WEBVTT - The fallout from Whitfield’s dismissal

0:00:00.160 --> 0:00:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Focusing on our topic this morning, it's very important to

0:00:03.640 --> 0:00:06.200
<v Speaker 1>look at this and Flumento Club as a political analyst

0:00:06.240 --> 0:00:08.840
<v Speaker 1>and joins us on the last on the line Soum Club,

0:00:08.920 --> 0:00:12.200
<v Speaker 1>we look Tremelo. We are looking at the fallout from

0:00:12.200 --> 0:00:16.040
<v Speaker 1>Whitfield's dismissal. We've seen last week where all of us

0:00:16.040 --> 0:00:19.880
<v Speaker 1>are South Africans, appealing for the best was the best

0:00:20.120 --> 0:00:22.799
<v Speaker 1>interest of South Africans, So that's what we're appealing to,

0:00:22.960 --> 0:00:26.200
<v Speaker 1>the inviting itself. Who stands to lose the most out

0:00:26.239 --> 0:00:27.320
<v Speaker 1>of this love triangle?

0:00:27.360 --> 0:00:33.640
<v Speaker 2>Good morning, Good morning, and thanks for having me this morning. Well,

0:00:34.360 --> 0:00:37.519
<v Speaker 2>if you can currently look at this coalition sit up,

0:00:38.159 --> 0:00:41.040
<v Speaker 2>I'd say it's obvious the ANC is a leading figure

0:00:41.520 --> 0:00:44.600
<v Speaker 2>in that it's the largest party within the GNU. So

0:00:44.880 --> 0:00:47.519
<v Speaker 2>I think that between the ANC and the GA, the

0:00:47.600 --> 0:00:50.080
<v Speaker 2>GA obviously has a lot more to lose out. I mean,

0:00:50.680 --> 0:00:53.920
<v Speaker 2>we saw the fact the fact that they still are

0:00:54.040 --> 0:00:56.760
<v Speaker 2>reluctant to talk of the GNU every time they can,

0:00:56.960 --> 0:01:01.400
<v Speaker 2>always threatening but not ultimately walking out, shows that they're

0:01:01.400 --> 0:01:03.760
<v Speaker 2>the ones that have more to lose, because a party

0:01:03.800 --> 0:01:10.280
<v Speaker 2>that was actually not Belgium scared of losing out in anything,

0:01:10.560 --> 0:01:13.560
<v Speaker 2>would have walked out of the Junior a long time ago,

0:01:13.840 --> 0:01:16.319
<v Speaker 2>considering the amount of times that they've always given an

0:01:16.360 --> 0:01:19.280
<v Speaker 2>automatum and always threatened to walk out. If you will

0:01:19.319 --> 0:01:22.840
<v Speaker 2>recall last year during the passing of the Faila Act,

0:01:23.200 --> 0:01:27.760
<v Speaker 2>they still gaze these thereat exhibited that these days that

0:01:27.840 --> 0:01:30.360
<v Speaker 2>they they did not like they did now even if

0:01:30.360 --> 0:01:34.039
<v Speaker 2>the Exppropriation Act. They always come out as if they

0:01:34.040 --> 0:01:38.600
<v Speaker 2>are going to do something that is that is unexpected,

0:01:38.640 --> 0:01:42.000
<v Speaker 2>meaning that they were going to do something that is

0:01:42.040 --> 0:01:45.840
<v Speaker 2>going to like rattle the entire coalition, but they end

0:01:45.959 --> 0:01:48.840
<v Speaker 2>up not doing anything. Even with the budget vote for instance,

0:01:48.880 --> 0:01:52.200
<v Speaker 2>the DA always threatens to do something, but they never

0:01:52.280 --> 0:01:54.920
<v Speaker 2>do it. So I would say that their bark is

0:01:54.960 --> 0:01:57.200
<v Speaker 2>worse than their bite if we've been honest about this,

0:01:57.280 --> 0:01:59.840
<v Speaker 2>because they've been doing automations and also they're not talking.

0:02:00.560 --> 0:02:02.560
<v Speaker 2>But they've always been taken to walk out to the

0:02:02.600 --> 0:02:05.880
<v Speaker 2>g and you think that instability, but they don't really

0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:11.520
<v Speaker 2>live up to such to those expectations or to those promises,

0:02:11.600 --> 0:02:14.919
<v Speaker 2>which shows a party that is in government and does

0:02:15.000 --> 0:02:17.520
<v Speaker 2>much want to leave. I think now they've actually helped

0:02:17.520 --> 0:02:19.960
<v Speaker 2>into the gravy train and have seen what it's lack

0:02:20.040 --> 0:02:22.239
<v Speaker 2>in government. Therefore vera that ting to walk out.

0:02:23.320 --> 0:02:25.880
<v Speaker 1>So we're going to miss that objective view we want

0:02:25.919 --> 0:02:28.920
<v Speaker 1>from in opposition party because this is not about the

0:02:29.000 --> 0:02:32.640
<v Speaker 1>DA or A and CE. Fundamentally, from a principal perspective,

0:02:32.639 --> 0:02:35.880
<v Speaker 1>we're looking for people to hold each other accountable, systems

0:02:35.880 --> 0:02:39.760
<v Speaker 1>and processes, where and checks and balances. That's the ideal situation.

0:02:40.360 --> 0:02:42.600
<v Speaker 1>But what we're caught up in, as you're mentioning now,

0:02:42.680 --> 0:02:45.760
<v Speaker 1>is a corruption of what those fundamentals are. What does

0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:48.639
<v Speaker 1>the ideal opposition party look like. There's been some good

0:02:48.680 --> 0:02:52.160
<v Speaker 1>work being done by the DA, as mentioned, and we've

0:02:52.200 --> 0:02:54.720
<v Speaker 1>read articles and that's what we want for South Africa.

0:02:54.800 --> 0:02:57.560
<v Speaker 1>What does the ideal opposition party look like? And let's

0:02:57.560 --> 0:02:59.840
<v Speaker 1>talk about those members of success that the DA has

0:02:59.880 --> 0:03:00.840
<v Speaker 1>been able to spark.

0:03:02.480 --> 0:03:05.000
<v Speaker 2>Look, I think one thing that you need to get

0:03:05.080 --> 0:03:07.440
<v Speaker 2>clear that the DA at this point in times no

0:03:07.600 --> 0:03:11.280
<v Speaker 2>opposition party. I think that they're just conflicted between being

0:03:11.320 --> 0:03:15.079
<v Speaker 2>a party in government and being an opposition because the

0:03:15.120 --> 0:03:17.720
<v Speaker 2>stands of the position that they always want to take

0:03:17.880 --> 0:03:20.800
<v Speaker 2>with as far as the AGENC is concerned, is acting

0:03:20.880 --> 0:03:22.840
<v Speaker 2>like a watchdog to the agency. Because if you can

0:03:22.840 --> 0:03:25.720
<v Speaker 2>look at the same multi party coalition, you'll find that

0:03:25.800 --> 0:03:28.040
<v Speaker 2>they're the ones that always have a problem, not even

0:03:28.080 --> 0:03:32.160
<v Speaker 2>Freedom Front Pluss actually always is opposing the what the

0:03:32.240 --> 0:03:35.160
<v Speaker 2>ANC does and all of that. Well, a couple of

0:03:35.200 --> 0:03:38.800
<v Speaker 2>times we have things for them Front Class trying to work.

0:03:38.840 --> 0:03:41.160
<v Speaker 2>They tail when it comes to the person of the

0:03:41.200 --> 0:03:45.000
<v Speaker 2>Badges as well as some past legislations that are passed

0:03:45.040 --> 0:03:47.680
<v Speaker 2>like the Better Act as well as Expefication Act. But

0:03:48.120 --> 0:03:50.480
<v Speaker 2>the DA and the A that are the ones that

0:03:50.600 --> 0:03:54.320
<v Speaker 2>seem to be have to be more problematic than the

0:03:54.360 --> 0:03:57.080
<v Speaker 2>other political parties, like I said, and I think the

0:03:57.160 --> 0:04:00.120
<v Speaker 2>stems from the fact that this multi party coalition and

0:04:00.280 --> 0:04:04.760
<v Speaker 2>is made up of organizations that have totally different world views,

0:04:05.040 --> 0:04:08.920
<v Speaker 2>that are totally different ideological backgrounds. So I think in

0:04:08.960 --> 0:04:12.760
<v Speaker 2>such cases we didn't begin to see those fragmentations that

0:04:13.120 --> 0:04:15.880
<v Speaker 2>are consecuting this G and you. But then in as

0:04:15.960 --> 0:04:18.280
<v Speaker 2>far as the TEA is concerned, like I mentioned, I

0:04:18.279 --> 0:04:20.480
<v Speaker 2>think they are conflicted as to whether or not they

0:04:20.520 --> 0:04:24.000
<v Speaker 2>should be in opposition party or a party in government,

0:04:24.000 --> 0:04:26.480
<v Speaker 2>because when you're in government, you cannot want to act

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:31.200
<v Speaker 2>as an opposition. Yes, behind close doors, you are obliged

0:04:31.240 --> 0:04:34.400
<v Speaker 2>to actually hold those that you are in power with accountable.

0:04:34.440 --> 0:04:37.039
<v Speaker 2>You are applies to have these debates, but they should

0:04:37.080 --> 0:04:39.720
<v Speaker 2>not now transcend to the public eye where we not

0:04:39.839 --> 0:04:43.039
<v Speaker 2>begin to see these fragmentations because it gives us as

0:04:43.160 --> 0:04:46.600
<v Speaker 2>citizens and impression that you guys are not united firstly,

0:04:47.000 --> 0:04:50.960
<v Speaker 2>and that there's no direction in this coalition partnership, because

0:04:50.960 --> 0:04:54.560
<v Speaker 2>the coalition is about being in a partnership and actually

0:04:54.680 --> 0:04:58.440
<v Speaker 2>being in agreement with whatever it is that we are

0:04:58.520 --> 0:05:01.279
<v Speaker 2>that is on the table. Yes, sometimes may disagree, but

0:05:01.760 --> 0:05:05.000
<v Speaker 2>within a partnership, you cannot publicly disagree with the people

0:05:05.040 --> 0:05:06.960
<v Speaker 2>that you are in power with. So that's what we've

0:05:07.000 --> 0:05:09.280
<v Speaker 2>been seeing with the A ANDC in the DA in particular.

0:05:09.320 --> 0:05:11.359
<v Speaker 2>But like I said, I think the DA is just

0:05:11.520 --> 0:05:14.520
<v Speaker 2>conflicted between being an opposition party or being a party

0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:17.440
<v Speaker 2>in government, which is something that I think is a

0:05:17.480 --> 0:05:21.360
<v Speaker 2>bit i'd say for a term dangerous in a way,

0:05:21.440 --> 0:05:24.119
<v Speaker 2>because if you're in government, like I said, you ought

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:26.599
<v Speaker 2>to agree with those that you are in partnership with,

0:05:26.920 --> 0:05:31.320
<v Speaker 2>particularly in a coalition. So THEDA is really conflicted and

0:05:31.400 --> 0:05:34.640
<v Speaker 2>so far as at this point in time, because they

0:05:34.680 --> 0:05:36.680
<v Speaker 2>really just want to act like a watch watchdog to

0:05:36.760 --> 0:05:40.120
<v Speaker 2>the A and C instead of working together with them.

0:05:40.160 --> 0:05:42.600
<v Speaker 1>What does that look like? Because there's one aspect I

0:05:42.640 --> 0:05:45.520
<v Speaker 1>think watch dog and checks and balances are important. Let's

0:05:45.560 --> 0:05:49.080
<v Speaker 1>take a step back here. What impression does it give

0:05:49.200 --> 0:05:52.160
<v Speaker 1>politically and is there a viable I hear you talk

0:05:52.200 --> 0:05:56.600
<v Speaker 1>about opposition parties and government in power. How do we

0:05:56.680 --> 0:05:59.719
<v Speaker 1>find a balance then as to be represented as South Africans,

0:05:59.720 --> 0:06:02.960
<v Speaker 1>that's what you're looking for. We want public officials who

0:06:03.000 --> 0:06:05.800
<v Speaker 1>are going to do a good job with integrity in

0:06:06.080 --> 0:06:09.040
<v Speaker 1>the right parameters. But what does it look like because

0:06:09.160 --> 0:06:11.599
<v Speaker 1>surely there is disagreement, there should be a way to

0:06:11.640 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 1>handle it, and we want a viable opposition party.

0:06:17.680 --> 0:06:21.880
<v Speaker 2>Well, like I mentioned that the parties that are currently

0:06:21.920 --> 0:06:26.080
<v Speaker 2>in the g and you now are very different in

0:06:26.200 --> 0:06:29.680
<v Speaker 2>so far as the ideological orientation is concerned, meaning that

0:06:30.160 --> 0:06:33.400
<v Speaker 2>there ought to be inevitable that there won't be any disagreements.

0:06:33.680 --> 0:06:37.240
<v Speaker 2>But in so far as the coalition is concerned, they

0:06:37.320 --> 0:06:39.760
<v Speaker 2>need to be issues of common interest that you agree

0:06:39.800 --> 0:06:43.040
<v Speaker 2>on that you will be able to actually try that

0:06:43.160 --> 0:06:44.880
<v Speaker 2>you'll be able to actually drow up in the Chaine

0:06:45.000 --> 0:06:49.360
<v Speaker 2>and drive those issues together. But with the current coalitionship

0:06:49.400 --> 0:06:52.039
<v Speaker 2>that because Africa at national level we don't see that.

0:06:52.160 --> 0:06:55.280
<v Speaker 2>And I actually alluded to this platform sometimes last week

0:06:55.520 --> 0:06:58.680
<v Speaker 2>where I mentioned the fact that the statement of intent

0:06:59.120 --> 0:07:01.440
<v Speaker 2>which was const which was drafted last year in the

0:07:01.800 --> 0:07:05.039
<v Speaker 2>of the in the week of the agency, in the

0:07:05.040 --> 0:07:07.520
<v Speaker 2>work of the g and you've been constituted, is not

0:07:07.680 --> 0:07:09.480
<v Speaker 2>something that is very so such.

0:07:09.320 --> 0:07:12.040
<v Speaker 1>A quick one as a parting sort in thirty seconds

0:07:12.080 --> 0:07:14.200
<v Speaker 1>from what I'm hearing from you, are you saying that

0:07:14.360 --> 0:07:17.480
<v Speaker 1>the GNU is it viable? Is it a viable proposition,

0:07:17.520 --> 0:07:18.560
<v Speaker 1>then that can work?

0:07:18.720 --> 0:07:20.880
<v Speaker 2>So that's not what I'm saying. I was just saying

0:07:20.960 --> 0:07:25.440
<v Speaker 2>that currently there's no framework that is that is very

0:07:25.480 --> 0:07:28.120
<v Speaker 2>concrete in so far as ensuring that there'sn't a chain

0:07:28.200 --> 0:07:31.080
<v Speaker 2>that that can actually assist because in a coalition, like

0:07:31.120 --> 0:07:33.520
<v Speaker 2>I mentioned, they need to be issues of common interest

0:07:33.600 --> 0:07:35.080
<v Speaker 2>that you agree on, like they need to be a

0:07:35.120 --> 0:07:38.720
<v Speaker 2>framework of certain objectives that you all agree on. And

0:07:38.760 --> 0:07:41.160
<v Speaker 2>thinks that you're you need.

0:07:41.040 --> 0:07:43.920
<v Speaker 1>Those common objectives to work together. Thank you so much

0:07:43.960 --> 0:07:49.960
<v Speaker 1>to political analyst talking about the fallout from Whitfield's dismissal,

0:07:50.320 --> 0:07:54.680
<v Speaker 1>and that's Andrew Whitfield and being dismissal of andreid Field

0:07:54.680 --> 0:07:57.480
<v Speaker 1>by President Romain Passa, which is ignited a fierce backlash

0:07:57.480 --> 0:07:58.800
<v Speaker 1>from the Democratic Alliance