Why is Cllr. Ehrenreich opposing additional funds for wards in poor areas?

Any democracy worthy of the name has a robust exchange of ideas. People, and their representatives, are meant to disagree on points of principle and on policies. This is the foundation of a healthy contest between different actors in society who have different visions of the future.

I respect that exchange and I respect the outcomes produced by democratic processes. Adherence to this principle has guided me in my work for decades, whether as an activist, union organiser, parliamentarian, party leader, minister and now mayor.

This principle has also taught me a few lessons. One of them is that, even though you might not win in a democratic contest, that the majority does not have a monopoly on good ideas. I said as much when I was elected as Mayor of Cape Town.

In that spirit, I looked forward to ideas coming from all quarters to take us forward, together. I have since engaged with NGOs, like the Social Justice Coalition, who I met just this morning, and considered some of their policy proposals because they had good ideas. I have conceded where my own administration has had short-comings, like our capital under-spending last year.

I'm not a martyr. I have a vision of a better Cape Town and, with my team and our officials, I am working to build it on the five pillars: the opportunity city; the safe city; the caring city; the inclusive city; and the well-run city.

Make no mistake, I will do what it takes to see that vision realised.

But I am reasonable and I can take criticism.

What I cannot abide is the failure of the democratic process that so many of us fought for. I believe that in Council, the biggest culprit for that failure is the leader of the opposition, Cllr. Tony Ehrenreich. In media reports this morning, in his capacity as head of COSATU, he is quoted as saying that COSATU is ‘Not Falling for cheap tricks. The DA is using the money to buy over wards with gimmicks. [...] [the ward allocations] are laughable, because the DA is trying to preserve its support base.'

Cllr. Ehrenreich is referring to my announcement of our proposed Draft ‘Pro Growth, Pro Poor' Budget, which is currently going through a process of public participation.

One of the proposals of the draft budget is an increase in ward allocations of R200 000 per ward and an additional R10 million allocation for the poorest wards as part of the Mayor's Redress Programme.

Cllr. Ehrenreich, in his day job as COSATU provincial secretary, often makes much of the constitutional right to strike. His interpretation of the constitutional rights of workers is spot on. But I have come to the conclusion that, much like a student ‘spot-learning' for an exam, he has only read those parts of the constitution that he thinks apply to him.

Cllr. Ehrenreich seems completely oblivious to the fact that the constitution advocates three forms of democracy: representative, participatory and direct. When he sits in Council, he is giving meaning to representative democracy.

When we engage in public participation processes, we give meaning to participatory democracy. And ward work for councillors, along with ward committees and funding for ward initiatives, we give meaning to direct democracy.

Cllr. Ehrenreich would know these things if he knew the constitution and its expression at local government level in the Local Government White Paper and various pieces of foundational legislation, such as the Municipal Structures Act, the Municipal Systems Act and the Municipal Finance Management Act.

But all he knows are his instincts: to spin and oppose, no matter what the cost.

Well, let's assess the impact of his opposition to these allocations. The ward allocations go to all wards, no matter which political party represents them. That means that if we gave more money to support a political support base, we would be giving more money to support other parties' supposed political support bases. The move would cancel itself out.

So that dimension can be dismissed. The other dimension is that the Mayor's Redress Programme is a means of giving patronage to DA wards. The wards that will qualify for this proposed fund, if approved, will be, as I have said, the poorest wards in Cape Town. The purpose of the programme would be to correct past imbalances where those wards, as areas under the old dispensation, received few if any municipal benefits or amenities.

We have been working with external partners, official information sources and city databases to identify these wards according to formulas based on population and social-economic indicators, amongst other things. If the budget is approved, this policy will be fully unveiled.

But you don't have to be a statistician to know that, for a combination of historical reasons, many of the poorest wards in Cape Town are currently represented by the ANC. But their current political affiliation is of little concern to this government because poverty knows no political affiliation.

Because this isn't about politics. It's about social justice. That deals with the other dimension of Cllr. Ehrenreich's allegations. So his supporters must take stock of where his lack of constitutional knowledge or ability to engage constructively has led him.

Perhaps at the next COSATU rally or ANC City Caucus meeting, his members can ask him why he opposes redress money for ANC wards and whether he thinks they do not qualify? I look forward to him making that argument in Council and having it recorded in the minutes.

This article by Patricia De Lille first appeared in Cape Town This Week, the weekly online newsletter of the Executive Mayor of Cape Town

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