Speaker 1: Joined the conversation conversation you with Cape Talk. It's tenminous
Speaker 1: to ten o'clock. Doctor Dell McKinley, political analyst, joins us.
Speaker 1: We're going to find out how the gn you is
Speaker 1: holding up over the next couple of minutes. Welcome to you,
Speaker 1: doctor McKinley.
Speaker 2: Great have you, Thanks Clarence, and thanks to your listeners.
Speaker 2: Always a pleasure.
Speaker 1: Let's just understand, is it a government of National Unity
Speaker 1: or is it a grand coalition?
Speaker 2: It's a coalition government. I think we've been playing with semantics.
Speaker 2: I mean the Government of National Unity tag was given
Speaker 2: by the A and C because it wanted to make
Speaker 2: it more than it was. But yeah, it's a coalition arrangement,
Speaker 2: and it's a very fractious coalition arrangement. So I think
Speaker 2: still as South African's as I said and others, we
Speaker 2: haven't quite gotten used to that terminology and we haven't
Speaker 2: quite gotten used to the politics it goes with such
Speaker 2: a coalition. So we tend to respond to every little hiccup,
Speaker 2: for every little bump in the road and thinking it's
Speaker 2: going to end, when in fact, in some ways that's
Speaker 2: a natural progression of this kind of coalition.
Speaker 1: Then our permutations are limits it then, are they not?
Speaker 1: It could either be a grand coalition or a minority coalition.
Speaker 2: Well, listen, I mean right now we have a grant
Speaker 2: it's majority. If you take the DA in the A
Speaker 2: and C they've got over seventy percent. Yes, So you've
Speaker 2: got other two other options that the ANC can take.
Speaker 2: And this is what they're obviously on the table at
Speaker 2: the moment in their NEC discussions. Is they could go
Speaker 2: with a sort of what sort of a transactional relationship
Speaker 2: you could call it, with the EFF, where essentially the
Speaker 2: EFF comes on board on particular kinds of things and
Speaker 2: helps them pass legislation, but it's not a formal coalition.
Speaker 2: They could enter into a minority coalition, which of course
Speaker 2: is just to run it and then try to get
Speaker 2: as many people on their side for particular pieces of legislation.
Speaker 2: Or they could call new elections, So we have three
Speaker 2: or four different scenarios, or obviously continue as the press
Speaker 2: and arrangement is.
Speaker 1: We've seen some pretty significant fractions. I have some really
Speaker 1: deep divisions, but we can also say we've seen some
Speaker 1: resilience in the that they've been togeven.
Speaker 2: Yeah, listen, I think and the reason. You can call
Speaker 2: it resilience, but I think it's practicality basically, if you
Speaker 2: look at the scenario besides all you know, if you
Speaker 2: take away all the noise and a lot of the
Speaker 2: posturing and sort of performances in Parliament, the basic bottom
Speaker 2: line is the ANC and the DA need each other
Speaker 2: and one without the other right now. The other options
Speaker 2: are probably worse than the ones they've got right now.
Speaker 2: And I think the dominant factions within each of the
Speaker 2: parties and there are differences obviously, I think they understand
Speaker 2: this and realize that. That's why when you have all this,
Speaker 2: you know, are we going to break it up? Is
Speaker 2: it going to last till next week? You'll see them
Speaker 2: stepping back and they'll come with some other kind of plan.
Speaker 2: How far that can go along given they have to
Speaker 2: hold off the other factions which want to break or
Speaker 2: who which want a different kind of outcome. That I
Speaker 2: think is where we pay more attention is to internal
Speaker 2: party politics.
Speaker 1: Yeah, so then we're dealing with vested interest then, and
Speaker 1: how are they going to play out in terms of
Speaker 1: relationships within this grand coalition? So we know the A
Speaker 1: ANDC wants to hold onto power. It's not going to
Speaker 1: give it up at all. It is also the biggest
Speaker 1: party within this coalition, the DA. The DA is smelling power,
Speaker 1: familiarizing itself with power. Do you think it's fortunes would
Speaker 1: be better realized outside of the Grand Coalition that inside.
Speaker 2: No, I don't on a tactical basis. You could argue
Speaker 2: in some ways, on a strategic longer term it might.
Speaker 2: But in the short term, when we have local government
Speaker 2: elections coming up next year, I don't think it would
Speaker 2: serve the DA very well. If they were to pull
Speaker 2: out right now, I think they would be seen as spoilers.
Speaker 2: I think many of those that sort of sit on
Speaker 2: the fence right now and would be thinking of possibly
Speaker 2: voting for the DA. Let's say in my home province
Speaker 2: Koteng and Joe, where Helen Zilla wants to become the mayor.
Speaker 2: You know, these kinds of things that would sort of
Speaker 2: royal the terrain a bit. And I think right now,
Speaker 2: if the DA can be seen as a responsible sort
Speaker 2: of you know, okay, yes, we're gritting our teeth. We
Speaker 2: don't like these kinds of things, but we're doing it
Speaker 2: in the interests of the country, so forth and so on,
Speaker 2: and be the responsible one and not be seen to
Speaker 2: be always just complaining and always sort of throwing their
Speaker 2: toys out of the cot when things don't go their way.
Speaker 2: Then I think that many other voters would then pay
Speaker 2: attention to what they're the other side of what they're
Speaker 2: saying they do, which is governance, which is delivery, which
Speaker 2: is the things that they want people to pay attention to.
Speaker 2: So I think tactically would make sense for the DA
Speaker 2: to remain.
Speaker 1: Others would argue that they perceive their fortunes, yeah, could
Speaker 1: be better realized out aside with unencumbent commentary on government.
Speaker 1: I'm inclined to believe that too. But let's go to
Speaker 1: the National dialogue seven hundred million National dialogue mooted by
Speaker 1: the ANC, objected to by the Democratic Alliance. Is this
Speaker 1: a make or break disagreement.
Speaker 2: No, not at all. The national dialogues or sort of
Speaker 2: side shows. I mean, we've had several national dialogues in
Speaker 2: the last twenty to thirty years. None of them have
Speaker 2: really produced much of anything. They produced very big reports
Speaker 2: and lots of big bills, but in terms of action,
Speaker 2: not a great deal. I mean, look, it is an
Speaker 2: important space for people to be heard and I don't
Speaker 2: think the DA's sort of absence is going to help
Speaker 2: them a great deal. I mean, what does it achieve
Speaker 2: really if you step outside the room on this one,
Speaker 2: Because the national dialogues are going to involve a range
Speaker 2: of different voices, so might as well you might be
Speaker 2: heard as well. But I don't think politically it's that central.
Speaker 2: I don't think it's a make or break thing. I
Speaker 2: think where the real issues are going to come is
Speaker 2: in departmental budget voting. So if you notice up coming
Speaker 2: up in the next few weeks, a lot of the
Speaker 2: budgets are going to be put forward in Parliament and
Speaker 2: the DA is basic he said, no, we're not going
Speaker 2: to vote for budgets where the ministers are compromised or
Speaker 2: under allegations of corruption. I think this could be a
Speaker 2: much more politically fractious kind of situation than the National Dialogue.
Speaker 1: A very compelling argument has been made that we don't
Speaker 1: need a national Dialogue, we need the what's it? The Plan?
Speaker 1: The Development Plan the NDP to be implemented because proactively
Speaker 1: it talks to solutions.
Speaker 2: Look, I think most people would say the National Dialogue
Speaker 2: is more of a top shop.
Speaker 1: It is.
Speaker 2: It doesn't mean that talking is a bad thing. It
Speaker 2: doesn't mean the dialogue is a bad thing. Sometimes it's
Speaker 2: good to have those spaces. I think the feist tag
Speaker 2: obviously makes us squeeze because of what's going on, But
Speaker 2: in the context of plans, yes, I think everybody would
Speaker 2: be in agreement that where we are lacking, not just
Speaker 2: in terms of past administrations, but this G and u
Speaker 2: is action is putting things on the ground. There have
Speaker 2: been some elements of a progress, you know, the electricity situation, others,
Speaker 2: but sliding back. And then I go back to the
Speaker 2: local government and we're coming up next year. Local governments
Speaker 2: where it's at. It's where people feel it the most
Speaker 2: in communities, at locals.
Speaker 1: But it's the party in the penned in twenty twelve.
Speaker 1: It is there, the plan for local government, the plan
Speaker 1: for parisdats, the plan for state owned enterprises, the plan
Speaker 1: for professionalizing the civil service. It's all there.
Speaker 2: Yeah, We've got about seven plans Clarence that we come
Speaker 2: back from about nineteen ninety and each one of them
Speaker 2: succeeded the other, and they've been I think the problem
Speaker 2: is is that the plans are so grand that that
Speaker 2: they oftentimes don't get implemented. We need very specific plans
Speaker 2: for very specific areas of work, and people put into
Speaker 2: capacity and teams made, task teams made. You saw what
Speaker 2: happened with SARS. Where SARS basically there was a concentrated
Speaker 2: focus on recapturing the capturers, so to speak, and putting
Speaker 2: things correct. It's getting there and they've done a fairly job,
Speaker 2: and that's what we need to replicate in the context
Speaker 2: of I think many of the other departments. Is a
Speaker 2: recapacitation or reprioritization, but done so much more focused as
Speaker 2: opposed to some grand plan where everything gets lost in
Speaker 2: the detail.
Speaker 1: We got to wrap it there. We appreciate your time,
Speaker 1: doctor Delle McKinley, political analyst, just getting an idea of
Speaker 1: where the GNU is headed up or rather holding up.
Speaker 1: It is two minutes from ten o'clock. He's coming your
Speaker 1: way at the top of the hour.