‘Parliament TV must have age restriction’
James Selfe on the circus that is South Africa’s National Assembly
This House has become an absolute circus of late. I believe that the parliamentary TV channel has now got more viewers than [SABC2 soap] 7de Laan. That is because we have become a comic opera; a sort of sordid reality programme that ought to have an age restriction.
I want to make it clear: we condemn in the strongest terms both the disruptive tactics of the EFF and the hapless response by the presiding officers. We are appalled at the violence in this chamber by both the EFF members and the protection service.
Violence begets violence and it is no surprise that, with what happens in this House as an example, students torch universities and “activists” torch schools.
story_article_left1
The protection service is no better, acting like modern-day stormtroopers. Images of woman MPs being kicked and manhandled horrified South Africa and the world.
This has made this parliament the laughing stock of the civilised world, and a source of deep shame to our country.
The antics in this chamber are, however, the consequence of mismanagement by the presiding officers and arrogance by the majority party. The ANC has rallied behind a president who was found by the highest court in South Africa to have violated his oath of office. He should immediately have resigned. That would have been the actions of an honourable man. However, President Jacob Zuma did not.
In the absence of this, the ANC had the opportunity either to recall the president, or to vote for the motion introduced by the leader of the opposition in terms of section 89 of the constitution. It did neither. That fatally undermined the credibility of this parliament, and leads directly to the contempt that many of us feel about Mr Zuma.
But that’s not all.
Increasingly bereft of ideas and inspiration, the ANC resorts to using its majority to ram through legislation and appointments of cadres. Gone are the days when this chamber and its committees were the forums for the open exchange of ideas and the honest debate of alternative solutions.
Now the currency of debate is the hurling of insults and the trading of innuendos, the most common of which is to call people “racist”.
And frankly, it is not only the EFF that started this dialogue. It started with the clowns in Castle Corner, over which the chief whip of the majority party has apparently little or no control.
And then there are the actions of the presiding officers, led by the speaker. It remains our view that being the national chairperson of the majority party is inherently incompatible with being speaker of this House. In that position, one simply cannot preside impartially. So increasingly, the speaker grovels to the president in particular, and the cabinet in general. What then happens is that the speaker rules as unparliamentary any robust criticism of the president, the cabinet or the governing party.
The deputy speaker is no better. He recently gave a gobsmacking ruling that it was unparliamentary to quote from a court judgment, because that might reflect on a member.
The result is that ordinary South Africans in their homes and in taverns can, and do, engage in far more robust debate and critique of politicians than we can in this House. That is perverse, and cannot be what the constitution intended.
That is why we, in the opposition, have reluctantly had to resort to the courts. We do not want to involve the courts in our affairs — but given the intransigence of the ruling party and its presiding officers (and, frankly, their misguided legal and procedural advisers), we have no choice.
And so we had the De Lille case: parliament 0, De Lille 1.
Then there was the Mazibuko case: parliament 0, Mazibuko 1.
Then there was the Ambrosini case: parliament 0, Ambrosini 1.
Then there was the “white shirts” case: parliament 0, DA 1.
Then there was the case about the comment on the Marikana massacre: parliament 0, EFF 1.
Unless and until there is free speech in this House, unless and until MPs are able to tell the harsh and unvarnished truth that many others don’t want to hear, parliament will continue to be dysfunctional and disgraceful. And may I commend to honorary members and the presiding officers what the Constitutional Court said in the DA vs ANC (the so-called SMS case): “Political life in South Africa has seldom been polite, orderly and restrained. It has always been loud, rowdy and fractious. That is not a bad thing. Within the boundaries the constitution sets, it is good for democracy, good for social life and good for individuals to permit as much open and vigorous discussion of public affairs as possible.”
That is what we need here.
That, more than anything else, will restore the image of the National Assembly.
- Selfe is chairman of the DA federal executive. This is a speech he delivered in parliament this week