Hon Speaker, I must say I never thought the day would come when I would agree with the International Monetary Fund, the IMF, or the World Bank, but the day has come. I was quite alarmed to hear that the hon Marais - and I have the greatest respect for him in the committee and so on - thought the Asian Tigers had made a great success of things as developmental states, and I don't know what else.
In fact, the IMF, the World Bank and the rest of them said that the reason why the Asian Tigers had the financial collapse was precisely because three critical things were lacking among many others. These three things were: a sound financial management system; good governance, which is entirely absent and dependent upon an elite bureaucracy which actually wrote their policies; and a democracy which had no relationship whatsoever with its civil society other than, of course, trampling them underfoot.
This is not me talking. Read the IMF reports of the time; read the World Bank; read any respected journal outside this country. [Applause.]
I want to tell you that right now you must read the papers, the press, the media. Listen. They are saying that the freedoms and rights the developed states removed from the people and gave to the markets have been seen as an error of judgment. And now in countries like Britain, America and the United States, they are busy desperately trying to reclaim these freedoms from an irresponsible market economy.
For once in my life I have agreed with the IMF - I don't know when it will be again, but I understand they are also undergoing a democratic change. But I do want to say one thing: there have been a number of valuable inputs. Even in the hon Marais' own input, one could say there were some gems here and there. [Laughter.] So, let us not throw everything out. I am sorry the hon Narend Singh is not here, because a lot of what he had to say one had to agree with. It's just a pity it became a little parochial in the end.
I want to end off by mentioning one thing. It is something, perhaps, that I didn't make very clear - and, of course, I should have realised this. It is that so much is seen as buzzwords, this, that and the next thing. Indeed, you are quite right. But, I don't think anyone in this House would say "RDP" is a buzzword. Maybe we should stop saying "RDP" and call it by its proper name. We all agree with the principles and concepts of the Freedom Charter.
I was looking into Gandhi when I looked into this. He said that politicians should be aware, from wherever they are sitting in this House, of their own integrity and ensure that it doesn't get destroyed in their own ideological fervour.
But to come back to this issue: those two words - RDP and our own Constitution - can hardly be called buzzwords. They are the basis of a developmental state. Thank you. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.