The honeymoon is over, as the GNU gets real
Opinion
The GNU has faced its first challenge. Now, a dispute resolution mechanism must be established, writes Carol Paton.
How many times can the Democratic Alliance (DA) walk away from the government of national unity (GNU)?Only once, and everybody knows it.
South African president Cyril Ramaphosa took things to the brink this week over the signing of the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Bill when he refused any concessions on the contentious part of the bill until the very last minute. He was confident that, despite protestations from the DA, it would not walk away.
Speaking to journalists on Friday, the day he signed the bill, he said: "Those who may want to pronounce that they will leave the GNU [know] that it is wishful thinking. All of us who are participants know that any other alternative is just too ghastly to contemplate. We are tied together in the GNU in advancing the interests of South Africa. Anyone [who leaves] is destroying the hope of South Africans".
DA leader John Steenhuisen explained the same thing earlier in the week at what he called a "seminal speech" at the Cape Town press club. While the speech was not exactly seminal, it was nonetheless politically important for the DA's internal cohesion.
He urged DA voters to understand that the party, with only 22% of the vote, would not get everything it wanted. As leaving the GNU would have dire consequences, it had resolved that it would only leave if achieving its top two priorities – economic growth and jobs – was under threat.
Why the compromise?
"The DA will not crash the government unless the government is crashing the economy or trashing the constitution," he said.
But, if Ramaphosa and the African National Congress (ANC) had calculated correctly that the DA would not walk away over BELA, why then – at the eleventh hour – did he propose a compromise and pause the implementation of Clauses 4 and 5?
For those who don't know, Clause 4 allows a provincial head of education to override a school’s language policy, which is an authority that currently lies with school governing bodies. Clause 5 provides for the provincial education department heads to control admission policies.
The clauses aim to dislodge the gatekeepers of Afrikaans-medium public schools (Afrikaans-speaking parents) and open these up to black families searching for access to affordable, quality education in what were formerly white-only schools.
It is important to note that pausing these clauses has a political price for the ANC. Just as Ramaphosa has been assailed from one side by interests seeking to defend Afrikaans mother-tongue instruction, he has also been assailed by interests in his own party and others seeking to advance the interests of black children and parents.
The uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) Party and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) have been vicious in their criticism, accusing Ramaphosa of pandering to white interests and demanding that he fire basic education minister Siviwe Gwarube for not attending the signing. Many in the ANC and the broader black public have also found Ramaphosa's compromise difficult to swallow.
Consequences for good faith
But Ramaphosa had realised that apart from winning the battle over BELA, another thing was at stake in the GNU. While the ANC can impose its will on the GNU most of the time, the more it does so regardless of its partners, the more serious the consequences for good faith among them.
It is not the first time the ANC has pushed the boundaries of good faith since June. The statement of intent, the signed agreement that established the GNU, has been trodden on more than once.
The first and most serious occasion was the appointment of the Cabinet. While the statement of intent had agreed that the allocation of executive posts would be "broadly proportional", the DA ended up with fewer posts than its fair share. While it got half the number of votes of the ANC, it got a quarter of the number of portfolios.
After serious deliberations, the DA decided to suck it up and stay in once again because "the alternative was too ghastly to contemplate".
However, good faith will ultimately wear thin and erode the ability of the GNU members of the executive to trust one another.
The statement of intent had also committed the GNU partners to establish a dispute resolution mechanism, another clause the ANC had resisted implementing after the deal was done. As the BELA crisis unfolded this week, the DA sorely felt the absence of a dispute-resolution mechanism. Gwarube found herself no match for sweet-talking Ramaphosa as she tried to persuade him to consider the DA's difficulties.
Welcome move
Ramaphosa, who met with the partners over dinner on the day of Steenhuisen's Cape Town speech, has now agreed to set up a "technical committee" as a dispute resolution committee to deal with contentious matters, like the BELA Bill. For all the smaller GNU partners, this is a welcome move. It will also help make the GNU more durable.
There is also another problem with Ramaphosa's argument that once partners have checked in to the GNU, they can never leave.
While individual DA ministers might be rational and see the greater good of remaining in the GNU, they can only do so for as long as they have voters behind them. Unlike rational individuals, political parties are not rational but purely self-interested. Mother tongue instruction is very close to the hearts of many DA voters, who expect their party to defend it.
Should the DA be faced with the prospect of a revolt from those who feel their interests have been trampled in the future, it will be forced to rethink its options.
- News24