Part 1: Broadcast Type: Interview; Dr. Suzman Motloung, a political analyst from North West University, joins to discuss the government of national unity.
birthday today the eighteenth of june twenty twenty-five we're twelve years old today ja and we're gonna be marking this go into the as we week as well the hash tag would be power tense twelve glad that you are but i'm still here with an opportunity us to continue right i have this all important conversations that we bring for you show in show out one hour other after the ja minute after minute blow by and blow that is exactly what this morning we'll be doing as we go into hour of the show the second go into the second we are going to hour of the show looking at developments in the political space it's our political corner and here we've invited suzman motloung dr who's joining us as a political analyst from the north west university us reflect to help on the government of national a year unity on i want as you at home well to make this an all conversation round right in terms of how then you mark the a g n u later a year what would be your impressions in terms of where we find ourselves here and you whether are that person that thought wouldn't maybe we reach the twelfth month mark looking all of these issues at competing issues already that were playing themselves out even in the days early when they were signing that statement of intent remember where we come from from we come afar in terms of this new dispensation here but year on let's let's reflect talk about it on zero eight six one nine eight seven triple zero there on go by x we at power f m one nine eight seven et katlego legodi underscore doctor morning sir welcome good to the show hi katlego to your listeners thuto ya thank much for you very giving us your time one of those are you people dr motloung that thought that maybe we wouldn't see this through know you a whole lot of other political parties that were left out of the u for instance gee n like julius malema talking about this they were being short lived looking the fact that they at competing are all of those issues that we are already playing out themselves in the lead up to the signing even of that statement of intent did you maybe have a little bit of doubt we wouldn't that you know see ourselves reaching twelfth month the mark now i can't say i sort of expected a collapse of the this of new because it was beginning apparent from the that political parties like the democratic alliance had started even before the formation of institution this to pass on a message government that a that is without them is e a government that f f or mk party not ideal for is our country economy is in the so those that are in the a had a very vested interest to works ensure these for from the point of view that's a one and number two it is those minor parties i call you pay forth and so these are parties that could not dreamt of have being power especially at government the national level so this opportunity came they want to make it would work so i think for me there was not so much an expectation for this to to to rally collapse and before this there was that deputy president who was on a road show on part to one campaign for legislation to govern coalitions and that's one and number two i think it's from hindsight all political parties have seen the instability of coalitions at the metropolitan and level they have come into a gnu given that background and they didn't want to make those mistakes in terms of making national government i think to some extent the stakes higher are at a national level so they more are bound to tolerate each other to be patient than the poor place that we saw at a metropolitan level or let's call local government level it so i think is that that aspects in my view maybe to justify why i could not expect so much this that would collapse um it was now hope to see what in terms of policy outputs this kind of government will bring us to also backtrack i want a bit then doctor and look at you know how we find ourselves here in the elections lead up to the we saw for instance the formation the moon shot of packed convention and of people a lot would say that that was indication of an somewhat of a fertile ground for somewhat of a multiparty coalition or somewhat of a way of working together as a multiparty because the environment was pointing one to that in terms of the political space and how we saw things tend to develop was that it either going to it shot being the moon packed convention that we saw the democratic alliance leading or the a n c through to say coming we are going to our own form but as we see like for instance what you mentioned the deputy president and moving going into that space of saying let us tighten legislation and just get it right there it was already you know the writing was already there on the wall is that there not going to be somewhat of a an outright majority or a political would party that enjoy the outright majority fact looking at the that we've even seen the split enters over the years and also new formations into play coming would you say that indeed was it was it pointing to to a coalition somewhat of or a a working together some sort of looking at the political dynamics definitely i ja think that is another addition because the this speaks to their mental preparation by all political parties where a n c was adamant in public so they they will win we later got that inside story from i think mr we knew make we were not gonna so we were already thinking go where to so that is a governing that party knowing it was losing grip of power opposing parties and were preparing themselves in that sense and they were from other researchers who or analysts were already talking in terms of opinion public that this is a new dispensation where there is not one political party have a majority that will but we are this going to phase of coalition government so even maybe today we can speculate roughly that next maybe the four elections that we may have might still give us an coalition government is so it that matter of saying how prepare do we ourselves as the voters how parties do political also prepare themselves and who do they correlate with to ensure that they they gonna voter support so the short pack opposition was that and i think at some point a da when it realised this going anywhere thing is not started to run a different agenda of saying whatever outcome the d a should be in that government interests it is in the of the country um would you then doctor say motloung that one can view this as a marriage of inconvenience of some some sort somewhat of a relationship that came out of the the battered spaces of included all and would be then the shift political dynamics in the in the country whereby one way or the other they had to inconvenience work together early so that there is somewhat a move of here hence you saw them starting this even by saying there should be of a statement somewhat of intent so that we try to cover our tracks we try in any way to manage this you know space that we are going into because then realise we do as all of these political parties all of them that this marriage then becomes a of inconvenience ja let's start statement of intent with the i think that is the typical ground you said when a coalition you go into government had to be values values that common you and this will be guiding the line of your policies in power then of and the marriage of inconvenience other ministers i here saying that but i differ kind of it was a marriage of convenience a sense in that the the a n c and this is my one strong view that the a n c had always in its policy outlook taken the moderate never posture it was so so left wing or even wing it was always right a centre in policies its even though it has a social welfare or policy it's a social democracy kind arrangement of and that makes it a my centre in view and the d a as a dominant party as well in an opposition space we felt that we can really emerge easily with the a n c n c didn't and the a see anything so much offensive from the d a so if we to think want that this gnu it is that collision between a n c and d a mainly and then the undertone is that ideological differences within the a n c there are those who are opting for a more radical reform outlook and we all thought that you can't na work with the d are betraying a they the struggle and all that but for me that voice has become very minority in the a n c quickly and it was silenced it it it ended up just as frustrations on whatsapp chat rooms and stuff it was never anything really in public any debate political contestation or an ideological contestation so for me it was convenient in this manner because a n c has always taken very moderate a policy had it worked with the kind of m k or if you understand this wanted to raise the anti more radical for a policy reform and basic this is the debate now that the progressive work now the progressive i don't remember front or something because you after the gnu who there are those were radical who call themselves the progressive who came up and their argument is more radical reform to some extent in the case the mk r teaching at the constitutional level so anti constitutionalism to some extent that it is very inconvenient you can't be c a n and deal with a political says party that tamper with the constitution altogether move authority of the so and so give chief and and and traditional leaders some authority as espoused so pronounce so that would have been headaches so i feel a n c looked this at political landscape and felt controversies no matter the they are not so significant is easier it it to work with the d and from there a on like ensure these smaller are or minor parties they come in a n c when presented this did not to frame it want a as a n c d coalition here to say let us make a national building national cohesion the or you know kind of a project let's invite and everyone even though they invited everyone you see the d a understanding who they are wanted they a greater a greater influence even going head to head with the a pressing n c them vehemently to forego certain strategic policies or portfolios so that shows you that main the actors here were these two political parties satisfied minister of correctional services or give me minister sports i'm good i'm in the executive so i think this was so much convenient than having to work with other political that parties were really proposing an economic reform social policy reforms that a n c willing is not to take even when they were alone leading by themselves they were not willing take those policies to so for me i that's how i consider it ja i want remind our listeners at to home that still are open the lions you're welcome to also reflect with us this morning i am here with suzman motloung dr we're talking the government unity of national a year on still with the lions are open on zero eight six one nine eight seven triple zero and thereby find us on x you at power f m nine eight seven at katlego legodi underscore us to also i want talk about and the early days look at then dr mhlongo of government of national the unity we saw for this issue instance of sufficient consensus playing itself out to a point whereby and forth there was the back and the threat to pull and the out like and and and others that there is saying a need to protect themselves even within this and you that it in a way does not become a show one man but we do work around sharing this power as per the fact that no then got one somewhat of an outright majority looking at where we come from and there and starting as well that friction around the sufficient consensus would just say that you know the gnu was that that was the ultimate and test in the early days that would show as to how then they also deal with get to their differences we i mean after that saw them working together we saw issues playing themselves out with the minister the balance not attending signing we saw playing as for issues themselves out around them taking each to court other around the land expropriation act and all of these issues that played themselves and we know out they're friction as well the around foreign policies as well but this started when all we saw them trusting around sufficient the consensus clause was that an indication how of then would they fare in their differences dealing with going forward ja i think the i don't know why they work en or seminar or conference or workshop at this packed a that that called gumede to give them an background of coalition comments around how they the world worked and so forth and maybe what made them and when to it was time create this government of nationality framework then the political parties came already understanding what pitfalls their are and they wanted to talk on this principle of sufficient consensus that you cannot come mainly because the debate was also from hindsight looking at the these huawei parties come with a who one percent stabilise and they do everything they want to power were already play they rebuked you cannot come here with one percent and think you you played tune here a you are here as a partner but recognise over there is a political with twenty seven party percent with forty percent should mean something that and when they created this it was then a space of saying should still we have sufficient consensus that with your one percent you should be had forty with my percent i should also speak and the u ya sufficient consensus was emphasised by democratic the alliance like the point you made earlier it was vehemently pressing and testing the limits to see how they can influence decision making and to make sure that they are included because if they were taking a back seat the a n c would make decisions nilly willy and we saw now with this a budget issue how a n c thought it was business as usual and i think some officials i n c maybe the finance minister of said it on tv that now thought we it was the old way realised but we we were in a new setup we and had to consult so that big was a principal and a learning point that in terms of establishing coalitions you have to provide room and space for others to articulate they come as because partners in this collision are still they independent political who should demonstrate their electorate to what they did in that coalition how did they influence policies they how they do represent the interests of the electorate in that coalition so if you want to come here wena you are there forty percent forty of nine percent and want to speak and alone govern alone you should also be humbled and know that this is not man show a one so that was very important the kind and of debates that happened friction was there that i think it was necessary everyone for to make sense of it to understand this should be a concerted effort so they understand they understood that and i think overtime things became to smooth on up and those bumps despite but i think eventually understood it was we are all at the table we should be had and so good lesson that is a and i think it is one of the elements that contribute to coalition a stable that we have today consultation the element of it does become very important them going even for forward and this lesson then becomes a in terms of what we saw with the banks and fourth is around the know the you budget the passing you hear of the budget a lot of people talking dr ntlong about an unprecedented moment of south in the history africa meaning that we had stepped into then somewhat of a space that not normal was that was not familiar in of how then terms we move and you hear a lot of people attributing even the in the passing delays of the budget fact that we are to the doing things differently as we stand but there are those keep issues that playing themselves out that keep coming we do back see them taking each court other to they are still you know around the the basic education laws amendment act then it gets and how rolled out here there are issues around the national health insurance act how then it gets rolled and out here are issues there around the expropriation act we saw that playing itself out in court and democratic alliance the we see the them even they took matter of the budget the vat court to you know going outside of what would say it's one a collective in their approach to these governance here does this to us then say that there would be those areas areas of one wanting to more or you know less assert themselves as a political parties their independence here to say even though are still we part of this grand coalition it may as we are still an independent party and does this then see them putting even then pressure around some of those issues whilst within government here and how does this also play itself then out dr motloung where constituent the or the voter is concerned come through does this to confuse the voter that to say we don't see you being as agile enough on certain issues because now you may it may be because you're inside this government you've seen how people have criticised the democratic alliance to say you're no longer as agile in terms of the policy parliamentary for instance and the like how does this then where bode the electorate the electorate is concerned and the constituent of some of these parties are part of this that gnu definitely the dynamics change from you being an opposition party copper to being a opposition party in government a collision framework under you may find others being over zealously to move to their constituencies do not we sell out and that's one and another is being over zealously that have a voice you now it's like you've access been given into a dream and you think can lift everything you in their or even your strength though is not adequate for certain ways i know you want to do that is what we're this seeing with the d wanting a to touch policies let's call policies them legacy that were already in process before collision the policies that against which d a failed in parliament these were already in motion just waiting for enactment by the president the understanding was agreed there and bernard thought we already here are we can play this hand think and maybe we can cause them to to to stop what was already coming does so it have some moments of opportunism think and i the d a was not there and they're mountainous was it deliberate or was it to some extent sufficient consensus maybe the kganyago we put them there and there these people it's like are more valuable think and when you you can press them you can them reform and you think you want to go overstep now so i think that's one aspect and the other one is a commendable one that even though you are still an escalation government you don't forsake your role as independent an political party and where your principles are sent it sank stofile that they are wholly sacred you don't give them up are in government because they so that's why it's also important for the political parties that are in the gnu having to take certain government policies court and to overturn them and here should also separate we now parliament and the executive that here it was parliament floating certain processes and both processes would undermine the legitimacy the parliament of and the legitimacy of the that would come laws as a result is important so it then for you even are in government though you if you cannot convince your partners behind the scenes so wrong guys this is and they don't listen we know to you like the the a n c most of time is not listening to everyone of their majority because in parliament n c are still so the a behaving in that mistake of mentality of of of majority but they may be even underestimated all not oppose these ones will us because they like it here in the a g m you and why there was no that's state and so you cannot ja be opposing the same policies should implement that maybe you can choose or want to stay we or want to be opposition so those kinds of manipulating statements so but here we need to comment when protecting they were the the the function of the parliament so in that regard it's fine but are things these that were already on the rollout and you can't stop them we have be honest to about the social economy health sector of our of political economy of health economy of political education that the african black people the people are excluded from accessing schools education it and that's how we cannot deny that but it is was it for political expediency in terms of health we see of the dysfunctional our health facilities in an infrastructure there is corruption and even in and the private sector how they procure i extent think to some even price fixing so the people need who help cannot access it yeah medical bill medical aid is exorbitant so be something there has to government does to regulate sector because the private if left alone like traditional the economist economist want to say okay now let it on its own an and there shall be invisible hand that invisible hand is doing anything not to regulate this thing and ends it up being really extortionist so we have a second cannot economy like that i this is where think the role should of the state be firmly the one who restore order so that has to be accepted know why i don't the i wanted to come in their doctor i'm have looking at the time i two questions for you one on the would b fact that we had been rallying behind this g and you bench marking and saying it that it is possible because seen it work we've as a grand coalition in for instance you know in europe a lot you know of people were to germany taken us you'd see others even taking us you know to lebanon in terms benchmarking of just ourselves here would you say that all and of those countries that i've mentioned as well they too have had their fair of challenges share in moving around national this government of unity would you say that really you look when at it this would would for stand they would stand the test of time in terms of the coming for years or there's still it's still going to be tricky for us as a nation here and and and what according the successes to you then would be of this year of the government of national