Madam Deputy Speaker, I am pleased to table the committee report, recommending 12 persons for appointment as nonexecutive members to the board of the SABC. The persons being recommended to the President for appointment are: Cedric Gina, Desmond Golding, Philippa Green, Peter Harris, Barbara Masekela, Anthony Mello, Clifford Motsepe, Dr Ben Ngubane, David Niddrie, Clare Frances O'Neil, Felleng Sekha and Ms Suzanne Vos.
These persons were selected from a broadly representative and inclusive list of over 230 nominees, 30 of whom were eventually interviewed. In finally selecting the 12 candidates, the committee was mindful of the criteria set out in the Broadcasting Act. We needed to ensure that those who have been selected had suitable academic qualifications and experience and expertise in the fields of broadcasting policy and technology; broadcasting regulation; media law; business practice and finance; marketing; journalism; entertainment and education; and social and labour issues.
The committee believes that the nominees, viewed collectively, possess the requisite skills, expertise and competence to provide proper and effective leadership of the public broadcaster, whose corporate image has been severely damaged over the past two years. This report, it is hoped, will bring closure to a sad chapter in the history of the SABC.
Hon members will remember that the SABC was gripped by a severe crisis, the symptoms of which were a loss of over R1 billion in the last financial year; a breakdown in effective corporate governance; a lack of common purpose and cohesion among former members of the board and the executive management, which impaired their ability to carry out their statutory fiduciary duties; and serious lapses in sound operational management of the SABC by the executive management.
As a result, we, as the committee, decided after a public inquiry to dissolve the SABC board and to appoint an interim board for a period not exceeding six months. The committee is decidedly impressed by the performance of the interim board. Within a short period of time, it has stabilised corporate governance at the corporation, resolved the legal dispute with the former group chief executive officer, resulting in his exit from the company, taken short-term measures to deal with the financial crisis, reached a salary settlement with labour unions, and it has taken the necessary steps to fill vacancies at the executive management level.
I'm also duty-bound to report on the investigation of the Auditor-General into alleged misconduct and financial irregularities at the SABC. The Auditor-General found between September 2007 and June 2009, firstly, that the organisational culture that prevailed at the SABC showed a complete disregard for the prescripts of the corporation's procurement and tender policy and of National Treasury regulations. Secondly, there appeared to be numerous cases of conflict of interest by SABC staff members doing business with the corporation. Thirdly, there were selected examples of alleged gross abuse of benefits, such as petrol cards, by senior executive managers. Finally, there was a gradual breakdown in the lines of accountability and proper financial reporting.
Underlying these specific problems, the committee observed, are significant deficiencies in supply-chain management, numerous incidents of fruitless, wasteful and irregular expenditure, and an ineffective human resource management system. The committee has called upon the interim board to take proactive steps to institute disciplinary action, including criminal prosecution if necessary, against SABC employees who may have defrauded the corporation or were engaged in irregular conduct. I am reliably informed that, in the next few days, the interim board will be announcing what action it will be taking against staff members who are alleged to have breached company policy or the law.
All in all then - don't speak too soon - it does seem that the SABC is overcoming its worst nightmare. A foundation has been laid by the interim board for a turnaround strategy for the SABC. What we now need to do is to look to the future. The first thing is to ensure a smooth transition from the interim board to the new board that will be constituted by the President.
The SABC must also develop a new and sustainable financial model. The Ministry of Communications has also issued a discussion paper on the public broadcaster, which will be finalised in the near future. As a consequence, the Broadcasting Act will have to be reviewed and possibly amended.
I trust that the House will approve the nominations this afternoon. I am aware that some of the opposition parties are not fully supportive of all the nominees. That is understandable, but I do think that, as Parliament, it will be important to demonstrate full support for the new board.
Why?
This will be ... [Interjections.] Madam Deputy Speaker, there is a monkey heckling me on the other side. [Laughter.] This will be necessary ...
On a point of order, Madam Speaker: Is it parliamentary for a member to call another member a monkey? [Interjections.]
Withdraw.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I humbly withdraw, as I don't want to insult the monkey in the Johannesburg zoo. [Laughter.]
Madam Speaker, sorry, but that is not acceptable. Once again, he inferred that the member is a monkey.
Madam Speaker, I withdraw. [Interjections.]
I trust that the House will approve the nominations this afternoon. I am aware that the opposition parties are not fully supportive of all the nominees. That is understandable, but I do think that, as Parliament, it will be important to demonstrate full support for the new board. This will be necessary if we hope to get further progress at the SABC. The committee recommends that the House approve the nomination of the 12 candidates for appointment to the SABC board. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Deputy Speaker, I am going to deliver my speech in Afrikaans.
Agb mevrou die Adjunkspeaker, hopelik sal dit in die toekoms beter gaan met die belerde Suid-Afrikaanse Uitsaaikorporasie, SAUK. Die arme SAUK het as't ware 'n bespotting geword. Dit is tog bitter jammer dat die ANC- beheerde Portefeulje Komitee oor Kommunikasie nie al tydens die derde Parlement van die Republiek van Suid-Afrika opgetree het nie.
Die DA het gehoop dat die ANC waardevolle lesse geleer het tydens die aanwysing van die vorige SAUK-raad. Dit was 'n toonbeeld van wat gebeur indien die aanwysing van so 'n belangrike raad verpolitiseer word.
Die SAUK is 'n besonder belangrike staatsentiteit wat aan die mense van Suid-Afrika behoort. Nie een politieke party in die land kan daarop aanspraak maak dat die SAUK aan daardie party behoort nie. Indien 'n megakommunikasie instansie verpolitiseer word, word die boodskap wat na die mense van die land, via sy radionetwerke en TV-stasies uitgesaai word, verwring. Enige politieke inmenging deur 'n politieke party het 'n vernietigende invloed op vryheid van spraak en die onafhanklikheid van joernaliste. Dis nie 'n nuwe verskynsel nie. Jy kry nie 'n beter voorbeeld as die SAUK in die apartheidsjare nie.
Kom ons kyk na hoe die proses verloop het om die nuwe SAUK-raad aan te wys. Laat ek dit duidelik stel dat die DA diep teleurgesteld is deur die optrede van die ANC, tydens die hele proses. Dit was weer 'n baie duidelike voorbeeld dat die ANC nie vertrou kan word nie. Die ANC kan of wil nie sy beloftes gestand doen nie. Dit is baie duidelik dat die ANC 'n bang party geword het. Die ANC word duidelik deur sy alliansievennote gyselaar gehou.
Die ANC het nie woord gehou nie. Die mense van Suid-Afrika moet dit weet. Die ANC stel net belang in sy eie belange en stel dit voorop. Daarteenoor, is die DA 'n oop geleentheidsgedrewe politieke party wat gelyke geleenthede aan alle mense van Suid-Afrika bied. Die DA stel dit voorop dat die beste individu 'n geleentheid gebied word, op grond van vaardighede, kennis en uitnemendheid, nie soos die ANC kies, op grond van die politieke verbondenheid van die individu nie. Dis belangriker vir die ANC om sy alliansievennote, Cosatu, die Suid-Afrikaanse Kommuniste Party en die ANC- jeugliga, gelukkig en tevrede te hou.
Wat gebeur toe met die proses? Die ANC laat 'n geleentheid deur hulle vingers glip soos wat Bafana Bafana die kanse wat hulle kry, oor die doelhok skop.
Die SAUK s, en ek haal aan uit die jaarverslag van 2008:
Corporate goals create an SABC that enjoys the support and respect of its shareholders, viewers, listeners and other stakeholders.
Die ANC verkondig in die Portefeulje Komitee oor Kommunikasie hulle gunsteling frase tot vervelens toe:
The opposition must engage in the process.
Goedgelowig raak ons toe betrokke. Ons "engage" laat die biesies bewe.
Ek onthou agb de Lille het aan die begin van die proses ges: "Moenie ons tyd mors nie." Die opposisie gaan nie net 'n rubberstempel wees vir 'n ANC- beplande anneksering van die SAUK nie.
Daar belowe die ANC so tussen die lyne 'n 8/4 bedeling. Wat gebeur? Dit lees soos 'n mirakel. Die DA saam met die opposisiepartye, die Inkatha- Vryheidsparty uitgesluit, ondersteun sewe van die kandidate wat die ANC ook ondersteun. Omdat die DA glo aan 'n oop geleentheidsgedrewe samelewing, glo ons dat mense op meriete 'n kans moet kry. Wat doen die ANC? Hulle vat die volgende vyf op die lys ook vir hulle.
Die ANC is 'n bang party. Hulle is bang vir die alliansievennote en dit nadat een van die ANC-lede my die vorige dag gebel het om te s dat mnr Golding opgeoffer sal word vir dr Danny Titus. Toe kom daar dadels van die storie. Na ses maande in die politiek wil ek vir die redelike mense s dat hulle nie die ANC moet vertrou nie. Die ANC leef in 'n mirakelagtige droom- en dwaalwreld van hul eie.
Die ANC is nie in staat nie. Die proses was van die begin af soos 'n sprankelende bruid. Toe gaan beduiwel die ANC alles. Daarmee maak die DA 'n duidelike beswaar teenoor die proses waar die ANC onder druk van hulle alliansievennote, geswig het. As gevolg daarvan ... (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[Hon Deputy Speaker, it is to be hoped that things will improve at the beleaguered South African Broadcasting Corporation, the SABC. The lamentable SABC has truly become the object of ridicule. It is really regrettable that the ANC-controlled Portfolio Committee on Communications failed to intervene at the time of the third Parliament of the Republic of South Africa.
The DA hoped that the ANC would have learnt valuable lessons from the appointment of the previous SABC board. That was a textbook lesson in what happens when the appointment of such an important board is allowed to become politicised.
The SABC is a state entity of particular importance that belongs to the people of South Africa. No single political party in the country can claim ownership of the SABC. If a mega-institution of communication becomes politicised, this distorts the message it broadcasts to the citizens of the country via its radio networks and TV stations. Any political interference by a political party has a devastating impact on freedom of speech and on the independence of journalists. This phenomenon is not new. There is no better example than the SABC of the apartheid era.
Let us now look at the process that was followed in appointing the new SABC board. I want to state unequivocally that the DA has been deeply disappointed by the conduct of the ANC throughout the process. It was once again a clear demonstration that the ANC is not to be trusted. The ANC is unable or unwilling to fulfil its promises. It is very clear that the ANC has become a frightened party. It is clearly being held hostage by its alliance partners.
The ANC failed to honour its promise, and the people of South Africa should be aware of that. The ANC is only concerned about its own interests, which it puts first. By contrast, the DA is an open opportunity-driven political party that offers equal opportunities to all the people of South Africa. The DA sets great store by the principle that opportunities should be given to the best individuals on the basis of skills, knowledge and excellence and not by way of the ANC's selection process, on the basis of an individual's political connections. To the ANC it is more important to please and appease its alliance partners - Cosatu, the South African Communist Party and the ANC Youth League.
So what happened to the whole process? The ANC let a golden opportunity slip through its fingers, in the same way that Bafana Bafana spoil their chances by putting the ball over the cross bar.
The SABC says in its 2008 annual report, and I quote:
Corporate goals create an SABC that enjoys the support and respect of its shareholders, viewers, listeners and other stakeholders.
In the Portfolio Committee on Communications the ANC repeat their favourite phrase ad nauseam:
The opposition must engage with the process.
And thus we committed ourselves in good faith. We engaged so wholeheartedly with the process that it was a joy to behold.
I remember the hon De Lille saying at the start of this process: "Don't waste our time." The opposition would not become a rubber stamp for the ANC's intended hijacking of the SABC.
Between the lines, the ANC offered a dispensation in the ratio 8 to 4. Then what happened? It reads like a miracle. The DA together with the other opposition parties, excluding the Inkatha Freedom Party, supported seven of the candidates that the ANC also favour. Because the DA believes in an open opportunity-driven society, we believe that people should get a chance on merit. But what did the ANC do? They also claimed the next five on the list for themselves.
The ANC is a scared party. They are afraid of their alliance partners, and that after one of the ANC members had phoned me the previous day to say that Mr Golding would be sacrificed for the sake of Dr Danny Titus. In the end, nothing came of it. After six months in politics I want to say to the reasonable people that they should not trust the ANC. The ANC lives in a miraculous, erratic dream world of its own.
The ANC is just not capable. At the outset, the process was like a sparkling bride. And then the ANC blew it. And with this the DA expresses its clear objection against this process, where the ANC buckled under the pressure of its alliance partners. And as a result ...]
... the DA will abstain.
Ten spyte van meneer Vadi se goeie pogings om die proses so oop en regverdig te hou, moes hy, mnr Vadi, en die Hoofsweep van die Portefeulje Komitee oor Kommunikasie, swig onder die druk van die alliansievennote en hul opperbevelhebbers in die Raad. Dit is uiteraard ook die druk vanuit Luthuli-huis. Ek dink dis die opperbevelhebber, die veldmaarskalk, Luthuli- Huis. Ek dank u. [Applous.] (Translation of Afrikaans paragraph follows.) [Despite Mr Vadi's best efforts to keep the process open and equitable, he - Mr Vadi - and the chief whip of the Portfolio Committee on Communications had to yield to the pressure of their alliance partners and of their own commanders-in-chief in the House. Naturally that is also the pressure from Luthuli House. I believe that is the commander-in-chief, the field marshal, Luthuli House. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Deputy Speaker, the SABC recently came into the limelight for all the wrong reasons. As Mr Vadi indicated, there were serious cash shortages, reckless expenditure on extravagant functions, unlimited petrol cards, transgressions of tender regulations, insider trading - in general, a plundering of public resources for personal gain.
In short, there was gross mismanagement through a lethal mix of reckless arrogance, incompetence and individual greed. As a result, not only does the public broadcaster find itself in dire financial straits, but, as indicated by the Minister of Arts and Culture last week, the resulting financial chaos also bankrupted 80% of local film producers who closed their doors owing to payment defaults by the SABC. This is a direct loss of job opportunities in an already depressed economy.
The recently published Auditor-General report vindicated the position of Cope and members of the previous board. It fingers senior management, some of whom have since left the organisation with a platinum handshake and others who are still there. South Africa is now anxiously waiting for the outcomes of criminal and civil proceedings, as well as disciplinary processes within the organisation. Cope will insist that the law takes its course and that we have full transparency of the process.
The impact of the SABC saga will, however, remain for many years to come as an indictable heritage of brutal political power play in the governing alliance that chose to frustrate the previous board rather than to act on their early warnings of budget shortfalls and irregularities.
Instead, the post-Polokwane ANC went out of their way to collapse the now defunct board in order to replace it with a team that would dance to the tune of Umshini Wami. [Interjections.] Because the ANC fails to understand the difference between a party, a state and independent institutions such as the SABC, they decided to again micromanage the entire process - from nomination through to final appointment - with direct instructions from Luthuli House.
While opposition parties trusted South Africans to nominate candidates for the board, the SACP-led ruling party filibustered sincere attempts on our part to conduct an arms-length process which would have been fully inclusive. Their preferred cadres were nominated from Luthuli House, Tuynhuys, Cosatu House and SACP headquarters. And owing to the slumbering turf wars in the governing alliance, every faction had to be represented, presumably to watch over each other. Even Julius Malema had his personal hand puppet. [Interjections.]
Deputy Speaker, on a point of order: I wonder if the hon Kilian would take a question.
With pleasure, but only at the end of the speech.
Cope will refrain from dissecting the personal merits or otherwise of individual candidates. There are indeed a number of excellent candidates who were selected on merit rather than on party loyalty. They will have a mammoth task to bring about balance and objectivity, ensuring that the SABC does not end up as another extension of the Luthuli House propaganda machine. We refuse to endorse a process that was not inclusive and in which opposition parties, which represent more than 30% of South Africans, were bulldozed. [Interjections.] We will therefore abstain from voting. Thank you, Deputy Speaker. [Time expired.] [Applause.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, on 1 July 2009 we called upon this National Assembly to dissolve what was left of the previous board of the SABC in order to pave the way for the nomination of an interim board to manage the affairs of the SABC. At the same time, we called for an inquiry into the financial affairs of the SABC so that the wrongdoers could be brought to book.
The Auditor-General has completed the necessary investigation and has reported to the portfolio committee. The interim board is seized with the necessary follow-up of ensuring that the wrongdoers account for their misdeeds. While those processes were going on, the portfolio committee was hard at work interviewing candidates for the new board of the SABC. That process went very well and we selected the names of individuals that are today brought before this House for acceptance.
The IFP supports these people as they represent the best crop of highly qualified and experienced individuals ... [Applause.] ... drawn from various sectors, in compliance with the Broadcasting Act. We are convinced that these candidates will give the SABC a competent, effective, strong and balanced board. It is our hope that they will give the SABC strong leadership and the country confidence that our national broadcaster is now in good hands and that this will ensure that the SABC serves the interests of our people as a whole.
We want to take this opportunity to thank members of the interim board for the manner in which they accepted the daunting and challenging responsibility of going in to stabilise the SABC and stop it from complete self-destruction. They moved quickly in there and hit the road running. We hope the new board will emulate their good example and do the same. I thank you, Madam Deputy Speaker. [Applause.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, Members of Parliament, good afternoon. On 1 July 2009, the chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Communications, the hon Vadi said: "Today is a sad day for our country."
I'm here today to say: Mosito o tswelela pele. Ke nako! [let the beat go on. Now is the time!]
We are ready as the ANC. The ANC welcomes the debate on the reinstitution of the SABC board, particularly on the proposed 12 names. When one looks at the SABC situation, it is clear that all is not well. Clearly, a drastic change is needed. We need a turnaround strategy. It is going to take time for the situation ... maar, bietjie, bietjie maak meer. [Applous.] [... but every drop counts. [Applause.]]
We'll get there.
The SABC reported a financial loss of R839 million for the 2008-09 financial year, and even requested government to help with a R2 billion bailout. Our intervention as this House has been the appointment of an interim board, which had to stabilise the SABC to increase revenue and reduce costs.
The interim board has done a good job. In a very short period of time, among other things, it had to fork out a heavy bailout of the then Group Chief Executive Officer, Dali Mpofu. It was a costly but prudent decision. It had to be taken.
It also closed some of the international news bureaus to scale down operations and costs. These measures and others indicate the boldness and decisiveness of the interim board as a clean handover to the new permanent board.
The nomination of Suzanne Vos, Desmond Golding, Clifford Motsepe, Ms Barbara Masekela and David Niddrie indicates the principles of continuity, youth vibrancy and change, which should be carried to the new permanent board to promote a culture of ethics and operational effectiveness. I repeat for the DA hon members that Mr Niddrie is also part of the change as a South African. He deserves a chance.
Se se raya gore, letlhaku le le?wa le agelelwa mo go le legologolo; botlhale ba phala bo tswa phalaneng; mmangwana o tshwara thipa ka fa bogaleng. [This means that great ideas are derived from old ones; older people can rely on their children for wisdom; a mother always protects her child.] The ANC, about which we are not shy, at its 52nd national conference in Polokwane resolved that in accordance with the Broadcasting Act, Act 4 of 1999, the appointing body should ensure that the SABC board is representative of all sectors in our society. We therefore believe that the accountability and fairness of the public broadcaster are central to the objective of the gains we have made as a country in pursuit of a national democratic society.
In conclusion, once again, the ANC calls on all political parties to support the 12 names proposed collectively to ensure that we have an effective broadcaster. They reflect a broad South African demography and possess an array of skills necessary to transform the institution.
I'd like to say that I'm disappointed by the hon member from the DA as he was also part of the process. As a new member, I don't believe what he said is true because he was part of the process, we had agreed with them and we agreed on the process. [Interjections.] It is high time that the DA accept that the majority of South Africans spoke on 22 April 2009. That is the mandate we carry; that is the mandate we'll die for.
Mmogo re ka dira go le gontsi. Ke a leboga. [Legofi.][Together, we can do more. Thank you. [Applause.]]
Madam Deputy Speaker, the SABC as a public asset belongs to the nation and therefore needs to be protected. A lot has been said about the process by the DA and Cope and I agree with them. We were totally, totally misled, hon Minister, by the ANC. We trusted them. We didn't want to participate in the process because we said, "We are not going to rubber- stamp this process." They said, "It's fine; it will be inclusive", only for us to find that "inclusive" for the ANC meant including ANC, Cosatu and the SA Communist Party. [Interjections.] [Applause.] That is where the problem came from.
We really tried our best to make sure that we had an SABC board that the Minister could work with and that he could ... Could you sit down please, I'm still busy. [Interjections.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, I rise on a point of order: Would the member take a question?
No, I don't want to take a question. The only thing that I want to say is that Parliament must continue to monitor the SABC, we must continue to monitor the board and we must ensure that we don't land the SABC in the mess that the ANC left the SABC in. [Interjections.]
No, it's the ANC. It is the infighting in the ANC that caused the SABC board to look the way it looks today. [Applause.] [Interjections.] We must give the new board a chance. But the ID will only support the seven names that we agree on. We will not support the other five names that we don't agree on. Thank you. [Applause.]
Order! This is the hon Alberts' maiden speech. Could we afford him what we usually afford members delivering maiden speeches? [Applause.]
Mevrou die Adjunkspeaker, die proses van die aanstelling van die raadslede van die SABC-raad het die tekortkominge van die Grondwet as 'n instrument wat 'n komplekse samelewing moet reguleer, onderstreep. [Madam Deputy Speaker, the process of appointing board members to the SABC board has underlined the shortcomings of the Constitution as an instrument that must regulate a complex society.]
Having regard to the process of selecting the SABC board members, the following facts have been confirmed. Once again, the Constitution allows the majority party to control the selection process and thus all appointments to be made in all levels of government. From this flows further consequence, for instance the appointment of whoever the majority party wishes, irrespective of skills, orientation and representation. The further consequence of the absence of a constitutional check on the powers of the majority party is the creation of a dispensation whereby opposition parties can only influence and make appointments by the grace of the ANC.
What we have here is an overshoot of power by one entity, namely the majority party that disallows democratic space for Afrikaners and minorities within the current constitutional system owing to a constitutional vacuum. The pure weight of this power is unsustainable because it cannot be carried by our diverse societal environment.
The current entropy of the societal system, of which the SABC is an important part, is being hastened by the lack of service delivery ironically brought about by systemic discrimination against Afrikaners and other minorities that have the requisite skills and experience to solve the service delivery conundrum in the SABC and, more importantly, in the municipalities across the country as well as in the various provincial and national departments.
Die aanstelling van die SABC-raad is ook gedoen sonder om werklik 'n premie te plaas op die verteenwoordiging van al Suid-Afrika se gemeenskappe. So het die Afrikaanse gemeenskap geen werklike kampioen op die SABC-raad nie. Daar was weliswaar 'n vergunning van die ANC om 'n baie bevoegde Afrikaanse persoon aan te stel, te wete dr Danny Titus, vir wie ek baie respek het, maar van die ander opposisiepartye het die geleentheid tot sy aanstelling verbrou en sodoende is 'n vyfde posisie vir die opposisie op die lys verbeur. Die punt is egter dat die Grondwet ironies toelaat dat die ANC sy kaders kan ontplooi, maar nie noodwendig dat alle gemeenskappe behoorlike verteenwoordiging kry nie. Dit is die ironie van die Suid-Afrikaanse situasie op die oomblik.
Die gevolgtrekking te make vanuit hierdie proses kan soos volg opgesom word: Suid-Afrika se grondwet is wesenlik defektief. Dit kan herlei word na die onderhandelinge van 1994, wat geboorte gegee het aan die huidige Grondwet. Die onderhandelinge self was wesenlik gebrekkig aangesien die onderhandelaars van die Nasionale Party effektief uitoorl is deur die ANC se bewese onderhandelaars. Daarom is daar geboorte gegee aan 'n gebrekkige Grondwet wat al die magsoorheersing toelaat soos dit vandag gebeur.
Daarom is ons nou op soek na 'n waarlik beter bedeling waarin 'n ewewig heers tussen minderhede en die meerderheid, nie op grond van gunste nie, soos wat president Zuma tans doen nie, maar as 'n uitvloeisel van grondwetlike imperatief. Daarom, terwyl ek en my kollegas in die VF Plus gebruik sal maak van die instrumente in die huidige Grondwet, sal ons in voortdurende stryd met die ANC verkeer om die Grondwet te verbeter. Om bloot die huidige Grondwet te beskerm sonder 'n plan vir die toekoms, sonder om die gebreke daarin aan te vul is die domein van 'n uitsiglose opposisieparty waarvan sommige tans in die Parlement sit. (Translation of Afrikaans paragraphs follows.)
[The SABC board was appointed without really placing a premium on the representation of all the South African communities. Hence the Afrikaans community has no real champion on the SABC board. Indeed, there was a concession from the ANC to appoint a very competent Afrikaans person, Dr Danny Titus, for whom I have a lot of respect, but some of the other opposition parties spoiled the opportunity of his appointment and so a fifth position on the list for the opposition was forfeited.
The point however is that the Constitution ironically allows the ANC to deploy its cadres, but this doesn't necessarily mean that every community has proper representation. This is the irony of the South African situation at present.
The conclusion that we can draw from this process can be summarised as follows: South Africa's Constitution is fundamentally flawed. This can be traced bach to the negotiations of 1994, which gave birth to the current Constitution. The negotiations themselves were essentially flawed, seeing as the negotiators of the National Party were effectively outmanoeuvred by the proven negotiators of the ANC. Therefore, a flawed Constitution was brought to life that allows all the power domination that is happening today.
That is why we are now looking for a truly better dispensation where there will be a balance between minorities and the majority, not on the basis of favours, as President Zuma is doing, but as a result of the constitutional imperative. Therefore, while my colleagues and I in the FF Plus will make use of the instruments in the current Constitution, we will be in constant battle with the ANC to improve the Constitution. The mere protection of the current Constitution without a plan for the future, without supplementing the shortcomings, is the domain of an opposition party without vision, some of which are sitting in this Parliament.]
Hon Alberts, your time is up. I even added an extra minute and 12 seconds.
I'll finish up - one last sentence. Thank you, Madam Speaker. In summary then, if we had proper constitutionally enshrined cultural and minority safeguards, Dr Titus would have been on the SABC board today. We would have had a permanent government of national unity with executive positions reserved for minorities. We can still change this and fix this problem.
Maar dit hang af van u vermo tot insig in die toekoms en die beplanning daarvoor. Ek dank u. [But it depends on your ability to have insight into the future and plan for it. I thank you.]
Thank you, Madam Speaker.
Deputy Speaker, hon members and our guests, today, as we enter this debate as the ANC, our ideological clarity on the nature and character of the public broadcaster is unshaken and is clear.
It remains our resolve to ensure that the right of our people to receive information is not compromised, and we are on record on the development of an information society. Our people have the right to information, which allows them to make their choices in many respects. We are on course to make sure that this becomes a reality.
It was based on this understanding that the 52nd national conference of the ANC re-emphasised the need to speed up the finalisation of the funding model of the public broadcaster. We applaud the Minister of Communications for making sure that the necessary steps were taken. This discussion is in the public domain, as we speak.
It is important to assure the public that the ANC has never resolved to turn the public broadcaster into a state broadcaster. All we called for was to make sure that the Minister intervened, so that the SABC board complied with the necessary legislation, such as the Public Finance Management Act and other provisions. We gave an undertaking on 7 July 2009, when we said that we wished to see a board in place that was representative of our society in all its manifestations. The interests of the middle class and business class can never be the only interests that find resonance in the type of people we need on a board such as that of the SABC. In short, we cannot afford to have an elitist board. We should ensure that the process to appoint the permanent board is inclusive, and we believe in that expectation. Firstly, we were requested as the committee to extend the deadline of the first closing date for nominations. We did so, acknowledging the importance of the role of civic society. This, therefore, calls on all of us to do things differently, as we cannot afford to have a board that doesn't enjoy the support of this House. However, in doing so, we cannot ignore the provisions of the relevant legislation.
Without any fear of contradiction, this was not an easy process. When the committee was called upon to make choices in terms of nominations, of course we had various differences with colleagues in other political parties. However, we must say that the recommended names before the House are based on skill and representivity as required by the legislation. Of course, it's a normal phenomenon, I suppose, in a democratic environment, that other parties and other individuals might brand the process as a political one. There is nothing much we can do about that. It's their individual right. In fact, Parliament consists of political parties.
I don't understand that when the ANC pushes in a certain direction, it becomes a political matter as we are all political parties here in Parliament. I think we need a redefinition for the other political parties, so that they can clarify who they are and what they are doing here. [Applause.] We are also pleased, as the ANC, that in reports of the public media and from other platforms, there's been little outcry about this new board we are proposing. The majority of our people are happy, because they understand that they cannot afford to go through more pain, which is not necessary, which is not informed and which is ill - advised by other parties. [Interjections.]
The lifespan of the interim board is six months, but the board has created a fertile ground for the incoming board to ensure that they continue working and ensuring that the public broadcaster complies with all the relevant policies and legislation. I must hasten to say that during the interviews one of the issues we picked up on and that we need to follow up as a committee or as Parliament, is the issue of conflicts of interest amongst board members themselves and executive managers.
Secondly, we must deal with the matter of editorial independence, because it has become an issue, which seems to confuse some of the decisions of the SABC. The last thing we said that we must deal with is to review and revise the policies, by the board itself, in order to make sure that in moving forward we do away with this distortion, which we have picked up during these trying times.
The ANC would, therefore, like to thank these men and women, who constitute the interim board, for the sterling and wonderful work they have been doing in establishing a solid base for the incoming board. The difficult aspect was that when the interim board was recommended by this committee, all sorts of things were said against the ANC. You see, the problem is that people can't be ... I nearly said, "man enough", or they can't stand for the truth today and say that, indeed, we pointed fingers at the ANC, but they have done sterling work to give us this interim board, because their work is outstanding. No one can dispute the work that the interim board is doing. [Interjections.] [Applause.]
However, we must also say that our hearts go out to those men and women who sold their labour to the SABC as independent producers, and who now can't put food on the table. I therefore call on the committee to engage with the interim board so that relief measures can be found and this doesn't occur or go on.
Whilst, at the same time, we are recommending the appointment of these men and women with a wide range of experience and expertise, we must make sure that, as we have done, we are complying with the process that we need to follow.
I don't understand - maybe someone must assist us with the mathematics. This issue of adding and subtracting and so on, seems to be a challenge. If you need a board of 12 people, and you come here and say you agree about 7 of them, but you still say the board is not inclusive, what does that mean? Seven, for me, is even above 50% of twelve. What do you mean? Can you clarify? Everyone comes here and says that they agree with seven names and only differ about five of them. But they continue to say that this board is not representative, that we have not carried on board the interests of the opposition parties, but on seven names they agree. What does that mean? Maybe somebody needs to clarify that particular argument. [Applause.] I just don't understand. [Interjections.] I don't understand.
I don't understand when people point fingers at this board. For the first time in the history of the SABC board, five of the members serving on the board are white ... [Interjections.] ... because colour was not an issue. Colour was not an issue. The skills and expertise of these men and women was the issue at play. Why can't you give us credit for that? [Interjections.] [Applause.]
We deserve credit where credit is due. Of course, you cannot give it when it is not due. But, I am saying that for the first time ... [Interjections.] The hon Dene Smuts understands that, that for the first time the SABC board has five white people - on that particular board. [Interjections.] So, give credit when it's due. We continue to say ...
Madam Deputy Speaker, would the member take a question? [Interjections.]
Our strength, as people, is not tested during the best of times.
Madam Deputy Speaker, on a point of order ...
No question. Sit down. No question. Thank you. Our strength, as people, is not tested during the best of times. As we said before, we shall never become despondent because the weather is bad, but, then, if the weather turns, become triumphant because the sun is shining. We cannot work like that. It cannot just be the responsibility of the ANC when things go bad with the board, and then when things go well everyone wants to claim the victory of that achievement. It can't be. It cannot work in that manner.
I must say those who complete their course will do so only because they do not, as fatigue sets in, convince themselves that the road ahead is still too long. They do so because they believe that the road can be long, but they are going to achieve their goals. That is what we stand for, as the ANC, and what we will continue to stand for: that the road might be rough, but, where we are going, we are clear that we are going to achieve the ultimate goal we want to achieve. [Applause.]
We want to wish the incoming board well in its endeavours. I thank you. Ngiyathokoza. Ke ya Leboga. Ndo livhuwa. Ndiyabulela. Ndza khensa. Baie dankie. Ngiyabonga. [Thank you.] [Applause.]
Madam Deputy Speaker, the ACDP participated in the initial stages of this process and certain of the interviews, with our nominee being short listed. Our nominee regrettably had to withdraw, due to business considerations.
During the initial stages of this process, the majority party showed a willingness to accommodate opposition candidates in the final board. However, we regret to learn that these initial undertakings were not adhered to when the final deliberations took place. We regret that the majority party insisted that certain of its political nominees be accommodated, such as a representative from their youth league.
In view of the controversies that surrounded the previous board and, more particularly, allegations of political interference in the running of the public broadcaster, the ACDP is concerned that this new board will again be politically tainted. In view of the severe financial and management challenges facing the public broadcaster, as highlighted in the Auditor- General's report, it is regrettable that a new board will commence its duties already under a cloud. The ACDP will, therefore, have to abstain. Thank you.
Madam Deputy Speaker, the MF indeed recognises the necessity of an efficient and effective management team to be put in place for the SABC board. There may be some excellent candidates amongst the 12 nominations, and we have no doubt whatsoever about that, but there must be, and I repeat, there must be equal opportunities for all.
We say that South Africa belongs to all who live in it, united in our diversity, yet we fail to take into consideration the broad cross-cultural nature of South African society in the composition of the SABC board. For this reason, the MF will abstain.
Madam Deputy Speaker, I think I need to clear something up. I think hon Kholwane has made a very crucial mistake if he thinks that the opposition, the DA in particular, has the same preoccupation with racial head-counting that the ANC does; that's an ANC thing, it's not our thing. Please don't force it on us like it's our thing, it really isn't. We went for skills and ability; your racial obsession is yours, please don't force it onto the other side of the House. [Applause.]
The report of the Auditor-General on the results of his investigation into allegations of financial mismanagement at the SABC has unearthed overwhelming amounts of rot at the public broadcaster. The SABC is supposed to be the pride of our nation and the voice of our people; yet, in the absence of sure and decisive leadership and effective parliamentary oversight, it was allowed to dwindle into an embarrassment for South Africa. Not only is the reputation of the broadcaster in tatters, but because it was ordinary workers who initially came forward with these allegations which had to be investigated by the Auditor-General, it is now also clear that morale amongst staff at the SABC is at an all-time low.
The DA did not support the dissolution of the original board and its replacement with an interim structure, because we knew that this had nothing to do with entrenching good governance at the SABC, but was instead an exercise in political reshuffling. The fact that the interim board has performed well in its task of stabilising the SABC doesn't take away from the fact that had Parliament worked on dealing with the SABC's problems much earlier no such stabilisation measures would have been necessary in the first place.
With regard to the way forward for this board from today, there are a number of ways in which it can now address the current crises facing the SABC. The most important of these are establishing and adhering to the highest good governance principles at the SABC; and projecting a strong and unified body with the muscle and political will to withstand external pressures of any kind, but particularly, political pressure from those who would seek to control and dictate news and current affairs policy at the SABC. The board must also move swiftly to address the crisis which is facing South Africa's independent producers, whom one interview candidate very aptly referred to as our nation's storytellers, and whom we know are dependent on the SABC for the bulk of their business; and it must also appoint or have significant input into the appointment of a new CEO and head of news, in order to prevent the historical frictions between the executive management and the nonexecutive board, which have arisen as a result of previous boards inheriting managers that they did not appoint themselves.
Most importantly of all, this Parliament must make sure that it takes its role as the SABC's oversight authority very seriously, and in this the DA will brook no compromises. The truth is that this Parliament failed miserably to provide effective oversight over the previous SABC board. It was, of course, much too preoccupied with conducting a political witch-hunt aimed at purging a brand-new board which it felt was aligned with then President Thabo Mbeki.
If the previous committee had been doing its job properly, it would have responded with the utmost urgency when the then chairperson of the board tried to report the financial irregularities at the SABC to Parliament in the first place in early 2008, but the board was instead subjected to a cynical political ambush by ANC MPs in the committee, setting South Africa down this long and arduous path that has led us to where we stand today.
The DA, for its part, will do its utmost to prevent us from having to go down this road at the SABC again. I thank you.
Chair, I rise on behalf of the ANC to respond to this debate in the portfolio committee, which I must say I found tremendously amusing. It was very funny to see people who are usually conservative and staid trying to be militant and fighting to impress the gallery. They just do not succeed in those things. I want to tell you, hon members Kilian, Van den Berg and so on, that you should go to your other Cope members and get some lessons from them, because they are good with those things, they know how to be militant and how to speak to the gallery.
The procedure that we went through was in fact, if you actually followed it, a very enriching one. It took ages for us to go through everything; we found a list of candidates that we agreed upon, whom we wanted to interview, and many of them we agreed on as being very good candidates, and there are also some very good candidates who didn't make it, and obviously that is how the process works.
But you see, the joke of all of this - and this is why I say it's a joke - is that none of them, except our chairperson, referred to the criteria for the appointment of the board, because not a single speaker here that speaks against anyone could show, individually or as a collective, why the people that we appointed are not suitable. Not a single one of them. The only one who was mentioned is Prof Danny Titus, and he's been appointed to the SA Human Rights Commission, exactly because of the kind of respect we have for him, and because there wasn't space for him here. So, he's been given the space to do exactly those things.
On occasions like these, I think we should reflect, 15 years down the line, to see whether we are actually maturing as a democracy or not, because even in this process there are a lot of positive things to take out of it. I must tell you, however, that the opposition should actually start studying what it is to be an opposition. To be so immature - you're pretending to be the leader of such an immature group - and to handle this issue with such immaturity is really pathetic. Well, if we are obsessed with race, why is it that all the people that are not here, that you are fighting for are white? That's most of them, what you wanted were more whites here; don't tell me we're obsessed with race.
The fact of the matter is that we are in agreement, if you listen to the speeches, that we are facing a problem and a crisis with the SABC Board. It is one sick puppy at the moment: Firstly, we find, and I think we have agreement amongst probably most parties on this, that the model that exists at the moment, particularly in terms of the relationship between the board and the Minister or the board and Parliament is clearly one that is not correct, and that there should be a review of the model that we've got; and secondly, it has become very clear, and these are just allegations at this stage, that there are huge financial problems at the SABC. [Interjections.]
No, it's not under our management; it's under the management of the board. [Interjections.] Oh please, try to be intelligent when you talk, don't shout rubbish! [Laughter.] If that's the level of debate of your members, I wouldn't actually go very deep into their intelligence, if I were you.
Now, one would've thought that, if there was maturity, particularly ...
Johnnie Walker!
Well, I'm not Johnnie Walker. You guys are the ones who drink at lunchtime, not me. I don't drink. We all know where you and Mike Ellis are at lunchtime; you are in the pub. If you ask me, next time, I'll come and have a Coke with you while you're drinking at lunchtime. That's why you're so rowdy after lunch, because you guys spend lunchtime in the pub. Your militancy comes from the alcohol, it doesn't come from intellect. In fact, we should actually give you the "dop" system and it'll work much better for you, because then we'll have some really lively debates after lunch, if we institute the "dop" system.
Back to the point I was making, you would've thought that, therefore, there would be maturity, because what is the vehicle through which we have to fix this sick puppy? The vehicle is the SABC board and, therefore, in the appointment of the board, like we did in the process, we should be vigorous, and we should have strong debates on the right candidates.
Chairman?
I don't want questions.
Yes, what is it?
I just want to ask if the speaker will be prepared to answer the question why he's no longer a Minister?
No, that is out of order, hon member. Hon De Lange, continue.
If you want to come and have a drink with me at lunchtime, so you can be as brave as you are now, come. I'll tell you, Johnnie Walker; I'll buy you one and I'll explain to you exactly what you want to know.
Now, before I was interrupted, let me ... [Interjections.] ... oh, this is very strong. One would've thought that maturity would reign, and once we've had the fights about the board and once we've been able to agree on a whole lot of people, that there would then be maturity to say, "OK, we now have to lend credibility and legitimacy to this board to fix up the problem", because you and I, in the committee, can come and be militant here, but the only way we're going to fix it is through that board.
The big joke is, and hon Lindiwe Mazibuko tried to dance around the issue, that the militancy we see now is exactly the militancy that was here when we appointed the interim board. We were told that we were politicising the board and it's terrible. We were told that we were putting all these hacks on it, and today, the biggest fans of the interim board are the opposition. In fact, some of these opposition parties nominated some of those people from the interim board to try and get them on this board. The rest of us didn't do that. So, you have to be careful that, if you want to achieve a goal, and the goal we have to achieve is to fix this sick puppy, there's a vehicle through which we have to do it, and to try and come and be militant here and shoot down candidates whom no one can fault, individually or collectively, to do the job, is the wrong thing to do.
Of course, then we have the hon Alberts, a man of pure genius. I don't know where he read these things, but he comes and tells us today that what happens in a democracy is that the majority actually wins. When the majority vote, they actually win, and that's terrible, that's really terrible. By definition, what he and others are arguing is that, if we in the committee agree to the opposition's candidates then that will be democracy. When we agree to our candidates that's not democracy. The same thing with politicisation; we asked them in the committee and they said that we are politicising the process, we said, "Why do you say that?" And they said, "You're not agreeing to our candidates". We said, "But you're not agreeing to our candidates". Why is that not politicisation?
So, at the end of the day, the fact of the matter is that the way it works in a democracy - let me just explain to Adv Alberts - you don't have to amend the Constitution. In fact, every democracy in the world works like that. I know you're surprised by the fact that we have got this unique democracy, where the majority actually reigns, but I must tell you that most democracies in the world ...
Chairperson, on a point of order: I just want to remind Mr De Lange that Adv Alberts made a maiden speech.
Well, if he made a maiden speech I don't know why he became controversial. [Laughter.] When you make a maiden speech, you're not supposed to be controversial. You can't come to Parliament and say "the majority" when they're going to vote and "it's terrible when a democracy works like that"; you can't do that. You must actually try and stick to ordinary things.
Hon Buthelezi, is it a point of order?
Chairperson, I just want to know from the hon De Lange, when one is new, how does he know what is controversial and what is not? [Laughter.] [Applause.]
I would've hoped his Whips would've explained it to him, Chief.
The other thing I want to point out is that if this process is so flawed and not inclusive, I must then ask the question: Why is it that the IFP supported this process and voted for it? They are an opposition party; they are one of the most vigorous opposition parties we have, so why would they go along with the process? Must we assume that they've been duped as well? In any case, next time you vote for the majority you'll always win, that's the lucky thing about it. So, it's very important ...
Chairperson, on a point of order: Is it parliamentary for hon Mluleki George to say that hon Johnny is speaking Bangladeshi? [Laughter.]
Well, I didn't hear that issue, but I'm not sure. Did you say that, hon member?
I'll also take him for Johnnie Walker, and I'll speak Bangladeshi to him.
A lot of this has been on a lighter note, but I really want to say that this process has been important and I want to say to the opposition that we have to be careful in the way that we treat this board. We cannot let the legitimacy of this board disappear; we cannot let the credibility of the board, whenever we disagree on this issue, be doubted. Let us loudly explain where we disagree on things, let everyone understand it, but let's try and get this board to fix this thing up, and let's try and get this board to operate properly. It is in everyone's interest that we do that.
There are some things in this Bill that are terrible, and I never thought the hon Dene Smuts would ever let this go through. There is a clause on conflict of interest in here which says that when you appoint a board member it doesn't matter whether he's got a conflict of interest, whether he's got business interests that are directly affected by the SABC, as long as they declare it. So, you can do billions and millions of rands' worth of business with the SABC, which is happening at the moment, by the way, as long as you declare that interest, it doesn't matter that you've got an interest in that institution, and we in Parliament actually passed that law to allow that. [Time expired.] Thank you for the entertainment. [Applause.]
Debate concluded.
Question put: That Mr C S Gina, Mr D K Golding, Ms P M Green, Mr P J Harris, Ms B J M Masekela, Mr M A Mello, Mr N C Motsepe, Dr B S Ngubane, Mr D C Niddrie, Ms C F O'Neil, Ms F L Sekha and Ms S C Vos be recommended for appointment as nonexecutive members to the South African Broadcasting Corporation Board.
Question agreed to (Democratic Alliance, Congress of the People, Freedom Front Plus, Minority Front and African Christian Democratic Party abstained).
Mr C S Gina, Mr D K Golding, Ms P M Green, Mr P J Harris, Ms B J M Masekela, Mr M A Mello, Mr N C Motsepe, Dr B S Ngubane, Mr D C Niddrie, Ms C F O'Neil, Ms F L Sekha and Ms S C Vos accordingly recommended for appointment as nonexecutive members to the South African Broadcasting Corporation Board.