South Africa - A Stable Economy?

This is a post from ToxiNews website. http://toxinews.blogspot.com/2013/03/so-south-africa-is-stable-economy-built.html

So South Africa is a stable economy built on solid rock is it?

There is not a single example in the history of the world where a revolutionary communist terrorist movement had taken control of any country and made a success of it. One could call a terrorist a "freedom fighter", but once a terrorists, always a terrorist. Never in the past 100 years had the ANC ever had to work for their money, because standing with their cupped hands they've always been sponsored by a criminal liberal world. The ANC is nothing other than a bunch of spoiled beggars. Anyone who gives a country to a group of beggars with AK47s must expect the worst. Anyone who sympathises with the followers of terrorists is a fool to say the least. Only liberals are so feeble minded as to think it could work. Perhaps it has been working for the appeasing liberals who took their BEE money and fled, but the rest will suffer the consequences of the actions of the appeasing industry and liberals. 

Think about this:

99% of all taxes are paid by 3.3 million South Africans. 

"The government is wrong when it states that only 35% of the annual budget is spent on wages. The true figure is 88%,"

The question is; What percentage of taxes earned by SARS come from money paid from taxes. People working for the State are paid from tax money. Contractors working for the state are paid from tax money. 

All these huge infrastructure projects are paid for from tax money, so the taxes earned from those companies and their employees come from taxes anyway.

The pensions of retired Government employees come largely from taxes. The rest of the state pension fund earnings come from investments in state-funded projects.

The SA government employs more than a fifth (22.8% in 2011) of formal sector workers in South Africa and pays its employees an average 34% more than the private sector does. 

SA has more civil servants than the total number of people employed in mining and manufacturing combined.

The state salary bill was about R382-billion in 2011. People become millionaires by working for government.

In 2011 SA government salaries accounted for more than 12.8% of GDP and, when the salaries paid by state-owned enterprises are added, it increases to more than 14.3% of GDP.

The taxes they pay are paid from taxes paid to the government. So while 3.3 million people pay 99% of all taxes, what percentage of those taxes are paid from taxes?

More people in SA get an income from welfare than from employment.

Besides this the corrupt regime steal billions of Rand each year. Virtually all government projects are given to useless corrupt BEE (Black Elite Enrichment) companies that overcharge government to hell and back. Most of the work given to those companies never get done and are then re-allocated to other equally useless corrupt BEE companies that again overcharge government, which means we pay two to three times for the same, already overcharged, projects.

Add to the above the brain-drain over the past two decades, BEE and transformation that excludes whites from active participation in the economy, land-grabbing by the government giving huge productive farms to inexperienced, unqualified self-sustenance farmers.

Add to the above the fact that more and more farmers are selling off their farms, wanting to get out. Whites are no longer buying farms, but for the dumb liberal fools who believe in the miracle of the rainbow nation farce.

At an average of 18,000 murders each years since 1993 at least 342,000 have been murdered in the past 19 years, many of which were productive contributors to the economy, now lost.

By October 2011, South Africa's vehicle population was 10,156,186, according to the eNaTIS.

64,504 (176 per day) cars, worth more than R9-billion, were stolen and 10 627 vehicles were hijacked in 2011.

This means that of the 570,012 vehicles sold in 2011, at least 75131 occurred due to theft and hijackings.

The Taxi Recapitalisation Programme (TRP) was financed by the SA government with tax money. This added to the sales figures of new vehicles, further bluffing the public into believing that new vehicles sales figures keep rising year on year.

Tens of thousands of vehicles are scrapped each year due to world-record high number of road accidents and not being road worthy, further adding to vehicles sales. The Road Traffic Management Corporation announced that over 6000 unroadworthy public transport and freight vehicles were scrapped from service on South Africa’s roads in October 2011 alone.

Do not be fooled by flashy figures issued by industries such as the vehicle industry, because the sales do not reflect the true economic situation in the country. New vehicles sales would have been much, much less and in a negative downward spiral had it not been for theft, hijackings and vehicle accidents. Most of the new vehicles running around today are the result of state funded BEE projects and affirmative action government employees anyway.

Add to the above the serious wastage trend of this regime. School books dumped in rivers, food by the tons rotting at schools and other feeding programs, ministers going on vacation with chartered airplanes paid for with tax money, fuelled with tax money, the so-called state president being flown to the US to attend one stupid meeting escorted by two empty airplanes, Nkandla palace costing taxpayers more than a billion Rand and those contractors paying tax on income paid from tax money.

Add to the above all the companies owned by government employees paying tax on huge sums of money earned from projects allocated to them by the state, which were paid for with tax money.

It does not matter how we look at it, SA is on a self-destruction path that cannot be turned around and that cannot be undone.
Now add to the above the amount of money leaving the country thanks to migrant workers from the rest of Africa, illegal foreigners sending their earnings out of the country, huge companies withdrawing from SA with the help of liberals/industry created BEE. 

BEE was created by the liberals (PFP/DP/DA) as means to get their money and clear out. MacDonald's, De Beers, and too many others have withdrawn from SA. They supported the ANC and then convinced them to lend money to buy them out (BEE) so they could at least be paid very profitably to flee the country. It should be remembered that BEE stands for Black Economic Empowerment and not for Black Economic Development. The same cake has been sliced up into ever smaller pieces, without any form of economic development taking place. BEE, like land distribution, is nothing other than legalised sophisticated theft. Using tax money to buy farms for private citizens is nothing other than sophisticated theft. Stealing from tax payers to benefit a connected few to the detriment of all. Not only fuel price hikes threaten SA's food security, farms murder,s farm attacks, land distribution (land grabs), violent farm worker wage riots and even climate change threaten our food security.

Then we have the mining companies closing down mines, taking their money and leaving SA with the task of cleaning up the mess they left behind, such as acid mine water, destroyed rivers, etc.

In the fourth quarter of 2012 unemployment increased by 6.1 percent (257 000), the number of discouraged work-seekers decreased by 2.5 percent (58 000) and other (not economically active) increased by 1.4 percent (180 000), resulting in a net increase of 121 000 in the not economically active population.

In the meantime the Rand has hit R9,1220 against the US dollar and now remains floating around R9.00 to the dollar. Petrol has hit a record high, eTolls are being instituted, the communist National Health Insurance scam is being introduced to be paid for by the few non-government financed (independent / private) tax payers. 

The deficit on South Africa’s trade account reached a new record high of R24.5bn in January from a deficit of just R2.7bn in December.

Fuel prices are being increased to make up for the tax short-falls and SANRAL's debts.
The retail price of all grades of petrol would increase by 81 cents a litre from Wednesday.
Both diesel with 0.05 and 0.005% sulphur content would go up by 58.3c/litre wholesale.
The wholesale price of illuminating paraffin would go up by 57c/litre, and the Single Maximum National Retail Price (SMNRP) would rise by 76c/litre.
The maximum retail price of LP gas would go up by R1.18/kg.

South Africa’s small tax base is a major hindrance to the government’s growth objectives. 
More than 50% of personal tax revenue to come from individuals earning R500,000 or more, although they make up just 8.4% of taxpayers. Taxpayers with an taxable income of R150,000-R250,000 a year are projected to account for 13.2%

What applies to taxes also applies to Electricity and water as only a very tiny percentage of the SA population pay for the "right" to to those. It would not come as a surprise if only 3.3million people also pay 99% of the water and electricity bill in this country.

Eskom has an investment grade rating from Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s, mainly because of the R350bn financial guarantees provided by the state. TAX MONEY from the 3.3million taxpayers. The 140 largest consumers of electricity have to pay more. Mining companies used 14.5% of Eskom’s 2012 electricity sales of 224,785 gigawatt hours and heavy industry used 26%. BUT remember that they pay much less per unit than household consumers. "This comes at a time when the viability of half the platinum sector is being challenged and is unprofitable, and 37% of the gold sector is in a similar position," In the meantime strike actions are killing the chances of preventing the SA grid from collapsing.

Add to the above that gold is set for longest run of monthly falls in 16 years. South Africa's mining sector has been shrinking consistently and strikes are making it much worse. Most potential investors are now looking outside SA.

Now how is it that some people are still hopeful and positive about the future of this communist country? ENTITLEMENT is the biggest threat to South Africa and it is obvious that South Africa, as it currently functions, is unsustainable and must and shall collapse, sooner or later.

Sources:

'Civil service eats up 88% of budget'
http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/2012/11/29/civil-service-eats-up-88-of-budget

Government Wages Constitute 88% of Annual Budget
http://www.abndigital.com/page/multimedia/video/power-lunch/1474815-Government-Wages-Constitute-88-of-Annual-Budget

How many taxpayers are there really (2013)?
http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=360155&sn=Detail&pid=71619

SA government employs 1.3m people
http://www.southafrica.info/news/business/168599.htm

Gross wages of SA government employees higher than other sectors combined
http://toxinews.blogspot.com/2012/05/gross-wages-of-sa-government-employees.html

SA's sizeable and costly public sector
http://www.sowetanlive.co.za/news/2012/05/08/sa-s-sizeable-and-costly-public-sector

Theft Of 4×4′S And Other Vehicles Is About To Become Less Profitable
http://www.4x4-insurance.co.za/tag/motor-vehicle-theft/

SA's car crime numbers detailed
http://www.iol.co.za/motoring/industry-news/sa-s-car-crime-numbers-detailed-1.1387604#.UTE1S8VsPwI

Over 6000 dodgy vehicles scrapped
http://www.ciibroadcasting.com/2011/11/03/over-6000-dodgy-vehicles-scrapped/

SA Government Information - Transport
http://www.info.gov.za/aboutsa/transport.htm

Taxi Recapitalization
http://www.arrivealive.co.za/pages.aspx?nc=Taxi_Recap

SA News.gov.za
http://sanews.gcis.gov.za/south-africa/new-lead-detective-pistorius-case?page=181

South African vehicle sales strong in 2011
http://www.southafrica.info/news/business/1523766.htm

South Africa Unemployment Rate
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/south-africa/unemployment-rate

Trade deficit high, expected to worsen
http://www.bdlive.co.za/economy/2013/03/01/trade-deficit-high-expected-to-worsen

Much of tax burden falls on the wealthy
http://www.bdlive.co.za/economy/2013/03/01/much-of-tax-burden-falls-on-the-wealthy

Eskom’s reduced hike ‘bad news dressed as good’ - the increase would fuel inflation
http://www.bdlive.co.za/economy/2013/03/01/eskoms-reduced-hike-bad-news-dressed-as-good

Eskom reels as regulator grants half of tariff hike
http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/energy/2013/03/01/eskom-reels-as-regulator-grants-half-of-tariff-hike

Gold set for longest run of monthly falls in 16 years
http://newsletters.bdfm.co.za/servlet/link/191/6160/206035/219343

Opposition parties irate at Eskom’s BHP Billiton deal
http://www.bdlive.co.za/business/energy/2012/09/12/opposition-parties-irate-at-eskoms-bhp-billiton-deal

Rand fall no joy for Zim
http://www.herald.co.zw/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=65325:rand-fall-no-joy-for-zim&catid=41:business&Itemid=133#.UTG6hMVsPwI

Price hikes 'threaten' food security
http://www.fin24.com/Economy/Price-hikes-threaten-food-security-20130301

http://toxinews.blogspot.com/2013/03/so-south-africa-is-stable-economy-built.html

The End Of Non-Racialism?

ANC rhetoric consistently characterises whites as "the other"

In his recent address to the Cape Town Press Club Hlumelo Biko pointed to the increasing tendency within the ANC to "obectivise", to "other" and to "border" non-black communities - and particularly whites. He warned that this process was not good news for those who are being objectivised.

What did he mean?

A speech by Jeff Radebe last month in Parliament provides some pointers regarding the manner in which the Government is ramping up its rhetoric. In a relatively short address, he referred no fewer than seven times to the depredations of the past -

• to "apartheid colonialism";
• to "the struggle against colonialism and apartheid";
• to "the forces of colonialism and later of apartheid, on the one side, arrayed ...against the forces of freedom and democracy on the other side;"
•  to " ... the heroic stance by the United Nations when It declared apartheid a crime against humanity and a threat to world peace;"
• to "...the untold suffering, strife and racial hatred sowed by apartheid..."; and
• to "...the poverty trap and vicious cycle of inequality perpetrated by the legacy of apartheid and colonialism..."

Such references pepper most policy statements made by the ANC. Whatever their historic merit - or lack of merit - it would be surprising if they do not stir up some degree of racial animosity - or at the very least - reinforce perceptions of white moral inferiority and black entitlement. Inevitably they fuel demands for restitution - particularly of land - which most black South Africans firmly believe was stolen from their ancestors.


The message characterises whites as "the other" and places them beyond the border of "us" because they are presented as being either directly responsible for "apartheid colonialism" - or as being its present day heirs and beneficiaries. Whites are indelibly tarnished by the past - while blacks are identified with the forces of freedom and democracy. 

The "legacy of apartheid and colonialism" is routinely identified as the root cause of most of South Africa's problems - and particularly of the triple crisis of poverty, unemployment and inequality.

Increasing use is made of the term "apartheid colonialism" - implying that whites are transient alien interlopers. For example, the Green Paper on Land Reform proclaims that "all anti-colonial struggles are at the core about two things, repossession of lost land and restoring the centrality of indigenous culture" (i.e. placing blacks at the centre and "bordering" and "othering" minorities at the periphery).

The message continues that, in the second phase of national transition, the time has now arrived to take action against these vestiges of apartheid and colonialism.

All this raises questions about the degree to which non-racialism is still a core value of our new society, of our government and of the ruling alliance.

It is a question that was recently addressed by the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation in a study of racial perceptions in a number of ANC branches in Guateng. The findings revealed "a growing sense of isolation and fracture among non-African constituencies" which could have "profound implications for the party's (the ANC's) ‘identity' as a non-racial party."

Although participants in the survey noted that the ANC "theoretically supports the ideal of non-racialism" they felt that there were "significant problems with race relations within the ANC, at all levels" - particularly in branches with strong minority membership - such as Eldorado Park, Sandton and Lenasia. Among the problems were perceptions of racism and the sense that non-Africans were excluded from leadership positions.

The authors of the study go on to discuss the ANC doctrine that the institutional racism of "colonialism of a special type" can be overcome only through the "empowerment of blacks in general and Africans in particular". This will require "the radical restructuring of key aspects of the economy so as to destroy the material basis of the white racist power structure." 

This process - which lies at the core of the ANC's National Democratic Revolution - is described by Firoz Cachalia as "anti-racist-racism". 

According to Pallo Jordan

"The movement adopted as policy the conscious and deliberate re-racialisation of South Africa by undertaking a host of measures, among which are affirmative action, to ensure that the results of decades of systematic discrimination and denial of job opportunities are reversed. In other words, the purpose of affirmative action is to create circumstances in which affirmative action will no longer be necessary."

The ANC's updated 2012 Strategy and Tactics document states that "the need for such affirmative action will decline in the same measure as all centres of power and influence and other critical spheres of social endeavour become broadly representative of the country's demographics. In the process, all inequalities that may persist or arise need to be addressed."

The "re-racialisation" of South Africa is gathering pace. The government rigidly allocates posts in the public service according to demographics - down to the first decimal point - regardless of merit or objective circumstances. 

Coloured employees of the Department of Correctional Services in the Western Cape are informed that they will not be promoted - because they have exceeded their national racial quota of 8.8%. 

1 500 white members of the SAPS have been refused promotion to vacant officers posts because they have exceeded their 9% quota. 

Late last year Minister Rob Davies said that demographic representivity should also be applied to the private sector: "We need to make sure that in the country's economy, control, ownership and leadership are reflective of the demographics of the society in the same way the political space does. "

What we are experiencing is racial social engineering on a Verwoerdian scale, where once again, the course of South Africans' lives is being determined by their race and not by individual merit. Because it will take generations to achieve broad demographic representivity in all centres of power and influence minority communities can expect to be subjected to "anti-racist racism" for the indefinite future. 

For all intents and purposes South Africa is no longer a non-racial society.

The "re-racialistion" of South Africa is the antithesis of the constitutional values of human dignity, equality and on-racialism on which our new society has been based. 

It contravenes South Africa's international treaty obligations - and it will certainly destroy any hope of national unity. 

Without national unity we will have little chance of successfully implementing the National Development Plan or of addressing the many challenges that confront us - including the pressing need for a rational and workable transformation process.

Dave Steward is Executive Director of the FW de Klerk Foundation

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page71619?oid=362634&sn=Detail&pid=71616

Robbers pepper-spray sleeping baby

Durban - A Durban family were shocked when robbers pepper-sprayed their sleeping 4-month-old baby after invading their home during an armed robbery.

Brenda and Allen Lockyear and their two children had only recently returned to South Africa after living overseas for 11 years, reported the Daily News.

They were staying with Lockyear’s parents, Pam and Des  Naudé while their home was being renovated.

On Saturday night, while Allen Lockyear was away in the UK on business, robbers entered the home, pepper-spraying the aged family dog until it passed out.

One of the robbers walked up to Brenda Lockyear and pepper-sprayed the baby, who was asleep in his mother’s arms.

The men also pointed a gun at the couple’s other 3-year-old daughter.

“The baby was screaming with pain and he could not breathe. By this time two more suspects appeared. One of them cocked the gun and placed it to my husband’s head. He too was repeatedly pepper-sprayed,” said Pam Naudé, the mother of Allen Lockyear.

“They had no right to harm him [the baby]. That makes me very angry. Crime is out of control. It is getting worse and worse every day. My son [Allen] came back because this is home,” Naudé said.

“These guys were professionals. They seemed to know the layout of the house and where all the dogs were kept. They ransacked the entire house.”

Goods worth more than R350 000 were stolen and packed into Naudé’s car with the personalised licence plate, Gogo1 ZN.

Both children needed medical treatment.

Naudé said her son returned to South Africa the next day and said he would give his home country one more chance but should there be another incident, he will leave as soon as possible. 

- News24http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/Robbers-pepper-spray-sleeping-baby-20130307

S.A.'s Reputation

Is The World Laughing At Us?

http://www.zapiro.com/cartoon/1486200-130221mg#.UScNHR2rT5M

10 Things We’d Like To Hear Zuma Say

City Press political reporter Carien du Plessis imagines what South Africans might like to hear from President Jacob Zuma when he delivers his state of the nation address tomorrow evening.

1. My immense love for the nation means I choose to spend Valentine’s Day with you, the citizens.

2. We’re a bit slow on those infrastructure projects but with some luck we’ll get it right this year, and we’ll try our best not to give contracts to our buddies.

3. We believe in the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers, and to prove it we’ll hand over those spy tapes (the ones that got me off those corruption charges in 2009) as the court ordered and we’ll take Parliament seriously.

4. The police will be demilitarised and become a “service” again, rather than a “force”, and trained accordingly so that we avoid more Marikanas or Andries Tatanes.

5. Ministers and the Presidency have agreed to tighten their belts, travel more humbly and get by with cheaper security measures. We will give the money to feed hungry school children and students instead.

6. We’ll be awarding big state tenders with no more kickbacks and use the money we save to fund the toll roads so that citizens don’t need to be burdened with yet another tax.

7. We’ll call a youth wage subsidy a youth wage subsidy, implement it in a way that doesn’t encourage companies to sack oldies, and support young people to get a foot in the door.

8. Government departments will can their consultants and use the money to train people to do the job
in-house instead.

9. We want teachers to be in school, in class, on time, and teaching for at least seven hours a day – and this time we won’t let politics get in the way of a proper education system. We’ll support teachers with proper infrastructure and textbooks delivered on time.

10. “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times . . . ” Or really, Mr President, it doesn’t have to be Charles Dickens, as quoted by Thabo Mbeki in 2008. Any inspirational piece of poetry or song will do. Come on, Msholozi, get a little more lyrical about our future. It’s Valentine’s Day after all.

http://www.citypress.co.za/politics/10-things-wed-like-to-hear-zuma-say

10 Things Zuma Didn’t Say

A list of the things President Jacob Zuma did not say in his state of the nation address.

1. Let me tell you exactly what happened with Nkandla.

2. I apologise for not firing Angie, but we all know why I needed her on my team *wink*.

3. Yes, I will take another wife and yes, you will pay for her upkeep.

4. Do the allegations about Mac and the Swiss millions bother me? No. Who didn’t have to beg, borrow or steal at some point?

5. Want to know a secret? The Guptas don’t serve the most delicious food I’ve ever eaten. Helen goes there for the food. I just go there for the money.

6. I chose for Sona to happen today so that I didn’t have to choose which wife to spend Valentine’s Day with.

7. I actually have no clue what Facebook is – Dudu put that part into my speech.

8. Can you believe this thing about Oscar!

9. It was the best of times, it was the worst of times … (Charles Dickens)

10. We will be introducing a youth wage subsidy. Yes, Cosatu. A youth wage subsidy. The full monty.

http://www.citypress.co.za/politics/sona-10-things-zuma-didnt-say/

ANC to steal more taxes

By Mike Smith
15th of February 2013

In President Zuma’s “State of the Nation” speech yesterday, he also announced a “Tax Review”.Zuma announces Tax review

He said that the finance ministry will review its tax regime this year, including looking at mining royalties, to ensure the government is raising sufficient revenue from the economy.

He also said that they want to ensure that they “have an appropriate revenue base to support public spending,"

“Public spending” ???, like paying for Zuma’s Nkandla Palace???

I see the mines were elated that they will be taxed more. Mines keep JSE on back foot

Nevertheless, as you know, I believe taxes are unconstitutional.

There is not a single section of government that cannot fund itself.

Further the state owned property, money and assets can be put into a trust fund and they can fund the government like that.

Everything else should be privatized, Eskom, Telcom, Railways, etc. There is no reason why parastatals should exist.

Taxation is a form of extortion. It is immoral when the mafia does it and you won’t stand for it. Why does it suddenly become moral when the government does it? Why do you accept it?

When the government forces you, by threats of imprisonment, to give up your money, the fruits of your labour, then they are threatening to take away your constitutional right (Sec 21) Freedom of movement and residence.

In prison you won’t be free to move where you want. And if you have less money, you cannot go on holiday or live where you like or can afford, because you have to give up half of your money to a thieving, corrupt terrorist regime.

The same with your right to property as in Sec 25. The government does not have the first right to your money. When every man's labour is the property of the state, and he is allowed to keep only what the state feels appropriate, we call it Communism which leads to poverty and death.

The threat of imprisonment by the government if you refuse to pay taxes is against your constitutional right Sec 12, which deals with your individual freedom and right to security.

Section 13 of the Bill of Rights says that “No one may be subjected to slavery, servitude or forced labour.” 

Yet the government forces you to work five to six months of the year just for THEM.

Section 14 of the Bill of rights says: “Everyone has the right to privacy”…and…Section 16 says “Everyone has the right to receive or impart information or ideas…”

Yet the government forces you every year to declare on a tax form how much money you earn, how you earned it, where you live, what your expenses are, etc…What happened to your constitutional right to privacy or your freedom to declare it or not? It got raped by the government.

By forcing you to pay tax, the government directly hampers the rights of your children as stipulated under section 28 which includes, your children’s well-being, education, physical or mental health or spiritual, moral or social development.

…And so I can go on…

Taxes are against every constitutional right that we have. Taxes are immoral and unconstitutional. Full Stop.

http://mikesmithspoliticalcommentary.blogspot.de/2013/02/anc-to-steal-more-taxes.html

The Key Dilemma Facing The DA

Tony Leon

23 January 2013

Former party leader says challenge is to grow into new markets while retaining faith with core values and old voters

Remarks of Tony Leon to the Democratic Alliance Sandton, Crowne Plaza Hotel, Rosebank, Johannesburg, January 23 2013

"Opposition Then and Now"

I have not sought specifically in interviews, writings or speeches since my return to this country last October to assess the general prospects and future of opposition in this country, and specifically the role and outlook for the Democratic Alliance (DA), which party I led for seven of its twelve year existence.

However, since this is the first DA platform I am speaking on since arriving back from Argentina last year, it seems appropriate to offer some observations and even pre-empt some of the questions which will arise in a forum such as the one you have convened for me to address this evening.

The other day that enfant terrible of our politics, Julius Malema bewailed his current isolation in the political wilderness, noting that ‘his friends had deserted him in droves.' I was tempted to suggest that he remember the wise words of President Harry Truman, "If you want a friend in politics, get a dog." But then fairly recently our President apparently suggested that dog-loving is UnAfrican, so perhaps that is not such a good idea.

I am always wary when people use ‘culture' as either a club or a shield- whether to justify rent-seeking riches or to denigrate minorities - since part of the founding settlement of our democracy was specifically to champion and celebrate and protect multi-culturalism and the individual choice to adopt as many cultural identities and practices as consistent with the injunction of ‘do no harm to others.'

On the subject of friendship, I am pleased to recognize old political comrades here this evening and to have retained many old associations in this Party, and perhaps more significantly to note how many more people and new leaders have emerged in it since I left active party politics on stepping down from Parliament in 2009.

Someone defined ‘'leadership success" as the "success of the leader's successors". On that definition, and looking at the current track record and trajectory, I suppose that my many years leading this party and its predecessor could be termed "successful."

I am also mindful of Queen Elizabeth's injunction that "distance lends enchantment." Four years outside the clashing conflicts of party and parliamentary combat and three years away from South Africa does lend both physical distance and subjective perspective which can be refreshing and clarifying.

With this as background, allow me to make the following brief observations of the political and opposition terrain I had to navigate during my time at the helm and the opportunities and dilemmas I think you confront tonight and in the years ahead:

Opposition then:

On Saturday week, 2 February, we will note the twenty third anniversary of the famous speech of FW De Klerk in Parliament, which was in political terms of such thermo-nuclear intensity, that we are still living with its after effects today.

One of the lesser consequences of that event was that it blind-sided the liberal opposition Democratic Party, among whose new members of parliament I was at the time, the freshly elected MP for Houghton. In essence, the conservative president of the country and leader of its National Party, in one swoop, appropriated most of the platform and manifesto of our party.

Although the DP during the negotiations' process inaugurated by that speech played a significant, at times, disproportionate role, in truth when the ANC and the NP commenced negotiations, we had a bad seat at the table and a difficult set of cards to play.

This positioning was well summed up by the then ANC chief constitutional negotiator, Cyril Ramaphosa, who defined the "sufficient consensus" - which Codesa required to reach its decisions - with breathtaking candour: "Sufficient consensus means that when the ANC and NP have agreed to something, the rest of the parties can get stuffed."

Outside the negotiations' process the DP had a torrid time of it. The party couldn't decide whether it should accommodate itself in the slipstream of the ANC (as some of its defecting members decided to do); seek common cause with, and the protection of, the NP (as most of its voters decided to do in the 1994 election); or soldier on alone.

The majority of the party and its leadership decided to hew an independent liberal course, more out of duty to its principles than out of any expectation of electoral reward. In the event, the results of the election -a triumph for the country and a disaster for the party - were pretty well pre-ordained before the first ballot was cast on 27 April 1994.

Although I was not the party leader at the time, I was pretty much its chief campaigner around the country. And when we could get a hearing at all (most of our meetings in townships and on university campuses were either broken up by ANC rowdies or ignored, although we had more success in the suburbs), few voters believed in the message that, in an election based on proportional representation, the quality of the parliamentary representative and the purity of the party cause trumped considerations of size and history.

In the aftermath of being sent to the new national assembly and constituent assembly with just 7 (out of 400) MPs, a major rethink was required. It was clear that if the party continued along the road it had trod for the previous thirty five years of existence it was headed for the scree slope of oblivion.

I was elected leader of this unhappy and uncertain band. I subsequently wrote that being leader back then was like being given a poisoned chalice. I ruefully noted (in a borrowed phrase) that "at times it tasted like something rustled up by Lucrezia Borgia on one of her more vengeful days." But the one advantage of having few expectations to meet (in truth, most of the media, many of our historic backers and the majority of our  traditional -read English speaking, white and suburban -  voters had written us off) is that you can define your own agenda and determine your tactics after fashioning a strategy without the burden of expectation.

The downside is, of course, relevance: projecting yourself onto a political radar already crowded by the height and glory of the presidency of Nelson Mandela and the weight of the National Party opposition (then consisting of 82 MPs in the National Assembly, more members incidentally than the DP has today) and its dual role alongside Mangosuthu Buthelezi's IFP of power sharing in central government, while each of those parties controlled one province as well, was a difficult task.

This seemed very unpromising terrain on which to rebuild a small party and make it fit for purpose for the newly democratic South Africa. However, amid obvious and objective weaknesses, we had certain strengths which we maximized with vigour and determination: since 94% of parliamentarians were in parties serving in the government of national unity, the opposition terrain was more or less open to us.

Thus our small band, of mostly experienced parliamentarians used the platform of parliament, and the crisis of legitimacy affecting the National Party, to broadcast our message of good governance and answerability, adherence to rule of law principles and the advancement of market-friendly, growth-promoting economics.

With a great deal of hard work and not without controversy (the attraction of some leading and defecting NP members and the "fight back" campaign among others) we were well positioned for the next election. It is also true, that notwithstanding some blind spots of his own, Nelson Mandela's personality and presidency encouraged and gave recognition to the opposition role played by the Democratic Party.

Shortly after our relatively stunning success in the 1999 election (we increased our voting share by over seven fold and added 31 new MPs to our team and went from being the seventh largest party to becoming the second largest and with it the title of "official opposition") we soon faced an important fork in the road. In the Western Cape, where the ANC had achieved the largest share of the vote, slightly ahead of the NP, we held the balance of power in that province, the only one where the NP, due its retention of Coloured support, beat us.

Notwithstanding our explicit pre-election commitment to forming opposition alliances to hold down the power of the ANC, I was placed under enormous pressure by some of our donors, many independent commentators, and most of the media (who in turn were under pressure from a victorious and very assertive ANC) to do a deal with the ANC and deliver the province to their control, with our party as junior governing partner.

Having two years before, resisted the tempting offer of Nelson Mandela to enter his government, I found the pressure significant, but the suggestion easy to rebut: we had promised the voters strong opposition and we could hardly deliver on this claim by essentially closing down, or significantly compromising, the independent opposition role the voters had entrusted us with.

Thus the deal was made with the NP. Under it, Helen Zille and others achieved provincial ministries and we found ourselves sharing power with a party we disliked, but with our strategic project intact (consolidating the highly fragmented opposition and establishing a governing bulwark against the increasingly hegemonic ANC, then rapidly consolidating its power over the rest of society).

We were able within a year of that coalition to formalize our arrangement - under our leadership and based on our core principles - by forming the Democratic Alliance. By December 2000, the party achieved over 23% of the vote in the national local government elections -a result which took a further eleven years to replicate in the 2011 local government elections.

Of course, what followed was a very rough ride and I will spare you the agonizing details of the immediate period which followed the formation of this party - a history of splits and schisms, bad faith and floor crossing. However, the party that stands today is the inheritor of those early and difficult decisions.

It was in the period of the NNP desertion to the ANC (2001-2004) that the DA faced its most fraught challenges. We were the largest opposition party, but the very space which opposition claimed for itself and which the constitution demarcated was under enormous challenge.

I dubbed this phase "the closing of the open society". Although we identified the "open and opportunity society" as the summary of our policy and positioning, in truth at the height of the Mbeki presidency there were few takers for this position in wider society.

The press, with a few honourable exceptions, had been suborned by the government agenda, and with the exception of the government policy on HIV-AIDS, few leaders and organisations in civil society wished to pick a fight with the ruling party.

Within the opposition itself, parties outside the DA such as the NNP, ID, IFP found it easier to accommodate themselves within the paradigm, if not the formal membership, of the governing ideology. We had a bigger reach than ever before, but getting our message across - and even the concept of robust opposition recognized -had a hard swim in such murky waters.

The winning of the Cape Town municipality and the installation of Helen Zille as its mayor (in the teeth of a virulent campaign against us by the ANC with a co-opted ID at its side), once again as a result of intricate coalition building, turned the tide.

But by then the tide was turning against President Mbeki himself - and the once unified and mighty ANC was starting to divide, a process which reached its culmination in Polokwane in 2007, when Jacob Zuma ousted him as party president.

The very disunity which had so characterized the opposition had now swept right past it into the chambers of the ruling party itself. The elemental forces which toppled Mbeki, like the proverbial genie which could never be put back in the bottle, also released into society and the media a renewed vitality and vigour.

The "trust in government and respect the president "approach, on the back of this event and the multiplying corruption and misgovernance scandals, was fast disappearing from the public space. Against this background, the DA, with refreshed and credible new leadership, performed admirably in the 2009 election and probably might have done even better were it not for the emergence of COPE from the factionalised ANC.

Opposition Today

I have summarized this immediate past history, not to take you on a retro-tour through the DA museum, but to point out that the concept and even he continuance of real opposition in the past twenty years of South African history was by no means a sure thing. There were challenges and obstacles strewn in our path (and doubtless we placed some there ourselves).

 And the success of the opposition project was the result, at strategic and difficult moments, of making some hard choices and explicit decisions.

Of course the platform you bestride tonight is bigger than the one I and my colleagues stood on. It is also true that, three presidents later and after nearly two decades in power, the ANC has shed  a great deal of the moral armour which Nelson Mandela clothed around his organization back in 1994.

And although the overall opposition strength today is slightly less than it was back then (when two provinces were outside ANC control), the opposition terrain today incontestably belongs to the DA and the wind seems set fair for a resounding electoral performance next year.  

Perhaps because I am no longer directly involved in the affairs of the DA, and with the benefit of some distance from the demands of party and leadership offices, I can signpost some of the challenges which you face today.

I do so in the certain knowledge that meeting these opportunities (and some of the risks implicit in them) which you confront will be quite as decisive for the future of the country as the ones which I had to deal with were determinative for the opposition. Here is my selection of some key areas:

The core constituency (minorities) of the party is diminishing. The last election revealed that the DA has unchallenged support among minority voters; the last census showed that this is a reducing bloc of supporters.

The key dilemma (and it is not new, incidentally, only more urgent) is how to grow the party in a new market (where the majority lives and votes) while retaining faith with core values and old voters.

The latter is less of an issue than the former, since the opposition space is overwhelmingly occupied by this party and there are no identifiable and credible challengers for it. And the argument that liberal ideas and policies are somehow a "whites' only" proposition is nonsense.

But in order to attract more votes from black South Africans the party has to close the distance between itself and the majority, something which has far more to do with tone, familiarity, identity and other intangibles and less to do with objective policy propositions. But there will be a temptation to soft-pedal certain propositions in order not to scare off new potential voters.

"Culture" incidentally is political quicksand. I remember how when the NNP leadership could find no other issue to divide the early and fragile DA, they always hoisted up the fig leaf of "cultural differences and insensitivity" to sow dissension and distrust.

If I were the current DA leadership, for example, I would not get into a bargain of "Africaness" et al. Make your point and move on.

This leads ineluctably to the second challenge: can the DA retain its traditional identity with core values -from market economic sensibility to non-racial preferment to mention two obvious ones - and attract new supporters?

In other words, as the number of supporters and voters increase is there an automatic blurring of vision and values? Can you have both or do you have to make a choice.

I would hazard a view that two things are profoundly important for this country's democratic health going forward:
The first is more competitive politics which means, simply, a larger opposition and a smaller governing party. The second, which is more complicated, is to provide not just another version of the ruling party, but a clear alternative. This entails putting forward a distinct vision, other and better policies, and offering something beyond just "the ANC minus corruption and with good delivery."

The DA cannot be just a patronage machine providing a "catch all" message, and scooping up every shade of disaffected government supporter-from alienated Marxists to losers in the government procurement stakes.

Obviously politics is crucially about numbers. But as the party grows and as some outsize personalities, some carrying a great deal of baggage around with them indeed, are attracted to its ranks, just be sure that the welcome mat is also marked with some clear red lines which new and old recruits only cross at their peril.

I am sure that in facing and responding to these challenges, and the many others which will face you on the road going forward, you will understand quite how important it is for our country, and the wider world which still holds faith in our cause, for the future mission of the opposition to be crowned with success.

http://www.politicsweb.co.za/politicsweb/view/politicsweb/en/page72308?oid=352724&sn=Marketingweb+detail&pid=74709

Zuma Address Gets Thumbs Down

CAPE TOWN - Opposition parties on Friday united to express disappointment at President Jacob Zuma's State of the Nation Address.

They said Zuma's speech on Thursday night cemented their view that he is not fit to run the country.
In an unprecedented move, eight opposition parties joined forces in 2012 to bring a motion of no-confidence in the president.

DA Parliamentary Leader Lindiwe Mazibuko said Zuma failed to provide an inspiring vision for the country and a realistic plan to get there.

“He had an opportunity to give us an indication of his plans to create more jobs for young South Africans, but instead he just paid lip service.”

Congress of the People (Cope) leader Mosioua Lekota said once the Constitutional Court rules on the matter, opposition parties will pursue a motion of no-confidence in Zuma.

He said the president can no longer be trusted to deal with the pressing concerns.

The eight political parties believe the extravagant spending on Zuma’s Nkandla home will make it difficult for South Africans to take his pledge on corruption seriously.

According to Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi, a government investigation revealed the state paid over R206 million for security upgrades to Zuma’s private residence.

It found “no evidence that public money was spent to build the private residence of the president or that any house belonging to the president was built with public money”.
Over R20m of this was allegedly spent on private security consultants.

Meanwhile, the Cape Chamber of Commerce described the address as "incredibly disappointing".

Cape Chamber President Fred Jacobs admitted while they were mostly displeased with Zuma's address....

http://ewn.co.za/2013/02/15/Zuma-address-gets-thumbs-down