Thank you very much indeed, Speaker. It is a privilege for me to be participating in this debate to mark Human Rights Day, one of the most important commemorative days on our calendar.
I speak on behalf of those in this House who strive for the vision of an open-opportunity society for all. Those five words summarise centuries of political evolution and are captured in our Constitution, that historic compact that represents our country's best hope for a rights-based democracy and a growing economy.
In the open-opportunity society the state has three equally important functions. The first is to protect people's rights and freedoms. The second is to extend their opportunities. The third is to do those things for people that they cannot be expected to do for themselves.
This formula sounds simple, but it is in fact extremely difficult to achieve. And sometimes there is a tension between these three imperatives.
Now that we in the DA are a party of government, at local and provincial level, we must seek to get this balance right within the competencies of each specific sphere. This is how we make human rights real as we progress towards our goal.
Often we get it right. But sometimes we get it wrong, and when we do we must reflect on our actions and correct our course. For example, when we negotiate service delivery that encourages community involvement in development, there may be unintended consequences that infringe on people's rights.
This happened recently in the saga of the toilets without walls. It is an episode that we greatly regret, and from which we have learnt. We now know that an agreement, even when it is negotiated with a community for the purpose of maximising service delivery and stretching the available budget - and even if it works for 95% of families who agree to build their own enclosures so that they can each get a toilet, rather than share one toilet among five families - may not work for everyone. In this case the plan ended up unintentionally affronting the human dignity and rights of the 5% who did not or could not contribute their share.
Our commitment to human rights enjoins us to learn from these events and to adapt. We have now reverted back to the national guidelines for upgrading unserviced informal settlements, which provides for one toilet for every five families, rather than one toilet per family, even if they agree to enclose them themselves. We cannot risk the unintended consequence of even a single person facing the indignity of having to relieve themselves in public.
This Sunday, 21 March, is Human Rights Day, previously known as Sharpeville Day. It is the fiftieth anniversary of a tragedy that became a turning point in the struggle for a democratic South Africa. On Sunday, we in the city and the province will unveil a memorial in Langa, commemorating the great march of 30 000 people in 1960, led by the then teenaged Philip Kgosana, to protest the pass laws. Philip Kgosana will be there. We will also remember Eulalie Stott, a member of the former Liberal Party and founder member of the Black Sash, who played such a pivotal role in preventing violence and bloodshed during that march, but who, sadly, died just before the commemoration she was so looking forward to.
The DA-led government of the city and the province will commemorate these great South Africans, because we recognise that many people from different perspectives played a role in creating the new South Africa. Such recognition is part of celebrating an open-opportunity society for all. We do not airbrush the contributions of others out of history to suit our own closed version of events. [Applause.] We heard the hon Chief Whip giving a list of people he said contributed to the struggle: Well, let me say, that was a closed list. It was a selective list. We include everybody who made contributions on our list. [Applause.]
This brings me to the "national democratic society", the theme of today's debate. This is supposedly the culmination of the ANC's so-called national democratic revolution. These are seductive words - a classic example of what George Orwell called "doublethink". This involves holding two contradictory ideas in one's head at exactly the same time and believing in both of them. Doublethink involves distorting history and reality, and then denying that distortion to yourself so that you can believe your own propaganda - and we heard a very good example of that right here and now.
The ANC exemplifies doublethink. Our President, for example, urges people to take personal responsibility in the fight against HIV and Aids, while personally doing the opposite. He proclaims zero tolerance in the fight against corruption, and then fails to declare his assets. He proclaims allegiance to the Constitution, but destroys its independent institutions. He claims to champion the poor, but adopts empowerment policies that enrich only the small, politically connected elite.
That is doublethink. And doublethinking governments destroy people's rights, limit their freedoms and undermine their opportunities - even as their leaders claim to promote the people's interests. This is what happens in the closed, crony society for comrades only. It is the culmination of the doublethink inherent in the ANC's national democratic revolution. It is the very opposite of the open-opportunity society for all.
Take Julius Malema propagating the nationalisation of the mines ... [Interjections.] ... even as he brokers lucrative private mining deals to enrich himself ... [Applause.] ... or his advice to the youth of South Africa. Only a year ago, Julius Malema said, and I quote:
You must never role-model a rich person who can't explain how he got rich. In the ANC we must not have corrupt people as role models. Corruption means a simple thing: you can't explain the big amount in your bank account. In less than a year, you have got everything. Yesterday you were down and out, but today you have everything, which shows in your fancy dress code.
The irony, of course, was lost on him, with his Breitling watch, his Armani jeans, his various multimillion-rand homes and his top-of-the-range vehicles. This contradiction was also lost on the hon the Chief Whip, Mr Motshekga, in his speech. [Interjections.]