Note to editors: The following speech was delivered in Parliament on Tuesday by the DA’s Chief Whip, John Steenhuisen MP, during the budget vote debate on Parliament.
“Hands off our House, Mr President”
It is indeed an honor to speak in this important debate today. Given the events that have occurred since the beginning of the 5th parliament, this budget debate is probably one of the most vital. This is especially so because, for the first time since 1994, Parliament is once again the crucible of the national debate.
More people than ever before tune in to watch the proceedings of the National Assembly. Channel 408 is now vying for attention with firm favourites like Sevende Laan, Generations, Muvhango and others. More people are again seeing Parliament as the locus of democratic expression and more people than ever before are looking to parliament to debate and discuss solutions to the great issues of our time.
That’s why, now more than ever we should be looking at ways to make Parliament more relevant. We have made some positive steps in this regard. I believe that the introduction of rotating member’s motions has been one of these.
Now, for the first time, members are able to bring issues into this House which directly affect their constituents, are topical in nature and stir debate around key challenges facing our nation and its citizens. This creates both relevance and interest. Together we must look for more ways to do this.
Committees have always been the engine room of Parliament, they are where the rubber hits the road. This has always been a platform where, despite political differences, we are able to find each other as MPs, compromise, and do what is best for South Africa.
Sadly there are a number of committee chairpersons that are becoming particularly executive-minded in their approach. In committee they stifle debate, protect Ministers and officials from probing questions and, in the case of Hon Motshekga, humiliated the Public Protector in order to push through the will of the cabinet. The chairperson of the Labour Committee, Hon Yengeni, has even been known to harangue journalists with long hysterical tirades in full public view. This is not a way to advance parliamentary democracy.
One of the basic tenets of a functioning and effective Parliament is ensuring freedom of speech. It is the duty of every member of this House to protect and defend the freedom of speech in Parliament. It is for this reason that the events of the past year cannot go without comment in this debate.
Signalgate was a blatant violation of Section 16 of our Bill of Rights, which guarantees freedom of expression as well as Section 59(b) of the Constitution. It almost beggars belief that in a constitutional democracy we are still haunted by an executive so hell-bent on control of information that they would implement such a regressive and draconian measure to control the flow of information, and then to try and cover it up with the most tawdry and farcical Star Wars fantasies of drone threats in this house. This must never ever happen again.
The events in this House of the evening of the last State of the National Assembly were shocking and unprecedented. Not once since the advent of our democracy in 1994 have the security services, who report to the executive, been allowed onto the floor of this House.
This is separation of powers, this is democracy 101!
Nothing could justify the brute force and violence displayed against members of this House, including woman, who were beaten, kicked and stood on. An entire party was removed even though the majority of those members had not even been ordered out the House. How do we ever again in this House have a debate in good conscience about violence against women and others when we set this example of brutality in this hallowed chamber?
The presiding officers have a duty, especially the Speaker, to protect the rights of ALL members of the house, including the minority parties.
We need to work harder, and the presiding officers in particular, need to pay more attention to freedom of speech in the House. Statements can never be declared “unparliamentary” simply because they are not to the liking of the executive or presiding officer.
The DA has on several occasions highlighted the unsuitability of the dual roles performed by the Speaker as chairperson of her party and head of this House. We continue to believe that not only is this undesirable, but it actively compromises the Speaker’s ability to not only appear impartial, but to be impartial too.
Presiding officers would well be advised of the words of Mahomed J in the De Lille case when dealing with freedom of speech in Parliament:
“It is a crucial guarantee. The threat that a member of the assembly may be suspended for something said in the assembly inhibits freedom of expression in the assembly and must therefore adversely impact on that guarantee – The right of free speech in the assembly is a fundamental right crucial to representative government in a democratic society.”
The opposition, largely due to the infringement of rights by presiding officers, have had to seek relief in the courts to defend these basic rights enshrined in The Constitution. Most notable have been the April 2015Bozalek judgement into freedom of speech and the Cloete judgement in May 2015 into the use of security services against members.
On both occasions the judgments have confirmed the rights of members to free speech in the House and have reinforced the earlier De Lille, Lekota and Mazibuko judgements. This has been a major victory, not only for the opposition parties in this House, but also for the constitution and, dare I say, even members on the other side of the House. It’s also their duty speak their mind, speak truth to power and not simply toe the Luthuli House line!
I must now turn to the conduct of the President and his attitude and approach to this House, its functioning and his responsibility to it. His performance in this House last week was nothing short of a national disgrace.
President Zuma behaves as though this House is accountable to him, when it is the other way around. It took massive pressure from the opposition and public outrage just to get the President to fulfill his simple constitutional obligation to answer questions in this House once per term as he is required to. He virtually had to be dragged here, kicking and screaming, to fulfill this obligation.
After last week’s performance he showed that he has in fact become the Jester of his own court.
What else could explain away his petty and childish mockery of Members of this, the very House, he accounts to? Barely a week ago, the President stood at this very podium sneering, “Nkaaaandla, Nkaaaandla, Nkaaaandla”. Whilst this did however make a change from his usual refrain of “angazi” “angazi” “angazi” it did nothing but undermine his credibility and authority.
The President criticized Members of this Parliament for not being able to pronounce certain words correctly, well here’s some President Zuma struggles to even say, let alone pronounce:
Accountability
Transparency
Responsibility
Ethics
I am guilty
Here’s is the money I am paying back to the South African people
In perhaps the most cynical move and with the grossest disrespect to this House and its work, President Zuma and his Cabinet cohorts clearly withheld Minister Nathi Nhleko’s report as well as the Marikana report to ensure they would not be able to be utilized in the debate of his budget. To further expose the cynical spin doctor politics of this shameful Cabinet and their disdain for this House, the Ministers chose to brief the media before briefing a single committee on their findings.
In 1996 Kader Asmal had the following to say about Parliament:
“Parliament lies at the centre of our democracy. The standard it keeps, or does not keep, are crucial to the well-being of the whole nation and it is incumbent on the leaders of Parliament to take steps to ensure that its integrity is beyond question. We should not have to be dragooned into setting high standards in public life. We should willingly seek maximum openness about what our public representatives do and receive.”
And so I have news for the President today, he will not wreck this Parliament and tack it to his totem pole of raided and broken institutions. He can try his best to subjugate that side of the House, he can deploy as many automatons as he wishes. And Gwede Mantashe, the Lord of Luthuli house, can bully and threaten as many ANC MP’s into the worst kind of submission. One where they betray their own instincts and values in the service of the ego of one man.
But, Madam Speaker, this side of the House, the side that gets bigger after every election as that side shrinks ever more, will never surrender the hard won freedoms of our Bill of Rights.
We will not let the executive encroach a single inch further in their desire to control Parliament.
We will not yield in the face of the mightiest unleashing of the state security apparatus against us and we will never, ever turn our back on the Constitution that we swore to uphold and defend.
The President may have destroyed or cowed every other institution that has got in his way, but he will never destroy Parliament!
Issued by the DA, June 2 2015
