Was it the heat in Thabazimbi on Sunday or, perhaps, he was stung when his party provincial secretary in KwaZulu-Natal labelled him “weak”?
Whatever the cause, by the usual “aural valium” standard of many of Cyril Ramaphosa’s remarks, his attack on the process which led to a settlement of the contentious Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act was decisive. And, entirely wrong, of dubious legality, contradictory, and arguably self-immolating.
Campaigning ahead of by-elections in this municipality in Limpopo, Ramaphosa said of a compromise settlement reached on the BELA legislation, “my resolve in relation to the [BELA] act should not be tested”.
These are fighting words from one who was accused by his KwaZulu-Natal provincial secretary, Bheki Motolo, of being the weakest link in the chain that broke the party’s majority in May.
Except for several glaring and inconvenient facts. Here’s a sampling.
Nedlac settlement
First, it was Ramaphosa who paused the implementation of sections 4(d) and (f), and 5 of the BELA Act in September – and mandated parties to reach an accord, if possible, within three months, or else the original legislation would be fully implemented.
To recap, the two controversial clauses essentially transfer the right to determine a school’s language of instruction and admissions policy from the school governing body (i.e. the parents and others closely involved in school affairs) to politicians and administrators in the provincial government.
Since most of the schools likely to be affected are Afrikaans-medium institutions, this has aroused fear and fury in both their civic bodies and political parties.
However, given the wide and devastating effect of this removal of authority from the school body to provincial politicians, the best line of opposition – in my view – would have been to demand respect for parent power, not to claim cultural genocide, et al.
Simply put, the flight of parents, mostly black, to remove their children from the failing clutches of Gauteng Premier Panyaza Lesufi’s state schools and send their kids to far better performing (former) model C schools speaks for itself.
This legislation is all about command and control and has little to do with improving educational and life chances of pupils. It is also about succession politics in the ANC, on which more anon.
Second, while whatever process the Presidency inaugurated to make good on its commitment to resolve the impasse by year-end, National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) involved itself in the matter.
This happened not on some whim or because of an underhand or undermining strategy, but consequent to the operation of both the Constitution and the law.
The Nedlac Act of 1994 enshrined certain obligations and protocols to be observed when, for example, a party such as a trade union gives notice of strike action, the law enjoins Nedlac to seek resolution.
This is precisely what happened when Solidarity initiated a dispute process through Nedlac to seek authorisation for “protected” protest and strike action in opposition to the BELA Act.
Correctly, it cited both the Presidency and Department of Basic Education as respondent parties, and all three of them then negotiated a settlement that all three parties (the union, Presidency, and department) signed.
Just in case you think Nedlac is simply a toothless chattering house, it is worth reprising what Ramaphosa said about it some years ago.
In March 2018, he advised Parliament:
Not so magical or enthusiastic now, Mr President, with the resolution to the BELA impasse struck there by three parties, including his own office.
In a testy statement, his office (ironically the same office which was party to the Nedlac settlement) stated: “The agreement between the minister [of basic education] and Solidarity has no influence on the president’s powers to ultimately take a decision regarding the commencement of the [BELA] Act”.
Wait a mo, though: Why did the Presidency wrongly omit that it, too, was a party to the signed agreement which the minister of basic education announced last week?
Mashatile’s gambit
Third, this interesting omission, of course, goes to the heart of the issue: it is all about succession planning and certainly not about success for affected school children.
Barely had the ink dried on the Nedlac settlement when Deputy President Paul Mashatile was roused from his usual torpor and near invisibility and demanded the immediate implementation of BELA without any changes. He also reminded the country he oversees the “clearing house” where disputes between parties to the GNU are resolved.
Mashatile, like his lieutenant, Lesufi, and the gang of predatory rent seekers, are eyeing the presidency for themselves – and what better calling card than to be a GNU anti-DA hawk to burnish your credentials?
There are, of course, two glaring problems with Mashatile’s gambit.
On the one hand, having announced his total opposition to any changes in the BELA Act, how is he to be a good faith chairperson of the body mandated to reach an accord on the dispute?
And here is the kicker on all this and the endless processes and protocols invoked or revoked according to the political needs of whichever faction in the ANC is in the ascendancy or needs appeasing.
It is found in the plain words of the often-forgotten statement of intent signed by all participants in the GNU. Specifically, clause 19(3). This defines what happens when the parties cannot achieve consensus on a matter. In this event, the agreement mandates consensus is achieved when “parties to the GNU representing 60% of the seats in the National Assembly agree”.
You don’t need to know much about arithmetic to understand that, in basic translation, this means the ANC (40%) plus the DA (21%) resolve the impasse.
So, even if Mashatile is miffed by being legally bypassed at Nedlac (by his own office incidentally, since the Deputy Presidency is a unit of the Presidency) then his “clearing house” to achieve an outcome requires agreement between the ANC and DA. As simple and as complicated as that.
As for the potential self-immolation contained in the increasing pressure from noises such as ANC Grande Dame Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma that “the ANC should not have formed an agreement with the DA” – just consider the options.
Eject the DA from (or allow it to leave) the GNU, and there are only two options:
Or else, bring in the MK Party and/or the EFF and just watch them blow up the presidency of Ramaphosa before detonating the entire economy.
Oh yes, and this year, we are bringing the world to our doorstep to witness our stable democracy as we host the G20.
Historian Jonathan Dimbleby described the situation of the Wehrmacht on the Eastern Front in 1944 as the war turned against Germany as “a perfect storm of worsening dilemmas.”
The gathering local tempest over BELA and its resolution is something similar.
