Warwick Bruce Chapman

In a discussion on Facebook yesterday, you berated the state of Education in the Eastern Cape and suggested that the ANC should be ashamed of the travesty.  Your friend Frank Julie commented that “Maybe those who vote for the ANC and still plan to do so should also hang their heads in shame! Come to think of it, these leaders did not elect themselves into power?” to which you responded by asking, “Frank who should we vote for?”

My suggestion to you, Zackie, was that you should vote for the lesser of the two evils (inferring the ANC and the DA), and you responded that for you, the ANC was just that.

Consider that choice: The ANC vs the DA.  Our liberation heroes turned power hungry, greed fuelled, race-obsessed non-deliverers vs the political party that fought apartheid during apartheid, and which fights today for all the ANC promised us as a people.  In short, racial nationalists vs non-racial liberal democrats. At least from my point of view, knowing the DA is not perfect, we are head and shoulders above, the lesser of the two evils.

But then me being a zealot (I believe in the DA, I promote the DA, I live the DA) makes it difficult to see beyond our own definition of the cause and our opponents.  For the record, my interpretation of our cause is a fair, safe and just South Africa where all who live in it have the means and opportunities to prosper and become all they want to in life.  Education is key.  Healthcare is key.  Ridding our society of violent crime is key.

I’m firmly of the opinion that South Africa has never known a good government. The DA is rapidly showing, as it implements what we’ve been speaking about for so long where we now have power, that South Africa could truly have a Government that is good and for all.

Zackie, the NP architected apartheid. The ANC and NP architected the new South Africa. The ANC has largely implemented it (reconciliation, transformation, economic liberalisation) and despite all the good policies it is crumbling now as a result of poor leadership and policies like cadre deployment (education, health, crime as examples).

It’s time that we as a people recognised the DA for what we are.  Our predecessors have been on the sidelines since the 1950′s, being pulled in when it counts (eg. writing the constitution), always punching well above our weight.  Today, we’re still committed to the genuine non-racial South Africa where all can live in peace beside one another.  The only difference now is that the liberals of new South Africa are no longer the whites Biko berated so harshly.

Like it or not, most aspects of DA government have shown themselves to be good for the people of South Africa.  Unemployment in the Western Cape is down.  Crime in Cape Town is down.  The provincial economy is now growing at a faster rate than KwaZulu-Natal.  Has it all been fixed? No.  Can it all be fixed? Probably not.  Have we made mistakes? Yes.  Ultimately, are we doing a much better job than the previous Government?  Yes.  Yes.  Yes.

The 25 clean audits in the Western Cape Government, for example, the first since 1994, and after just a year in Government, are good for the the poor.  While not service delivery in themselves, they mean less taxpayers’ money is being stolen by individuals for their own enrichment. More money in Government coffers means more resources to apply to the needs of our people.

I wonder often why it is you go to so much effort to paint the DA in as bad a light as you can. If I did that, you would ask me why I was so obsessed with attacking the ANC instead of promoting the alternative offered by the DA.

For example, we released details of how crime in Khayelitsha is down as a result of massive social and infrastructural intervention (which improve the quality of life beyond just crime), and you found some data which showed that a specific category of crime had gone up over the same period.  I wish it were that simple, but I’m convinced the reality is that you know the interventions taken by the City were aimed at creating an environment which is no longer conducive to crime.  The fact that some crimes have increased is through no lack to well-intentioned effort on the part of the City of Cape Town.

(Note to readers: The DA erred in calculating a 70% decrease where there was only a 24% decrease. Our shadow minister apologised and issued a correction.)

Ultimately, Zackie what you want is a Government which is accountable and would never get away with 43 chairs for 323 learners.  You can help achieve that through the mechanics of democracy itself.

Zackie Achmat, do you want to fix South Africa and set it back on the course we charted in the early nineties?  If so, its simple, make the ANC petrified of losing power…

The Speaker – eThekwini Council
Councillor James Nxumalo
City Hall
DURBAN

12 November 2009

Dear Mr Speaker

QUESTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 17 OF THE RULES OF ORDER

During the last questions on the issue of the R6.5 million fifaworldcup.durban.gov.za information portal at the July 2009 council meeting, Cllr Peer answered in respect of the first question that “in May 2008 the Municipality advertised for the appointment of a panel of consultants to assist the information services section to deliver on its various projects. From this panel, a quote system was used to obtain services for various projects, including the preparation of a new website.”

In respect of the provisions of the eThekwini Supply Chain Management Policy:

1. Can it be confirmed that the “quote system” mentioned above refers to the procedures outlined in sections 16-18 relating to procurement through quotations; and
1a. if not, which legal provisions were utilised to select and appoint the service provider?

17 (a) makes a mandatory provision requiring that “quotations must be obtained in writing from at least three different providers whose names appear on the list of accredited prospective providers of the municipality” and 17 (b) allows for quotations to be “obtained from providers not listed, provided that such providers meet the listing”.

2. If the quote system was used, were quotations received from at least three different providers as required in 17 (a); and
2a. if so, can a report be provided in terms of the records required by 17(d) showing all the “potential providers and their written quotations”?
2b. if not, in terms of 17(c) what were the reasons approved by the chief financial officer for not securing the required three quotations?

18 (a) stipulates that all requirements in excess of R30000 are “advertised for at least seven days on the website and an official notice board of the municipality”.

2c. was the required advertising as described above done in respect of this project?

18 (b) requires that “when using the list of accredited prospective providers the accounting officer must promote ongoing competition amongst providers by inviting providers to submit quotations on a rotation basis”

2d. what were the reasons for using the same provider of web development services used by the City previously instead of rotating as required above?

19 (1) requires that for “goods and services above a transaction value of R200 000 (VAT included) and long term contracts may only be procured through a competitive bidding process”

3. If the quote system was indeed used, then considering the mandatory provision outlined above, why was the quote system used to select the service provider for a project with a value of R6.5 million?

4. Was the scope of work upon which bidding companies prepared their quotation formally defined; and
4a. if so, then can the original scope documentation be provided to me?
4b. if not, why not?

Yours faithfully,

Councillor Warwick Chapman
Democratic Alliance

In response to the release of the DA’s Crooked Comrades Monitor, the ANC was quoted in the Mail and Guardian (“Tracking crooked comrades”, 8 October 2009) saying the DA was attempting to “tarnish the image” of the ANC. That comment made think that perhaps we also need to create a list of ANC Comrades with functioning deductive abilities.

I believe it is quite clear that one of our jobs as a political party is to show our opponents up when their actions and practice differ from their words and policies. This is an important component of the greater task of presenting our party as a capable alternative to that opponent. So, for example, when the ANC attempts to show the DA up by accusing us of being racist and then failing to back it up with facts, the DA, through the Crooked Comrades Monitor is not only accusing the ANC of accommodating criminality within its ranks but backing it up with facts.

In the same article, ANC spokesperson, Brian Sokutu said that the deployment of ANC comrades into public and private sector positions was not the business of the DA. Unfortunately on this point Mr Sokutu is wrong. The word public in reference to public sector jobs means appointments are everyone’s business since it is our money being spent, and unfortunately for the ANC, the DA is included in that “everyone”. The Crooked Comrades Monitor deals only with appointments in the public sector since President Zuma came to power on the back of promises to fight crime and corruption.

Were the ANC to attempt to build a similar list for the DA they would find that the Democratic Alliance has at the first hint of any suspicion of illegal activity, suspended membership of the person or terminated the relationship with the organisation involved pending full investigation.

The fact of the matter is that the ANC tolerates corruption and criminalism within its own ranks. How can a government stand up on a soap box and berate corruption as an evil of society, an enemy of the national democratic revolution and then at the same time allow this extent of complicity with corruption and criminalism to continue?

What South Africa needs is a clean, efficient and correctly resourced public service and representatives, and in order to feed the current climate of demand for service delivery, that should the single highest priority for the ruling party.

As the Ward Councillor for eThekwini Ward 18 where the Pinetown Home Affairs office is situated and a member of Democratic Alliance, I wish to express my sincere frustration at the situation at Home Affairs and other public sector organisations.

In February 2008, our leader Helen Zille visited the Pinetown Home Affairs office last to discuss our serious concerns about the state of service delivery in that office.  DA activists had earlier uncovered the charging of hundreds of Rands to “streamline” the process of obtaining an ID book.

While I have no doubt Minister Dlamini-Zuma was genuinely upset by the loss of this young man, he chose to end his life because of a frustrating reality which the DA so patently brought to the attention of home affairs over a year ago.  It is high time Government stopped viewing the opposition as yapping dogs and started viewing us as partners in Government.

In 2008 we acted in the interests of all South Africans by bringing this issue to the attention of the Department and I suspect our requests were ignored because of the party from whence they came.  President Zuma has committed the Government to working together to do more.  It should now be crystal clear to everyone employed in the public sector that people’s lives hang in the balance and their poor performance can be the deciding factor.

– DA Councillor Warwick Chapman