To Raymond Tlaedi, ACDP

Dulton Adorns, ACDP Dennis Bloem, COPE Alco Ngobese, IFP Corne Mulder, VF Plus Wouter Wessels, VF Plus Pieter de Knecker, VF Plus

Helen Zille, DA

Thomas Wolters, DA

Cc  Herman Mashaba, ActionSA President

Subject: Filling of the Position of City of Johannesburg Speaker

Date  25 September 2022

Dear Colleagues

1 The meeting of 19 September 2022, and the subsequent letter from the Democratic Alliance doted 25 September 2022, have reference.

2.   It is disappointing to note the approach to the issue of Filling the vacant City of Johannesburg Speaker position. This approach rather selectively focusses on the previously agreed power sharing arrangement as if such an arrangement is beyond re-negotiation. It would have been more mature for the approach to the question to be whether there is a sufficiently positive benefit to the coalition, and consequently the residents of Johannesburg, to warrant the renegotiating the position of Speaker.

3.   I characterise the DA's approach as selective because it is a departure from the rather more casual approach the DA has adopted towards the establishment of the Deputy Mayor position as prescribed in the signed coalition agreements in all three metros in Gauteng. Perhaps an example, closer to home, is that the coalition agreement that the DA wishes to argue the non-negotiable nature thereof, has the IFP listed as the MPAC Chairperson — a position that was never honoured by the coalition. One cannot demonstrate both a fervent adherence to the agreement when it is convenient, and then be casual about it when such an approach becomes inconvenient.

4.   However one characterises it, the essence of the DA's argument appears to be that it was a negotiated position and, therefore, not subject to change. There are two fundamental errors with this position; namely that this is as short-sighted as it is factually incorrect. I now elaborate

5.   It is entirely valid to focus on the question of the stability of our coalition arrangements at a time where these governments are more readily associated with instability than coherent governance. In fact, to not do so when vacant positions provide the opportunity would be foolish. I fully acknowledge that stability has a number of facets, but it is indisputable that one such element is the extent to which coalition partners feel they are part of the co-governance of these metros. The more a political party feels invested in the leadership of the multiparty government, the more likely they are to defend any unwarranted effort to seize power through frivolous motions of no confidence. One party holding the Mayor, Speaker and Chief Whip of a municipality is unhealthy towards the principles of power sharing and co-governance —also codified in our coalition agreement in section 5.4 provided below

'The parties agree that the selection of the positions mentioned above should be beneficial to the coalition with the view of on effective and cooperative coalition.' Section 5.4 of the signed coalition agreement.

6.   The truth is that it was deemed not possible to revisit these 'above the line' positions in the City of Johannesburg, after the inaugural council meetings, because the coalition numbers at the time did not lend towards reconfiguring these positions to accommodate other parties as was possible in Tshwane. These three top positions in the City of Johannesburg were born of broken coalition talks in which parties had to force the DA into office to prevent ANC governments. To ignore that these positions were more the product of a hostage situation rather than a coalition negotiation would be ahistorical.

7.   While arguments have been advanced that the negotiation of other positions bore this in mind, this is a one-sided perspective that is flimsy at best. The truth is that positions of Mayor, Speaker and Chief Whip (much less all three in one metro) cannot be balanced against an extra MMC or Committee Chairperson they are intrinsically weighted more heavily because these office bearers lead a sphere of government rather than just participating within it.

8.   It is also worth noting that the IFP, with seven seats in the City of Johannesburg Council, holds only one position in the coalition in the City of Johannesburg (MMC Housing). The IFP is vastly underrepresented relative to other parties and they hold no positions in leadership over the executive of legislature. At the council meeting in question, some IFP Councillors opted to support the opposition motion of no confidence. While the DA would argue that that these two events are not connected, I would suggest that the IFP Councillors would have defended the motion if they had seen such a motion against one of their own represented in the leadership of this multiparty government. This is why the vacant positions should be reconsidered with the interests of stabilising the coalition arrangement for the benefit of all parties.

9.   The DA's argument is short-sighted because it faits to recognise that an improved power sharing arrangement contributes towards coalition stability and the security of tenure of DA Mayors for the full term of office. One would imagine that such a point would be self-evident and in the interests of all parties to project better stability as we approach a 2024 election where coalitions are effectively on trial. The fact that the DA stands to benefit most from a full term of office, by virtue of having the Mayor position in all three metros, just makes the irrational defence of this arrangement even more difficult to accept.

10.The DA's letter makes reference to this debate being 'political.' While it is unclear that this means, other than an intentionally vague and unchallengeable claim by the DA against its coalition partners, ActionSA places on record that we do not seek any further position in the coalition. Our position, that power sharing should be improved with the current vacant positions, is based on wanting these arrangements to be stable and to deliver value over a full five-year term of office.

ActionSA believes this is essential when it comes to Johannesburg as perhaps the most important stage upon which coalitions will be assessed ahead of the 2024 national and provincial elections. Our position that these vacant positions should improve the power-sharing arrangement for the stability of coalitions and consequent governance of Johannesburg, has no direct benefit to ActionSA nor a number of other coalition partners that have agreed with this position The mischaracterisation of the motives of the coalition parties is regrettable and, presumably, an effort to conceal the uncomfortable truth that the DA stands alone in their illogical defence of their position.

11. However, as indicated earlier, the DA's position is also factually incorrect.

12. As indicated, the election of Mayor, Speaker and Chief Whip in the City of Johannesburg was not the product of coalition negotiations — which followed the election of these positions. The arguments that the negotiations factored in these positions when negotiating others is a DA perspective which is subjective.

13.ActionSA contends that each of the positions (Mayor, Speaker and Chief Whip) weigh heavily in the power sharing scale & defending one party holding all three positions in Johannesburg reveals the view that coalitions are here to prop up DA Mayors, Speakers and Chief Whips rather than achieve real co-governance. This was necessary in the beginning in light of the events that led to the election of these positions, but now that a vacancy has arisen, the perspective that they can be renegotiated is entirely grounded in improving co-governance.

14. Where the DA argument is Factually incorrect is in its reliance upon section 5 of the coalition agreement ActionSA contends that section 5 makes the case for improved power-sharing.

15. Section 5.5 the coalition agreement which provides for the power sharing arrangement, limits such to positions negotiated during the negotiation process:

'The parties agree that the party allocation and proposed councillors to be put forward for appointment in the strategic positions shall be agreed to during the negotiation of the coalition.' Section 5.5 of the signed coalition agreement.

Any sober recollection of history will know that the positions of Mayor, Speaker and Chief Whip were filled prior to the negotiation of the coalitions and that these negotiations were made possible only by a number of political parties installing DA Councillors into these positions to prevent ANC governments.