Reply by Deputy President Kgalema Motlanthe on questions posed in National Assembly for oral reply, November 3 2010

Question 16

Dr G W Koornhof (ANC) to ask the Deputy President:

Whether the Government remains on course in its endeavor to create a non-racial South Africa which is premised on the principle that South Africa belongs to all who live in it?

Transcript of Reply:

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon Speaker and hon members; we must continuously reiterate that South Africa comprises of people who originate from many parts of the world who have brought with them values and cultures that over the intervening years have been blended into one rich tapestry of diversity.

Perhaps our greatest challenge in this country is not merely striving to be tolerant of this diversity, but to actively explore it, engage with it, and ultimately to understand and harness it.

In this way, a central vision that defines the parameters of progressive and critical discourse is one that says we as South Africans are one people with one destiny. And, it is this galvanising vision that will sustain our spirit in the course of fighting against poverty and inequality, and that will keep us as a people focused on building a nonracial future for all.

It, therefore, remains our collective responsibility to keep championing the vision of building a united, nonracial, nonsexist, democratic, and prosperous South Africa. I thank you.

Dr G W KOORNHOF: Mr Deputy President that will be last question. Thank you, Deputy President for your reply and I agree with you and I think so should every member of this House.

In your address during the Ahmed Kathrada Foundation lecture on 1 October 2010, you identified a few developments which are accountable for the damming of our nonracial aspiration.

My question Deputy President is: How do we redirect or reverse such developments to make our nonracial aspiration a flame that burns in every heart, and that we leave out the wording on our National Coat of Arms, "A unity in diversity?" I thank you.    

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Hon Koornhof, there are a number of efforts that would have to be made in order for us to ensure that this vision of creating a nonracial society in our country is realised. Key among these is to improve the education system ensuring that we give access to education institutions; and to ensure that all our messages, including the secondary messages do not undermine this effort of attaining a nonracial society.

Through word, indeed, we must always be communicating the message that it is important for all of us to contribute towards a creation of a nonracial society. Many people in our country tend to emphasise points of difference rather than the areas that bring us together as a people. The richness in our diverse, backgrounds and cultures is a strength that we must all appreciate and build on rather than to emphasise that we are different groups, we are different people with different interests, and so on - I think it requires all round, on going effort because those who are conservative and want to hurry up to the past.

We will also letch on opportunities from time to time to try and divide, but if those who have access to public platforms can utilise them to communicate this message. I believe will be able to succeed or to lay down a foundation, at least, for a truly nonracial society to be created in our country. Thank you.

Mr I O DAVIDSON: Mr Deputy President, one of the laws that fundamentally underpinned the apartheid government was the Population Registration Act - not that in many consequences we had to declare our race, and that led to a divided society and a racialised society - and we know what its consequences. Notwithstanding the fact that, that law was repealed in 1991. Why is it if you really want unity, if you really want nonracialism; does the government still insist on many applications that has to be made on official documents that we declare our race?   

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you very much for that point. I think it's a vexed question in the sense that we are in the early days of transition.  Sixteen years which is nothing it will take 100 years for us to scale over this divide, because the material basis for discrimination was the expropriation of the land; that is the basis. We will live with the consequences, thereof, for sometime and that is why it is important that we strike the right balance, because we can very easily start on a new footing and pretend that all historical factors must be forgotten and we are now this wonderful rainbow nation, we move forward.

But our Constitution is transformative, it directs and inspires us to build this nonracial society on an ongoing basis, taking along everybody; we mustn't steam far ahead of our people. You know, it will be very simple for government to declare, but we know now that social engineering doesn't work in that way. We know that people have to create and grow as united people, and they must have a sense of belonging.

I want to cite one example, recently just before the Fifa World Cup tournament, the Blue Bulls qualified to play in the semi-finals and the finals of the Super 14. And, because Loftus which is their homebase had already been handed over to Fifa, they had to search for an alternative homeground. Orlando Stadium which has been upgraded met their demands or requirements and they saw that as an opportunity to go to Orlando Stadium. The provision of the physical infrastructure enabled them because some of them have never been in a township to integrate. If we address, for instance, the social and economic infrastructure needs in the underdeveloped and depressed parts of the country. By so doing, we would have achieved provision of the physical infrastructure for integration because, then, people will settle and move anywhere; enrol in schools anywhere; and so on. There are these limitations that we have to take into account.  

Now, coming to the specific question - this was a bit of a peroration - why is there an insistence in registers to race? Why is that still possible? I suppose it is the easiest way of finding or getting the data that would speak to the demographics because the existence of different people or races is in itself not a problem; the problem is when it is used for chauvinism. The existence of tribes, and so on is not a problem. It is when tribalism is elevated into policy, which is, then, becomes a problem. That is why we say we appreciate that the rich diverse nationalities in South Africa bring strength strength in this country.

Many other countries look up to South Africa to solve problems of racism because we are better positioned to do so. I believe that if its serves no useful purpose, we must discard it. If the underlying rational is that it only serves to maintain the division and separation of people, then, we must discard it. But I don't think that's the intention. Thank you. [Applause.]       

Mr N SINGH: Hon Deputy, we have to agree that we require an all round and an ongoing effort to ensure and promote the principles of nonracialism in our country. Certainly, the Constitution and other pieces of legislation provide the broad framework and principles for us to achieve that.

However, Mr President, speaking as one who comes from the ground and links up with people when I'm in my constituency, we know very well that amongst the affluent and wealthy in this country we have little costs for racial tension as money is truly a great leveller of the playing field. A rich person who wants to buy a particular service, whatever colour will go and buy that service; but we have a problem with the lower level income groups where the causes of racial tension still as there are limited suppliers in terms of employment and government assistance to the poor.

Whilst in health, education and social welfare arenas there is a quality in the provision of services, my observation is that in the area of government promoted job creation opportunities, and in particular provision of state assisted housing - the Minister of Housing is here - there is a reality which leads to tensions where only certain groups of our society mainly qualify for state assisted housing.

Now, Mr Deputy President, where this happens is those that live in informal settlements get priority over the backyard dwellers and those who live under a joint family system in crowded...[Time Expired.]       

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you very much, hon Singh. As I understand it the Ministry of Human Settlements is no longer in charge of the Reconstruction and Development Programme, RDP. It provides human settlements and therefore anybody who falls within a particular consort can apply and they do qualify to access these houses. It's no longer the case that the poorest of the poor found in informal settlements are black people only.

As I said in my last response, here, I gave an example of what happened in Kroonstad whereby 70 white families moved into Marabastad - those are houses that are provided. They applied like everybody else precisely because in terms of the means test they qualified and they were able to move into those houses.

The issue of people who move into informal settlements jump in the queue ahead of the backyard dwellers it's a problem that the Ministry of Human Settlements is attending to, because they are also concerned with this phenomenon. I hope that a solution will be found. These are some of the problems that come with democracy and the removal of legal restriction on movements of people because today people can move into the Western Cape and occupy a piece of land and before you know it they have applied, they are on the list, and so on. It may very well be that the same people have applied for a house in Mpumalanga and actually received it. These are some of the challenges that the Ministry of Human Settlement is attending and I hope that we will be able to find a solution to it. Thank you.       

Mr L W GREYLING: Hon Deputy President, I'm sure you will agree that the building of a nonracial South Africa is a task that is not limited to government alone. It is something which we all need to be involved in and we will be judged by our words and actions; and not just a society at large but most importantly by our political leaders.

In that regard, I was extremely shocked to hear over the weekend that the President of the ANC Youth League [Julius Malema] referring to the leader of an official opposition as a cockroach that needs to be driven from her office. Surely, you would know, hon Deputy President, that this term was a weapon and a rewinding genocide and has absolutely no place in our political discourse. Given that, as we go into the selection period, what measures will you be putting in place to ensure that such words and action are not used to divide our population even further? I thank you.  

The DEPUTY PRESIDENT: Thank you very much, hon Greyling. I do agree with you, in fact, I really don't like the fact that even though human beings are part of the animal kingdom, we tend to use other animals [Laughter.] to insult each other.[Laughter.] I don't like that because some of these animals are really good animals [Laughter.] and nobody take offence when it is said you are a lion [Laughter.] or a blue bull. [Laughter.]

So, in a manner of speaking, we should, of course - and I know that the Independent Electoral Commission, IEC, does that from time to time that when we campaign we must not be disrespectful; and we must not use insulting language.

We must put our points across without trying to demean each other. I think the fact that the gentleman you aluded to referred to a good lady that she is a cockroach. [Laughter.] I also think it's a bad thing. I think it's downright simple bad manners. Thank you. [Applause.]

Source: Unrevised transcript, Hansard

Click here to sign up to receive our free daily headline email newsletter