourselves is whether the opposition responded effectively and constructively to the debate this time. Did they say anything that helps the Presidency in the discharge of its mandate? [Interjections.] Or did they use the debate, like many others before, as a platform for media sound bites and finger-pointing? [Interjections.] Did the issues raised mirror the concerns of ordinary South African citizens who still believe in the promise of this country, even when the opposition obviously does not?
If not, it would seem as though some among the opposition have become nothing more than those that sigh for the fleshpots of apartheid. If the level of debate in this Parliament has deteriorated, it is as a result of the opposition's desperation to score points on matters affecting ordinary South Africans, rather than to engage meaningfully on the true future of this country. Their eagerness to celebrate what they perceive as early failures speaks volumes about their bitter small-mindedness.
The opposition has become synonymous with doom. They did not need the year to assess the President's performance, because they had concluded before he took office that he would be a failure. In fact, they came to the same conclusion with regard to the other heads of state. They, too, are just a series of failures. They hoped, with little regard for the people whose lives have benefited as a result of our policies, that we would falter.
Instead of using this moment to play their part in building this country, they behave liked the old, - fabled character Chicken Little by hysterically yelling that the sky is falling down. [Laughter.] Today, hon members, I wish to assure the Chicken Littles of this House that the sky is not falling down. [Applause.] This debate offered this House and the nation at large an opportunity to engage the Presidency constructively, to better understand its vision, mission and programmes. Few democracies around the world have an opportunity to do this.
In fact, the formation of the ANC in 1912 was, to put it bluntly, an historical necessity. Borne of our people's determination to wage a concerted struggle for liberation, its formation ended the era of resistance against colonial incursion and ushered in a new epoch of fighting for liberation as one people. During the course of its evolution, the ANC grew to become a microcosm of our new society, for which the overwhelming majority of South Africans were fighting. It adopted the values of nonracialism, nonsexism and democracy, and steadfastly pursued these noble ideals even when its members and leaders were persecuted.
This is not the legacy of the ANC alone, but it belongs to the majority of our people. The very formation of the ANC was to negate the divisive legacy of 1910, which defined South Africa as a white man's country and democracy as a white man's democracy, to the spiteful exclusion of the majority of the population, merely on the basis of their race.
To continue to assume that the DA is liberal is fallacious. The DA is actually conservative. [Interjections.] Perhaps what is needed the most, amidst calls for lifestyle audits, is an ideology audit. The DA has proudly labelled itself a liberal organisation. [Interjections.] By definition, liberals are committed to liberty and equality. I ask: What liberty is granted to blacks and coloureds that remain economic outcasts and social captives of the most violent and desolate townships and slums of the Western Cape? What liberty is granted to the same communities who are purposely played like pawns against each other by the DA-led government? [Interjections.] And what equality is granted to the dispossessed Africans who are sidelined and undermined by the Western Cape dispensation? What sort of fairness and respect for human rights warrants the incidents of human beings being subjected to the humiliation of having to use toilets without walls? [Interjections.] [Applause.]
With liberals like these, who needs conservatives? Clearly, the DA is actually a lobby group for nostalgic, conservative interests. It is no more a liberal party than Cope is united. But do not just take my word for it. If you listen carefully, you will hear this condescending tone in their insensitive demeaning of African culture; in the falsehoods pedalled about the Presidency and, particularly, about the person of the President himself; and in all sorts of profanities they yell from the sidelines.
We have grown to expect this behaviour from people who use terms like "vampire state" to define our hard-earned democracy, because we know that they share commonality with the type of conservative American Republicanism which popularised this term with the intention of scaring the masses into supporting them. Since they cannot inspire the masses to vote for them, they conspire to scare or hoodwink them into it. One only needs to refer to the DA's "Stop Zuma" or "Fight Back" campaigns to prove the point.
Rather than focus on the potency and promise of their own policies, they focus on personalities and scare tactics. This means two things: firstly, that they are politically bankrupt; and, secondly, that they underestimate the intellect of the masses. I think they might have taken the term "opposition" too literally. If the ANC is for transformation, then they are opposed to it. If the ANC is for better labour rights, then they oppose that.
So, since the President has reaffirmed the hope and dream of Madiba's integrated rainbow nation, dare I ask if they oppose that too? I guess the answer is reflected clearly in the Western Cape. We are tired of hearing what you claim to be against. Can you, even for a brief moment, just tell us what you are for? [Interjections.] [Applause.]
Hon Trollip, we did expect you to bring newspaper headlines. You neither surprised nor disappointed us. As it may be disrespectful to claim that an hon member is lazy, it should then be your researchers who are lazy. The President has said explicitly that those who fail to deliver in the public service or in government will be penalised. That was the purpose of the performance agreement signed with the Ministers, but you cannot hear him because you have already prejudged him and are stubbornly unprepared to assess objectively his performance in this regard.
This government has been uncharacteristically candid in its assessment of its own performance, and has been prepared to be assessed as candidly, not just by the DA, but by the ordinary masses of our people. It was for this reason that the government decided to post its programme of action on the Internet and last year adopt a new monitoring and evaluation mechanism. Furthermore, the President signed performance agreements with the Ministers to hold them accountable.
Hon Mazibuko, national debate on moral values is not intended to shape public views, but it is intended to ensure that our people debate openly and freely the very things that are discussed on these sides. You both claim to advocate free and open debate, and yet take flight every time such platforms are provided. [Interjections.] To claim that moral decay originates from the ANC is both disingenuous and totally misses the point.
Apartheid colonialism, which you so loyally defend, is the actual root cause of the problems that our society sits with today. [Applause.] Premier Helen Zille may implement all the cosmetic changes she wishes to implement, including the ministerial handbook in the province, but the very value system the DA represents encourages rapacious greed, economic plunder, labour exploitation and racial humiliation. [Applause.]
The DA reminds one of the nineteenth century British imperialists who, when they came to South Africa, shredded all illusions about liberalism and, instead, adopted policies of racial prejudice and racial humiliation, particularly towards black people. This reminds one of a pamphlet written by Marx, The Eighteenth Brumaire of Louis Bonaparte, in which he says that all events of great historical significance happen, as it were, twice. The first time is a tragedy, the second time is a farce.
In the DA we have a farce, a pitiful incarnation of those imperialists of the 19th century. We fought against those. We will fight against these at this present-day moment. [Applause.]
Perhaps our history is the reason we have been targeted by Cope. Their history was not drafted at the roots of oppression but, rather, on the bloated bellies of a disgruntled bunch. Since they divorced themselves from our vision of the future, they must now, through action, rewrite their own history and purpose. But it seems they have come to notice that after divorce comes custody battles. [Laughter.] [Applause.] This is not a custody battle over the best means to serve the people, but, rather, a battle over who will wear the captain's hat.
Cope is not a party created on the foundation of principles and progressive ideologies. Instead, it is a party backed by disregard for the other side of the coin of democracy, which is respecting and accepting the decisions taken by a majority, even, and especially if, you disagree with them. If they were as introspective as they are critical of us, they would have realised long ago that the faults they accuse us of are, in fact, within themselves. And while they attempt to mend their internal quarrels, I offer this Shakespearean quote to them:
The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, But in us, that we are underlings.
And you are, indeed, underlings in policy and in leadership. The policy bankruptcy in this organisation is not only frightening, but confusing. It is difficult to know, when you are listening to its leaders, which one policy pronouncement you should take. But lack of direction is always expected from three-headed monsters. [Laughter.] This does not only relate to previous flip-flopping about black economic empowerment and affirmative action, but the organisation tries to be more progressive than the ANC and, at the same time, seeks to align itself with the DA.
The fact is that Cope cannot walk on both sides of the road and in different directions at the same time. They must take a stance. If they are truly for transformation, as their manifesto claims, why have they not been outspoken about the lack of transformation in the Western Cape? The blossoming of Cope and the DA's romance has come at the expense of poor people who were misled into supporting their manifesto. What our people know about Cope thus far, besides its policy fumbles and insistent leadership squabbles, is that Cope is as right-wing as the DA is. But, of course, small minds also think alike. They all wield pettiness and bitterness as a medium of engagement.
Hon Shilowa, it did not surprise us that Cope, as you said, will not support this Budget Vote. Were we honest, we would consider that this government took office in the midst of a deep and brutal recession. It is disingenuous to stand here and claim that close to a million jobs were lost under the President's watch. He took office when the job blood bath was already under way as a result of a global recession that was not created either by the President or the ANC. Actually, under the President's watch, half a million jobs were created under the Public Works Programme. Again, you allow your personal hatred of the President to cloud your good judgment and honest appraisal. [Applause.]
The hon Shilowa probably has the memory of a rat. As Premier of Gauteng, he also rode in luxury cars, stayed in five-star hotels and enjoyed the many perks of his office. Conveniently, he stands at this podium today and points fingers. What shameful dishonesty! [Interjections.] Maybe the hon member will take this House into his confidence about the R20 million that disappeared under his watch. [Applause.] [Interjections.]