Hansard: NA: Mini-plenary 1

House: National Assembly

Date of Meeting: 10 Nov 2022


No summary available.



Watch: Min Plenary 1

Members of the mini-plenary session met on the virtual platform at 14:00.

Chairperson Mr F D Xasa took the Chair and requested members to observe a moment of silence for prayer or meditation.

The Chairperson announced that the virtual mini-plenary sitting constituted a meeting of the National Assembly.

The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): Hon members, before we proceed I would like to remind you that the virtual mini plenary session is deemed to be in the precinct of Parliament and constitutes a meeting of the National Assembly for debating purposes only. In addition to the rules of virtual sittings, the Rules of the National Assembly including the rules of debate apply.

Members enjoy the same powers and privileges that apply in a sitting of the National Assembly. Members should equally note that anything said in the virtual platform is deemed to have been said to the House and maybe ruled upon.

All members who have logged in shall be considered to be present and are requested to mute their microphones and only unmute when they are recognised to speak. This is because the mics are very sensitive and will pick up noise which might disturb the attention of other members. When recognised to speak, please, unmute your microphone and work on activity permits, connect your video. Members may make use of the icon on the bar at the bottom of their screens which has an option that allows the member to put up his or her to raise points of order.

The secretariat will assist in alerting the Chairperson to members requesting to speak. When using the virtual system, members are urged to refrain or desist from raising unnecessary points of order or interjections.


Lastly, I wish to remind you that we are meeting in a mini- plenary session and therefore any decisions will be taken in a full plenary session of the National Assembly. The first item


on the Order Paper is a subject for discussion in the name of hon Shivambu on, Just energy transition in South Africa. I recognise hon Shivambu.




(Subject for discussion)


Mr N F SHIVAMBU: We have already communicated that the hon member Madokwe is going to lead the discussion.


The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): It’s fine! Let’s allow hon Madokwe.

Ms P MADOKWE: Chairperson, I am just having a bit of network problems, but now I am ready. Climate change continues to wreak havoc on many nations and economies across the world. There is no denying the monumental this will still have on this country and in the entire world. Our climate change mitigation and adaptation plans must however be based on a solid conceptual and practical foundation and we must refuse to be used as pons by the west in pursuit of goals that have nothing to do with us.

The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): Any difficulty now? What is happening?


Ms P MADOKWE: I think I am still experiencing some difficulties, Chair. I am not sure what is happening with my gadget.


The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): We can see you as you are appearing.


Ms P MADOKWE: Or may I speak with the video switched off rather because I am not sure what is happening with my gadgets. Apologies for that! But I will continue.


Climate change is a global phenomenon and those global powers contributing the most to greenhouse gas emissions must take more responsibility in reducing their gas emissions in order to prevent global climate change problems. South Africa is not even in the top 10 worst global emitters of greenhouse gases, but the attention of the world seems fixated on us and what we do.


The main culprits of climate change are primarily the global north which accounts for more than two-thirds of the world’s


emissions. These are countries such as Canada, US, Australia and all European countries especially Germany which has postured itself as the darling of climate change advocacy.

China, the United States, India, Russia and Japan are the highest contributors of climate change and the owners to cut carbon emissions and to fund such initiatives across the globe should be on them and definitely not in the form of loans as has been the case.



We want to state it here upright that the decommission of coal power stations, the dramatic reduction on investments in coal and the transition into the yet to be tested renewable resources of energy, will surely plunge this economy into a crisis that the protagonist of this just transition could never imagine.



Chair, the Presidential Climate Commission that was established in December 2020, published its framework for a just transition in South Africa which outlines the key focal areas to transit South Africa from a fossil fuel dependent economy towards one that relies largely on renewable sources of energy. This framework anticipates that the country would heavily downsize its dependency on coal from 2025 to 2030, and that this would result in massive job losses particularly in


coal mining areas around Mpumalanga. The framework further anticipates that the transition away from coal will have major effects on the agricultural value chain, the motor industry values chain as well as the tourism value chain. Despite this no provisions are made for the kind of economic losses the country would be making as a result of this transition. No reliable alternatives for energy generation and no consideration of the impact of this on our industrial development which requires sustainable and reliable sources of energy. More concerning for us however is the boldness in which global financial institutions are dictating terms in this country under the guise of providing loans for the just transitions.



Over the past few years since Mr Ramaphosa became President there has been aggressive attempts by global financial institutions to insert themselves into domestic politics of this country in an attempt to capture and dictate our economic policies. The World Bank has recently approved R9 billion loan facility for Eskom to repurpose the Komati Power Station which is basically a fancy word for the decommissioning of its power station without making means to replace the capacity to generate power loss because of this decommissioning. While understanding that the Komati Power Station has reached its


stages of usefulness, the EFF use the intimate involvement of the World Bank and other global institutions in our country’s so-called just transition with a huge sense of trepidation.



Between 2018 and now, South Africa has received in excess of R30 billion in loans from the World Bank alone. This is over and above the over R65 billion loan the country got form the International Monetary Fund, IMF, in 2020. On the other hand, it is expected that South Africa will need more than

$30 billion for transition to the renewable energy. That is


$30 billion worth of loans that our people will be expected to pay back with interests - loans that have detrimental conditions.



History is littered with examples of ruined economies who thought flatting with IMF and World Bank economic structural adjustment programmes which are conditions for their loans would solve their problems. Zimbabwe is an example of the ruiners’ effect of the World Bank’s imposed structural adjustment programmes. South Africa under the spineless leadership of Ramaphosa is plunging headfirst into this trap too risking this country’s sovereignty and barring generations to come with debt burdens that were unnecessary to carry.


At the Cop 26 in November last year, the President of the US, Joe Biden, shocked all of us when he announced that the US and EU had agreed to help fund South Africa’s transition away from coal into renewable sources of energy. They did make this announcement while the US continued to raise their subsidies for fossil fuel exploitation. The US is the second largest emitters of greenhouse gasses in the world, and yet they are intent in helping us transit from coal instead of showing the world and this House how it is going to be done.



Secondly, the west intent on making South Africa a guinea pig as it experiments with transitioning away from reliable sources of energy to renewable sources energy that have not sustained any economy anywhere in the world. The ten biggest emitters of greenhouse gasses in the world are continuing exploiting fossil fuels for their energy mix without making any significant cuts on their carbon emissions in order to meet global targets for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. To make any significant progress in fighting climate change, the biggest polluters must make the biggest cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. This is currently not the case and the fixation with dramatically decommissioning coal- based power stations in South Africa will surely plunge this


country into a power generation crisis and an economic calamity that Ramaphosa is un able to imagine at the moment.



Eskom’s plans to decommission a number of other coal-powered fire stations without the replacing the coal generation capacity these power stations had is foolish as much as it is suicidal. Ramaphosa’s own Presidential Climate Commission acknowledges that plans to cut the country’s dependence on coal is going to lead to massive job losses and have a deleterious effect on the country’s economy.



South Africa has no reliable energy generating capacity other than coal, and the nuclear options Ramaphosa is reluctant to pursue. The renewables now being chanted as solutions to our energy challenges will not sustain any development in this country. Ramaphosa’s short sightedness will leave the country serious financial and energy crisis that will take years to recover. Just transition ... [Interjections.]



Ms P N ABRAHAM: Hon Chair, on a point of order. The member keeps on referring to the President as Ramaphosa. She should know that in terms of the Rules members should be referred to as Mr or hon. Thank you, Chair. [Interjections.]


The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): I don’t know, who else is speaking now? I have allowed hon Abraham to speak. My assumption is that, that is known to the hon member that this is how you refer hon members. Can you please do that. Let’s proceed! I think you have noted the point order in terms of how we refer members in the House. They are referred to as Mr or hon. Let’s respect that. Continue!



Ms P MADOKWE: Chair, it is noted. In essence, what is considered as South Africa’s just transition all about is about plunging us into darkness and our economy into a crisis never seen before. The end goal is that at the end we must hand over our sovereignty as a country into the hands of the few white business people who will then take charge of the country’s energy needs and leave the majority without access to power.



The President is packed with big businesses and with western global power was on the just transition process has very little to do with us and much to do with the interest of the global capital. South Africa, as we have said before, has no reliable energy generating capacity other than coal.

Therefore, the conversation on just transition should be mainly be about an energy mix that considers the use of coal,


the use of nuclear and the use of energy generation such that it is not about the surrendering of coal energy generation which we know will ultimately plunge our country and our economy into darkness.



In closing, we condemn the selling of our country by Eskom enabled by Ramaphosa’s regime. Thank you, Chair.



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): When there is a ruling, I hope you will not continue to say you note and that you have noted, but you continue to refer to hon members in the way you have referred them. I am also talking to the other members.



Mr M G MAHLAULE: Thank you very much, Chair. The ANC-led government’s approach to the just energy transition is more intent on reaching a compromise between the renewable and nonrenewable sources of energy generation, as evidenced in the Integrated Resource Plan promulgated in 2019, the IRP 2019.

The IRP 2019, as a country’s electricity infrastructure development plan, not only serves as a blueprint for the just energy transition, but equally important, it ensures that the just energy transition reflects the long-term development goals of the country, as outlined in the National Development Plan, wherein access is of electricity that is environmentally


sustainable at affordable tariffs is one of the core elements of a distant standard of living.



Simply put, the ANC-led government rejects any form of a just energy transition that is both disembedding of the IRP 2019 and incapable of bringing a decent standard of living to ordinary South Africans, as outlined in the NDP. Therefore, anyone who thinks like the EFF, that the just energy transition in South Africa follows incorrect policies and strategies imposed on the country by Western superpowers, in part because they are too powerful for the ANC-led government to challenge, is either that their reality is stranger than fiction or they remain faithful to their stereotyped views.



The implementation of a just energy transition is a process premised on a series of sequential steps rather than an instantaneous change. The process-driven implementation of a just energy transition helps the country to deploy the better strategies and policies available to redress the growing imbalances between energy access and energy affordability, on the one hand, and security of the supply of electricity and environmental protection on the other hand.


Several steps are essential to this process of implementing the just energy transition the first step has been completed by the unbundling of s common to three divisions, responsible for generation, transmission and distribution. The unbundling of Eskom seeks to ensure that competition takes place throughout the generation and distribution networks, while retaining the transmission network as a natural monopoly.



More importantly, the unbundling of Eskom is a catalyst to the just energy transition as it guarantees the high level of entry by IPPS, to increase and complement the coal-generated energy through multiple renewable carriers, while at the same time driving down electricity tariffs, so that the transition can deliver on its stated objectives. So, the unbundling of Eskom is not a code for privatisation, but rather an attempt to introduce economic efficiency improvements alongside balancing environmental impacts and socioeconomic consideration.



In essence, the EFF’s hype about the privatisation of Eskom is just that - a hype! It is from this point of view that the EFF’s sped of accusing the ANC-led government of seeking to privatise Eskom should be interpreted as an alibi for pure fiction rather than the means to discover the truth.


Therefore, the position of the EFF on just energy transition remains a very important reason to invest in education, so that members of this party can break with stereotype narratives rather than further develop a fiction belonging to a comic book that they normally would refer to.



The second step has also been completed by introducing amendments to the Electricity Regulation Act and the Electricity Pricing Policy to incentivise competition and deliver electricity at a regulated competitive prices that are cost reflective. Of course, the ANC-led government is aware that the unbundling process has had unpopular outcomes, such as the drafting and swallowing of national utilities by capital incentive intensive IPPS, and electricity price increases set by market forces, especially in countries like the United Kingdom.



So, the Electricity Regulation Act and the Electricity Pricing Policy are set out to make sure that this time around, the unbundling process such as the one in the United Kingdom cannot be exactly replicated in the context of South Africa, because countries are not homogeneous. Therefore, their just energy transition parts will be dissimilar due to varying local conditions.


Unlike the unbundling process in the United Kingdom, the unbundling of Eskom incentivises competition with electricity tariff controls to retain the subsidisation of electricity to poorer end users because the ANC-led government remains committed to reversing the historical injustices of the past that manifests in our society through the triple challenges of poverty, inequality and unemployment, as well as the historical exclusion of the black majority from the economy.



In essence, if the EFFF still think that the just energy transition in South Africa is implemented not in the public interest but Western superpowers’ interest, then there is no point in discussing this debate any further, because it is exhausting to enlighten somebody who refuses to take off their rose-tinted glasses and realise that the transition is responsive to the people’s need rather than cultivating nefarious agendas.



The third step is to decarbonise the electricity sector. However, what is important is recognising that decarbonising the electricity sector does not imply that energy generation will be largely dependent on renewable energy sources to the detriment of coal. This should not be interpreted as the ANC- led government reneging on its commitment to reducing


greenhouse gas emissions per the binding International treaties and/or agreements.



The reality is that substituting coal-fired power station with renewable energy sources in the short term to medium term will bring the security of the supply of electricity and the economy desperate for recovery on the cusp of vulnerability.

To be sure, while renewable energy carriers such as wind, solar, hydropower, gas and biomass are associated with economies of scale and scope, as well as Innovation and economic efficiency improvement.



The power system in the country does not have the requisite storage capacity to overcome the intermittency nature of the availability. In other words, if the requisite capacity for energy storage was available the ANC-led government would rationally fast track the facing out of coal-fired power stations over the next 10 years to accommodate the entry of renewable energy careers.



As such, renewable energy carriers are less likely to provide a baseload power and, thus, have limited effect on sustaining the energy intensive economy of the country on their own.

Regardless, renewable energy carriers are the best option to


match the peak demand. They are also useful sources of providing energy in remote areas, in part because of the high cost of transmitting electricity from the grid to remote areas.



Despite all, their potential renewable energies carriers cannot match the impact of coal on energy generation and the economy, broadly. With significant investment in efficient clinical technologies, the country can exploit coal in an environmentally responsible manner and subsequently deploy its highest value used to save the jobs and key strategic industries that depends on it, as well as realise the priority interventions of the Economic Reconstruction and Recovery Plan.



More importantly, the country has invested quite a lot in building Medupi and Kusile Power Stations. Therefore, any form of the just energy transition that does not permit the ANC-led government to be fully compensated for bearing the cost of building these power stations will be politically, socially and economically unsustainable.



To conclude, the EFF’s overenthusiasm with the just energy transition must be tamed, not only because the party is


playing second fiddle on the concept that was conceptualised by the ANC-led government, but also because expecting the EFF to implement a viable alternative to just energy transition is like asking too much. This may lead us to lending in a vault of the VBS Bank rather than at the green energy power plant, which is designed to increase the generation capacity I thank you very much.



Mr K J MILEHAM: House Chairperson, at the outset, we need to acknowledge a few realities. Reality number one is that rolling blackout has been with us 14 years and we are no closer today to resolving them than we were in 2007 when they first emerged. In fact, one could also go so far as to say that we are actually in a far worse situation now than we were then because of the sheer mismanagement of our energy policy. Reality number two is that Eskom has admitted that it would require an investment of R990 billion in new generation to resolve our electricity crisis. This is money they admit they don’t have and cannot afford to borrow, which means it has to come out from outside of Eskom and outside of government – and that means independent power producers.



Reality number three is that our people are already enormously affected by climate change and harmful emissions. Just ask the


people of KwaZulu-Natal about their ongoing problems arising from the floods last year or the children of Mpumalanga who suffer respiratory ailments because of the enormous amount of harmful emissions pumped out by Eskom coal-fired power stations. Reality number four is that South Africa has international commitments in terms of the Paris Agreement, the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and various loan agreement conditions, all of which place a huge obligation on the country to reduce our carbon emissions.



Reality number five is that even if we want to ignore everything I have just said, the fact of the matter is that it would take too long to build new coal or new nuclear power plants. We have seen with the construction of Medupi and Kusile, neither of which is fully operational or up to scratch in terms of technical standards or emission control requirements that will take in the region of 15 years for Eskom to build plants like these.



So, where does that leave us? If we are truly address the energy and electricity needs of this country, we need to accelerate the building of new generation capacity. If we accept that Eskom cannot do this, then we must look to independent power producers to invest, build and operate this


generation. We know that there is no appetite, either amongst power companies or financial institutions to build fossil fuel power generation, which therefore means that we must look to renewables like wind, solar, hydro to create electricity solutions for South Africa.



A just energy transition – in other words, a move from a current status quo of primarily nuclear and coal generation to electricity sector dominated by renewable energy solutions must however take into account the impact on the socioeconomic circumstances of those most affected. In a strict limited reading of who these affects, we will be talking about the Eskom workers, the coal miners and coal transporters and the communities they support and live in, but more realistic interpretation include every single South African. It includes communities which suffer without electricity for days on end because of rolling blackouts. It includes children whose lungs are clogged with harmful carbon emissions. It includes the economy and the rampant unemployment and lack of economic growth which has resulted from this government’s go slow on the adoption of renewable solutions. We must ask ourselves if it is truly just to leave people suffering in cold and darkness because this government hasn’t done its job. We need to bring more electricity on right now, not in 15 years’ time.


A real just energy transition is the one that builds new generation capacity quickly, efficiently and cost-effectively. It is one that looks at the greater good of the people of South Africa, and not the limited selfish needs of the few who are directly part of the status quo that currently exists.

Thank you, Chair.



Mr S S ZONDO: Hon Chairperson, attending to a just energy transition in the current politic post-COVID-19 will be a great deal more challenging than the scenario and action plans that were outlined by the government before 2020.

Socioeconomic and political factors have changed the considerable and multiplicity of challenges, having compound upon themselves. What is important when considering our transition to a just and sustainable energy supply future, is to ensure that we do not set ourselves up for failure with unrealistic solutions to the current energy phases and ... [Inaudible.]



Are we confident that our models are in fact correct? Will they provide us with the energy security we require? Will the new energy supply be reliable and sustainable? Can we afford to implement this model? If we cannot afford this, what are we doing to open up the energy supply spaces to private foreign


investment and encourage foreign direct investment which will speed up the transition, create more employment, transfer skills, and importantly supply energy demand.



Additionally, will our current energy supply infrastructure even operationally long enough to see us through the transition which will take years. The solution to this once again is to open the space to private enterprises. Our hon President advised us that he attended the Conference of the Parties, Cop, 27 last week in Egypt, and that South Africa was in a strong position.



As we had recently adopted the just transition framework to guide our national approach to this process, with due respect to the hon President, how could such ... [Inaudible.] ... possibly place us in a strong position? This is when we have a public sector administration that is not only incapable of performing due to the quarter century of cadre deployment trampling our democracy for positions that requires specific skills and training, but additionally an administration that is driven by corruption and self-interest. Unless and until this government corrects its criminal behavior through serious consequence management for corrupt activity, commit itself to transparency and accountability and open the energy supply


mixed space to private enterprises will not only have no just energy transition will still have no energy.



South Africa’s great current crisis is that of unemployment. This can only be kept by attracting private and foreign investment. As the IFP, we urge government to immediately and correctly open this energy supply space to private sectors.

Historically, it clearly shows that this government has been a poor allocator of capital. Allow the private sector to invest, which will provide good jobs and service to affordable ... [Inaudible.] ... through marketing competition.



This government will not only be find what it creates but also by that which it refused to destroy. Eskom must go. It has failed acrimoniously and at taxpayers’ expense to fail the people of South Africa. I thank you.



Rev K R J MESHOE: Thank you. My apologies - I have challenges with the network.



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): We can see you. We can hear you.


Rev K R J MESHOE: The ACDP wishes to caution government against rushing the decommissioning of Eskom’s coal mines and coal-fired power plants such as megawatts Komati Power Station in Mpumalanga which will lead to many job losses. I am certain that many members of this House went to school from the money our parents made from selling magwinya [fat cakes] on street corners. As children we would wake up at home in the morning to find our mother gone to sell magwinya at 5am. Now that we are members of Parliament, we cannot just ignore the fact that there are still many thousands of people in pour country whose income depends on sales of magwinya, chicken dust, roast mealies, etc, which depend on coal fire made on street corners.



The ACDP has taken note that Cabinet has approved and initial investment plan for an $8,5 billion package to accelerate the country’s transition away from coal and towards clean energy. An additional R10 billion will be made available. A staggering further R1,5 trillion is planned over the next five years.

What we want to know about this R1,5 trillion funding which represents a third of the present public debt of R4,7 billion will apparently be made available through a combination of concessional laws, grants, investments and risks sharing


instruments. This will be a massive debt that this country we believe cannot afford.



We do not want to be slaves of our lenders. Have learned nothing from the extensive corruption in the building of the coal-fired power plants, Kusile and Medupi? Will they now be decommissioned. The ACDP demands transparency on where and how these funds are going to be spent and what safeguards will be in place to prevent fraud and corruption and most importantly, who and how will these funds be repaid. While the President has repeatedly said that he would only accept a deal that offered good terms based on grants and concessional funding that aligns with national development goals including debt reduction and job creation.



The ACDP is deeply concerned about reports as to how much of the funds will be delivered as grants with the rest split between concessional and commercial loans. As I said earlier, these additional loans will undoubtedly add to the country’s already high debt burden and heighten the risk of a sovereign debt crisis. International finance experts have also correctly questioned whether these packages offer the country better terms than it can already access on local and international financial markets. This ... [Time expired.] Thank you.


Ms C PHILLIPS: Chair, a just transition is a phrase that has become a bit like the Fourth Industrial Revolution phrase of 2019. Will the results be as dismal or will the governing party finally do the right thing for our country, our people and our future?



The poorest of our people are people who live closest to the coal fired power stations. These are the people whose quality of life will be improved by a transition to green energy.



Weaning our country off dirty energy will not happen overnight. There is plenty of time for coalminers to be gradually retrained in a renewable energy sector, especially considering our energy Minister’s penchant for procrastination.



A funded transition to green energy is the golden opportunity for our people and our country. If only we can grab the opportunity with both hands and pass it on to those who are affected by load shedding, pollution and job losses.



We cannot allow the greedy fat cats and tenderpreneurs to get their hands on the money, as we saw happening with the Covid-

19 relief funds.


Job losses are already a reality, not due to the transition to green energy, but due to load shedding, ageing infrastructure and a government that chooses to procrastinate, while our country literally burns, due to climate change.



Our wild fires have never range this far, burnt as long or as hot as they do now. Less than a month ago, we experienced devastating wild fires in the North West province. Brave South Africans lost their lives, animals died in excruciating pain. Their twisted eschar remains photographed and the images shared on social media.



Flooding, just like fire has ravished not only our country but many other countries around the world. Global warming, yes, say the majority, no, say some, just a theory. My question to South Africans and the world is: Are you willing to bet the future of your children, your grandchildren and your great grandchildren on your opinion, when there is a better alternative?



Is the alternative perfect? No, by no means. Our world will however continue to die, if we don’t change and that change begins with you.


I challenge anyone who is in favour of maintaining the status quo of dirty energy to live in the coal belt for 12 months.

Better yet, move in with a family who have lived there for a while. Point a residential area on the map, choose a house and the chances are one in four that you will end up living with a family who has members suffering from acute asthma.



Listening to a person with asthma is almost as traumatic as actually having asthma. Every breath they take, you want to actually breath for them, because it is a struggle. This is not some unseen effect on the environment that might affect your grandchildren, as many will have us believe. This is the daily reality for at least 113 000 residents living near coal fired power stations.



If we do not change, we will continue to spend billions annually, which our country cannot afford on health care for people affected by dirty power generation. Time expired.]



Dr W J BOSHOFF: Hon House Chair, the world as we know it presently, is inconceivable without fossil fuels. The pre- modern world mainly used biological energy, obtained from plants, animals and humans – very often slaves – for sustenance and trade.


A realisation that the pressure built up by steam could turn the world around, nearly drove European forests to extinction. Then fossil fuel came to the rescue, dirty and difficult to excavate, but abundant and effective.



Two additional technologies followed: the internal combustion engine, and electricity. The sky seemed to be the limit, and in fact, it was. Long before fossil fuels became exhausted, the earth’s atmosphere was so profoundly altered that climate change causes a real threat to life, as we know it.



That is history. Now economy. The economy is not the sum of money spent, but the sum of energy exercised. Add more money to the economy and you get inflation. Add energy and you get growth. Cut a country’s money flow, then something else will flow, but cut the energy supply and the country is screwed.



Since 1924, South Africa was governed by the mantra, South Africa First. We didn’t have oil, but we had lots of coal, so we did everything possible with coal, and a few more.



Without the economic foundations of Iscor, Eskom, Transnet and Sasol, there would not have been much of a state to capture and very little to expropriate without compensation.


Now the social reality. Whole societies constituted around coal mining, generation of electricity and manufacturing of fluid fuels. The balance of what was needed in this regard is imported.



In the time of sanctions, when the ANC attempted to destroy what they were about to receive, nuclear was also developed. While coal power stations fail, we are thankful for that. Just a pity, it looks like failing too.



In the process, a whole country was strung together by wires – electrical wires. Therefore, the expression emerged, to cut somebody’s water and lights, if the person is functionally annihilated.



Two possible calamities struck the South African economy at approximately the same time. Scientific opinion leaned towards the conclusion that burning of fossil fuels alters the earth’s climate. Americans on the right and South Africans on the left deny it, but that is the opinion on which international decisions are made and which I incidentally share.


Also, the ANC took a political decision not to invest in additional power generation and certain elements captured what was left of coal and of generation.



So, exactly when everybody says we should abandon coal, we lose the ability to hang on to it. Fortunately, a third thing happened. Renewables became competitive. This time the state won’t be the driver of the new energy dispensation, like it was a century ago. It simply does not have the ability.



But now, we have a much stronger private sector, providing finance and knowledge to transition at its own time. Small modular nuclear generation units might well provide the base load. The wide east to west spread of the country assists with renewable sources, whether solar or wind. A well-maintained grid is a huge plus.



The exact mix will not be determined by a state determined plan, but by private citizens, communities and the commercial sector. It seems the President realised that, but maybe not the Minister, and also maybe not the EFF.



This will have consequences for a centralised unitary state. As the state’s ability deteriorates, it will have less power.


Political power will vest in communities, who look after themselves, as it should.



The new power generation will create power for a new generation. That is a just transition. I thank you.



Ms J C N MKHWANAZI: Thank you, hon Chairperson. Hon Chairperson, I must emphasise from the beginning that, the Just Energy Transition in South Africa is a deliberate process of concern, rather than cohesion. I am raising all this, hon Chairperson, because the EFF is enslaved to their theory that, the United Nation Conference of Parties, COP, on Climate Change, is not build on social bargain, where countries convinced each other on the best possible approach to reach the next zero climate target, but rather, it embrace the expert offers of power dynamics of multilateral deal making.



In other words, the industrialised Western countries use soft and hard power to define the strategies of policy practices of the Just Energy Transition, and the ANC-led government, has to live with the results, or rather draw the line. Therefore, the members of the ANC that are participating on this debate, as the leader of society, just to give a free lesson, are here to


help disguise the selfish interest of the industrialised Western countries advanced by the ANC-led government.



This EFF theory is self-defeating because, the ANC resisted the oppressive regime of colonialisation and apartheid before, and it has never abandoned its policy autonomy in favour of the narrow selfish interest of any foreign countries. Hon Chairperson, even Mr Shivambu and others as the graduates or in the political studies knows that, where there is power, there is resistance. But I’m not sure if Mr Malema of the EFF knows about this, even though he is also a graduate also in the political studies. So, let us forget about the EFF because, its theory seeks to impede progress made on the Just Energy Transition based on the principles of opposing.



Hon Chairperson, the Just Energy Transition is the concept that is developed and advanced, not by the opposition parties, but by the ANC-led government, to address several critical social economy objectives, to ensure the development of the South African economy. Amongst other objectives the Just Energy Transition intend to increase, is the South African generation capacity, within the concept of growth in demand of electricity and the coal power plants which have reached their end of power cycle. Hence, the Just Energy Transition enables


the ANC government to pursue aggressively, the energy mix dependent on the coal generation capacity, as well as other multiple sources of clean energy such as the renewables, gas, hydropower and nuclear.



Chairperson, the energy mix approach is important primarily because, the South African economy is energy intensive, and therefore, the baseload cannot come from a single energy source such as renewables, as the DA would like us to believe. The reduction in carbon emission is critically important in South Africa, as the major carbon emission impacts negatively on the health of many communities, and also resulted in climate change. The impact of this climate change has not spared South Africa, as we have recently witnessed the devastating floods in KwaZulu-Natal, Mpumalanga, North West and parts of the Eastern Cape.



Consequently, this results in the people and communities, bearing the high cost, and their needs to be taken seriously. Hence, the Just Energy Transition is important in this regard. Hon Chairperson and hon members, the implementation of the Just Energy Transition has the potential to address the current energy poverty, which the apartheid system has inflicted on the majority of our people. Since 1994, the ANC-


led government has commenced on the electrification programme to ensure that, the majority of the population has access to electricity at the affordable, cheapest prices.



However, the Department of Mineral Resources and Energy is facing barriers to electrify the remaining backlog because, the remaining households that should be electrified, are specially populated rural areas and densely packed shacks that are unsafe to connect to the grid. Despite all these formidable hurdles, the Just Energy Transition plans to supply energy at true multiple carriers, and at the cheapest possible prices to those rural and succinctly catalysed transformation in such communities.



Hon Chairperson, the Just Energy Transition is not pursued for its own sake, but to promote energy security that is environmentally friendly, and it also aims at benefiting workers and the communities. To be sure, the Just Energy Transition seeks to ensure the development of new industrial sectors, in terms of green energy, gas and hydro power. These new sectors, will have a spill over on other sectors such as services and manufacturing. Most importantly, the Just Energy Transition, presents opportunities for the reskilling and the


retraining of workers in the affective areas, including coal mining areas, especially in the Mpumalanga Province.



Through the implementation of the Renewable Energy Development Zones, REDZs, it is aimed at ensuring that there will be no ghost towns for the coal mining areas because, the caring ANC- led government’s approach to the Just Energy Transition is based on the balance of evidence, energy security, as well as ensuring job creation and micro economic development. For instance, the Renewable Energy Development Zones will facilitate further local economic development through the exploitation of multiple renewables, with the special focus on the development and transformation of all mining areas communities.



Moreover, the repurposing of coal fire power plants, will retain some important jobs in the coal mining sector, for the benefits of the people around those areas. The implementation of the 2019 Energy Roadmap by the Department of Public Enterprise, is geared towards achieving this goal by conducting reliable maintenance at some of the aging coal fire power plants, while ensuring that, Medupi and Kusile are functional. This is not based on the privatisation of Eskom, but rather, on expanding the different multiple resources of


energy, to achieve greater energy security through public and private partnership, as outline in the Just Energy Transition.



So, what the EFF does not understand is that, privatisation or complete state ownership, does not provide a developmental solution to energy security, or ensure economic growth.

Therefore, hon Chairperson, the EFF approach to the Just Energy Transition, is a recipe for disaster, and it is not technically sound. It only elevates the newspapers narratives to the level of political principles, rather than the articulation of the plan.



Therefore, hon Chairperson, the only thing which can be trusted from the EFF, is the quality of the clothes from which their red overalls are manufactured and nothing else, as it lacks coherence and sound policies on the Just Energy Transition. Hon Chairperson, thank you so much.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Chairperson, the NFP is in support of a just transition, but I think we need to ask the obvious questions. First of all, we do not have enough energy supply in the country. Yes, we have a problem as far as global warming is concern. We can’t run away from that. But does it make sense to go out there and shut your current power


stations when you do not have the capacity to be able to provide adequate energy to the country? The mistake we made 20-years ago, we making it again. And even when we are planning we are planning based on the needs of today, not in 10-years’ time when it actually going to be happening.



Let me talk about coal alone. The Richards Bay Coal Terminal - and I know many people talk about Russia and Ukraine and the negative aspect and how it’s affecting the economic growth in South Africa. But nobody is talking about the fact that over 750% increase, that is from half a million tons, you go to 4,1 million tons of coal that was exported to Europe alone, and the revenue that’s coming in as a result of that. Now,



No one is talking about over 100,000 minimum indirect jobs that would be lost Mpumalanga province alone, as a result of the so called Just Energy Transition. Where you moving from one extreme to the other extreme. Not a process, but an extreme, one extreme to the other. Over 100,00. Look at the burden on the taxpayers in this country, already sitting at R4,7 trillion in debt. This R151 billion most of it is borrowings, which is going to add to the burden Eskom already has on top of R4 billion in debt.


We are saying what should happen that while you maintain this and build more power stations, simultaneously, you can look at renewable energy. However, given the history of state-owned entities in this country, I think we are more guaranteed that

... [Inaudible.] ... that there will be very little chances of success in whatever we do because everything seems to fail.

That is the concern that is being raised currently. And whether the renewable energy would be able to meet the demand? But when you have a mix of both, indeed, you will be able to meet the demand.



But more importantly, what is going to happen to all these coal mining towns? What is going to happen to all those communities? It’s going to become ghost towns. Do we have the capacity to incorporate them into any other sectors as far as jobs are concern with the high unemployment rate that we have in this country? Are we not considering that or are we going for the bait that was given by the West ... [Time Expired.]



Mr S M JAFTA: Chairperson, the discussion in South Africa about a Just Energy Transition is often shallow and decontextualized. Firstly, it doesn’t have to demarcate an artificial binary between coal and renewables in the process


of marshaling the country’s energy transition, that is the wrong premise.



We should remind members that South Africa is a signatory to a raft of international treaties. We have committed ourselves to the targets of the Kyoto Protocol in 2002 and those of the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference, commonly known as the Copenhagen Summit. We also hosted that COP17 in Durban in 2011. The concessions made in 2009 in Copenhagen, for instance, were clear that reduction of 43% in carbon dioxide emission by 2025 by nation states must be achieved. The recent climate conference in Egypt is on course to try to hammer on nation states to honour these commitments. Therefore, the debate about the Just Energy Transition must be context- specific and consistent with our climate change obligations.

This does not mean, hon Chair that we are not mindful of the far reaching consequences of a Just Energy Transition to job security and social equity in coal mined communities.



It is common cause that the National Integrated Resource Management Plan places call at the centre of our country’s generation capacity. The plan reveals persistency on the role of fossil fuel and coal is set to contribute 46% to the country’s electricity generation capacity by 2030. This leaves


the debate about Just Energy Transition in limbo. To avert this calamity, there is a greater need to diversify our energy sources and progressively switch to clean energy. This requires continued investment in clean coal and ultimately, the phasing out of fossil fuel. This would require the upskilling of coal mine former employees to adapt to new technologies.



Regrettably, what we have had in South Africa is not necessarily concerns over job losses, but attempts by government to use Eskom as black economic empowerment, BEE, patrimonial guinea pig, in which case Eskom disbursing of lucrative coal contracts to BEE consortiums is ... [Inaudible.] ... as a transformation tool in the energy sector. We need to dump this orientation and cast Eskom anew. I thank you, hon Chair.



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr F D Xasa): Can I assume that hon Hendricks is not in the platform. And will now move to hon Cachalia of the DA.



Mr G K Y CACHALIA: Chair, the biggest injustice around electricity in South Africa is that we don’t have enough of it. And it is too expensive. Elevation out of poverty is


predicated on the availability of electricity. Our Just Energy Transition, JET, should be a transition from electricity poor to an electricity abundant society. And that means affordable electricity should be available in every home and every workplace for business to create jobs, now. That is why we need a stable baseload while generation from other multiple sources of supply kick in on a source agnostic lowest cost basis, while we explore the most suitable least invasion and energy dense solution.



We must leverage what we have in hand and focus in parallel on what we can alternatively and impact fully implement over a sensible timeframe. Yes, the JET’s vision focuses on achieving net zero carbon emissions by 2050, with an increase in sustainable jobs involving increasing our share of renewable energy storage, grid strengthening and repurposing of our coal fleet.



However, it is not today’s panacea, it is tomorrow’s cautious project. Remember that during COP 26 in Glasgow, India was opposed to ... [Inaudible.] ... phasing out coal, still amongst the key sources of energy for developing nations. It pushed to introduce equity and safeguards on fossil fuel subsidies for the poor, following which the text in the final


pact was reworded. The current question on everyone’s lips is why has load shedding not being fixed after 15-years. In the face of ongoing and debilitating load shedding, and the need to transition sensibly, we need to understand that reliable energy power needs to be dispatchable. And we need to plan accordingly for both smaller scale and utility scale augmentation.



If you were to replace 1600 megawatts lost at Kusile and Medupi Power Stations with renewables, we would need 5000 megawatts because from 100 megawatts of nameplate renewables, you only get to 30% capacity factor. So, we need a reliable interim solution while we explore alternatives and push for the deregulation of energy and accommodation of independent power producers, IPPs. Battery storage is key to the new generator occasion, but multiple 1000s of megawatts of renewable energy need thousands of megawatts of battery storage.



Elon Musk’s historic gold storage facility in Australia, the largest globally is tiny by comparison with a capacity of 129 megawatt hours and significant augmentation will need governments there to kick in, in 2050. So it’s going to be a


while before this moves into utility scale solutions, and load shedding must be fixed now.



Given that South Africa will need R1,4 trillion over the next five-years to transition to an economy that is heavily dependent on coal generated energy, does South Africa have the time and the fiscal space? South Africa’s JET is said to be the first of its kind globally in both scale and ambition and sees itself as a leading player in the new carbon global economy. That’s all very well, but let’s learn to walk before we can run. And that involves keeping the lights on lest we fall in the darkness, I thank you.





Chairperson, hon Speaker of the National Assembly, Deputy Speaker, Ministers and Deputy Ministers on the platform, members of the House.



I have an option to be derailed and focus on the insults held by hon Madokwe, spineless Ramaphosa ... [Inaudible.] ... or embrace what hon Mileham throws as a solution, renewable energy as a ... [Inaudible.] ... I opted out of this.


Just energy transition debate is complex and contested as a terrain in which countries across the globe seek to advice their own national interests. So, there’s nothing like an innocent debate, whether it is in Egypt now or in the cows now, we are looking for advancing our national interests. The world is grappling with this concept in Egypt, as we sit here today.



These differences, among others, pertain to the common and differential commitments regarding emission targets in which contest on how to transition also reflect the north/south divide. The approach to transition reflects this divide, whereas differences of opinion on how our country should transition ... [Inaudible.] ... over the years, there’s one common consensus, that is about moving from high to low carbon emissions. We all agree on that. Rather than moving from coal to renewables. There’s no such an agreement because the upright abandoning of fossil fuel is dangerous.



We accept that transition is a journey not an event. It is a journey that must be just ... [Inaudible.] ... by justice which must be seen to be done, not only justice pronounced. It will be people-centred approach, talk about people not just numbers. When you talk about people in the coal belt it is


human beings paying in that belt. The socioeconomic condition of communities that will be affected must be taken into consideration.



The 10 ... [Inaudible.] ... that are in the coal bag with all including ... [Inaudible.] ... Vereeniging and Lephalale are committees that should be looked into. They’ve got an issue of alternative economic activity, is important. And taken into consideration, our country’s developmental needs. In other words, we must not be guinea pigs. I have noticed that hon Madokwe stole this expression, where developed economies us for experimenting. This must happen at a pace and skill that our country can afford.



Firstly, the pressure to abandon coal instantly must be resisted and opt for a systematic step-by-step transition that we can afford. Our transition cannot only be about reaching climate change targets; it must also address energy poverty, which includes lack of access to the energy. At this point in time we are not having universal access to energy, we should address that issue.



Secondly, energy should not be expensive. Well, there is a proposal for 30% increase in tariffs that is contributing to


energy poverty and electricity interruptions or loadshedding is a sign of energy poverty. Hence the combination of energy technologies, as stipulated in Integrated Resource Plan, IRP, 2019, becomes the most reliable solution to addressing energy poverty while transitioning to a low-carbon economy.



We ought to guarantee best load energy supply through a combination gas, nuclear, coal, hydro, a ... [Inaudible.] ... from coal to powered energy generation to renewable energies does not guarantee the best load stability. It will simply ... [Inaudible.] ... into a best load crisis, which we are witnessing today, as we currently experience. Because if Eskom is having just over 20 000 megawatts that are not decommissioned but not giving us energy, that means that is where the crisis is. And as we focus on that, we should resolve that crisis and then deal with the loadshedding, and then we will know that the renewable energies are important for medium to long-term energy supply.



The work done by Council for Duo Science in collaboration with the World Bank on carbon capture, utilization and storage, gave us hope and belief that coal will continue to play a critical part in our just energy transition.


Therefore, any suggestion that coal has reached its sell-by date is a miss. Hence our coal exports have increased over 700% since the ... [Inaudible.] ... Russia/Ukraine.



Our country is endowed with critical minerals and other fuel fossil fuels which must be exploited for the benefit of the people of South Africa. This should not be construed, undermining our commitment to global decarbonization agenda, as signatory of the Paris agreement, for an example.



Hon members, our country is witnessing a rapid growth of private sector energy investment through Independent Power Producers, IPP. This has been witnessed through the procurement of additional energy under renewable energy IPP procurement programme for Bid Window 5 and 6.



Just today, we signed power purchase agreements with at least three IPPs under Bid Window 5, which will add over

300 megawatts to the national grid once completed in the next


12 to 18 months. We intend to be signing Power Purchase Agreements, PPAs, with other preferred bidders under this Window.


But what we should not forget is that in 1996-98, when we were warned of the exhaustion of the energy surplus, we all were told to believe that the private sector will provide and buy that additional capacity; is a risk that we must avoid because this is a public good, the state must continue playing its role in actually ensuring that people have access to this public good. Hence the talk of the generation 2, which should be a public entity that continues to develop base load capacity.



It must, therefore, be clear that Eskom is not for sale, it remains country’s best load energy generator. This aggregation of Eskom and ... [Inaudible.] ... utility generation ... [Inaudible.] ... distribution, form part of our plan to secure energy supply to society.



The amendments of Electricity Regulation Act and the Electricity Pricing policy are aimed at enabling competitive market for electricity generation in the country and ... [Inaudible.] ... affordable through fair competition.



You must remember that while you establish transmission as a market and the wheeler of energy you are actually allowing competition ... [Inaudible.]


Africa is the least polluter of the environment, yet it is the most affected continent by climate change. Therefore, it is an incumbent upon all of us and on developing nations in particular, which historically benefitted from industrial economic activities that polluted the world resulting in climate change, to finance our transition appropriately and adequately.



Therefore, the funding must respond to our programme, including ending energy poverty, improving our energy infrastructure and thereby ensuring base load supply, repurposing of some of our energy generation facilities. For example, I don’t think the issue should be decommissioning coal ... [Inaudible.] ... it should be de-repurposing others, replace coal turbines with gas turbines and coningulating an equal capacity or more of energy, investment in carbon capture and ... storage, an ... [Inaudible.] mitigating technology, skills development and technology transfers to the communities and workers in the coal value chain.



In conclusion, hon members, it is our collective responsibility to ensure that the people of South Africa are cushioned from the dire consequences associated with just energy transition, including job losses in carbon intensive


industries. Our transition must be geared towards advancing our national interest, not hinder the country’s ... [Inaudible.] ... of its socioeconomic objectives.



So, in brief, what we are saying, the myth that we are about privatization, offloading everything, that is not what we are in. We must reduce carbon emission and move to low carbon emission. Thank you.



Ms P MADOKWE: Chairperson, it is conclusively illusionary for the speakers from the ANC to deny the obvious and open fact that the unbundling of Eskom and approvals of IPPs is a form of privatization of power generation in South Africa.

Especially when they themselves have acknowledged that the implications of set action, which is primarily the financial benefit of profit-driven private sector at the expense of service delivery.



In actual fact, the ANC’s energy policy completely disengages the state from energy generation and thereafter transmission and thereafter distribution.



To refuse to accept that the ANC is privatizing the electricity value chain is ignorance or foolishness or both.


The EFFs conclusive view is that the South African government should pay maximum attention to clean coal technologies because it is not immediately possible and there is absolutely no way that we will abandon coal energy generation in pursuit of something that has no scientific value.



Additionally, the South African government should form partnerships with countries that have floating storage and gasification unit capacity and then plug the hydrogen-anchored

... [Inaudible.] ... into the national grid in order to resolve our energy problems.



Lastly, South Africa should adopt a fiscally neutral approach towards the inclusion of nuclear as a source of energy. Our country must enter into a build of parade transfer partnership with the Russian Federation’s State Atomic Energy Corporation Rosatom, ROSATOM, and build additional 6 000 megawatts which will solve our energy crisis.



The neo-colonial co-operation and partnerships signed by your President in the Conference of the Parties, COP26 and COP27 are not a solution to our energy crisis.


Without electricity the economy will collapse and when the economy collapses our people will be plunged into absolute poverty and conflict.



Just transition essentially means a transition to new forms of energy and electricity sources without compromising the job and economic activities. And what the ruling party is doing is not a transition and certainly it’s not just. There is a blind rush to close coal power stations without ultimate plans.



The carrot the ANC is dangling claiming that there will be no ghost towns and coal mining economies will be protected is as imaginary as the carrot they once dangled when they claimed we have a state-owned mining company, only to find out it is just a mere company that is busy with coal tenders.



We need to accept that it is not possible and not practical to transition in the manner, pace, form and direction set by government and the global capitalist forces.



We acknowledge the Minister’s agreement with this and hope the rest of the ANC including the state President, who gets excited by international media and make suicidal nonsensical commitments, will also agree to it.


With South Africa’s energy and unemployment challenges, there is no reason the government is not pursuing clean coal technology and all recommendations made above as part of the energy mix to ensure energy sufficiency, reducing our carbon emissions and protecting jobs and our economy.



In conclusion, the jab on EFF members’ qualifications, by the way, is the lowest blow. The ANC should not even be tempted to go down that route. This side we do not have fake doctors nor do we have people that are paying lecturers to admit them into qualifications they do not apply for. And we’ll gladly supply our qualifications, unlike some of you. Thank you, Chair.






Ms D R DIREKO: Hon Chairperson, hon members, Ministers and Deputy Ministers present, the ANC motivation in sponsoring this motion was a conscious decision to allow a political engagement on this matter where the public has expressed deep unhappiness about it; the one of the coalition governments in the local government spheres.


All political parties in the National Assembly has experience of this. In initiating this debate, we are seeking to engage with other political parties with whom we have to form coalitions, depending on the situation of what can best be applied to bring greater stability.



Unstable coalitions have a very negative impact to our communities because it results in dysfunctional municipalities and unable to provide services to our people. From the first local democratic elections in 2000, we have had results that have produced the so-called hung councils for municipalities.



The difference is that the number since the 2021 Local Government Elections have increased from the one of 2016 and this is an indication of a deeper challenge that we have.

Coalitions requires co-operation between coalition partners to ensure that the responsibilities in councils is carried out responsively.



However, in practice coalitions mostly have been unstable and terminated before the end of its term. Instability in local government coalitions have severely impacted and compromised the municipality’s ability to adopt budget policies bylaws and appointment of senior managers. It raises a bigger question


about the level of political maturity between political parties. Party policy is of course a major factor even though all parties will want to claim that they always put the interests of the people first. However, we have also witnessed extreme diverse political parties coming together who do not share the same ideological orientation even though they have tended not to last.



Our historical experience is that there has only been one coalition government that have lasted for a full five years and that was the one of the ANC-led municipality. So, what is it that hold the greater prospect for stable coalition?

Currently there are no guidelines for coalitions other than what SA Local Government Association, Salga, has developed for 2021 which are not binding, but assist. There is no regulatory framework that exist at the moment.



The history of a problematic coalition government in municipalities cannot solemnly be attributed to lack of framework for coalition government that can be used as a guide by political parties in struggling their coalitions in practice. Often, it has everything to do with what a particular political party want to get out of the coalition.


Size of a political party in a coalition and of course, the subjective factors of political insecure individuals who assess a coalition in terms of subjective factors, not objective conditions. Therefore, a first point of disagreement political stress in a coalition starts.



So, what is it the ANC is proposing? Our point of departure is always based on our philosophical orientation towards the matter at hand and what the problem statement is. Therefore, in whatever we propose it must be advanced on the basis of best principle. The absence of best principle leads to a brake up of coalition grounded around narrow political party interest.



Coming to terms with not winning as the outright majority is an act of political maturity and respecting the electoral that their will has been expressed even if it does not sit well with the interest of a particular party.



State is governed by a governing party, not as an end itself, but governed and managed as an organ of the people. This means that the wellbeing of the people, their needs and their aspirations needs to be of what is guiding the decision of the coalition within the contents of the Constitution, municipal


legislation and regulations. The principle approach means that any coalition at the outset needs to be clear as to what is it that it needs? How are they going to build local government democracy and their priorities in terms of service delivery? A principled programme in terms of local government development and ensuring strict accountability to the electorate for the structures that have already been created. Given that funds for local government rest with the division of revenue and the equitable share. Apart from internal revenue generation where that is possible, a coalition stance towards implementing government programmes is primary since the money from the national fiscus is appropriated for such programmes.



Any coalition that is put together around those who aspire for personal benefits or personal relationships, a common occurrence will fail and should be avoided. It is better to be principled position in this regard than to go into a coalition that has self-serving interests that may be initially hidden, but break out at the first huddle. Bottom lines must be established upfront and should not emerge based upon the issue at hand.



Coalition agreements should be made public, since those who have voted for a party have a right to know what their party


is entering into. At the outset who desire to enter into a coalition should be able to articulate framework and rational for coming together. Any party that cannot do this will not survive coalition and end up destroying it. In a coalition and taking a fractional nature of it and a number of political parties, there should be a basic level of trust if a coalition is going to last. Where there is no trust the coalition will never last because those who are in that coalition will always treat one another with suspicions.



The human factor in a coalition cannibalising themselves, often has to do with the human factor and no regulation or framework of intension will be able to deal with this matter.



Linked to this is the political immature stance that may parties take to govern at all costs whereby even if you can see that the service level acumen between the coalition is not what exactly the people needs, but to just enter into coalition at all cost. What happened in those cases is that communities become alienated to those parties that they see and experience as having more self-interests to govern than accommodate for the sake of progress and development.


Another political immature stance is the one of dominating and dictating especially when the bigger party is concerned towards a smaller party. These are the signs of a destruction of a coalition as we have seen them so often.



Mechanism on how to deal with the differences and disagreements are essential. The absence of this can lead to a collapse of the coalition. Coalition as a basic tendency must be formed on the basis of a written agreement containing as much policy and structural details as possible.



Organised structures in the coalitions are necessary because if we do not have them, we will end up in a situation where everyone will want to do everything that they want to do at any time despite the fact that they need to work together as parties that are into a coalition. I thank you, Chairperson.



The CHIEF WHIP OF THE OPPOSITION: Chair, as the South African democracy matures, voters are increasingly realizing the power of their vote. For the past five years, this has signalled the end of the ANC majority in many parts of the country. This has meant that the ANC has lost grip on major economic hubs in most provinces. This party that used to be a political giant is only a shadow of its former self.


The residents of Cape Town, Nelson Mandela Bay, Tshwane, Johannesburg and most recently again Ekurhuleni have rejected the governing party. They’ve done so because the ANC has long forgotten what service means. It is riddled with its own internal politics, a bunfight for positions and perks. More importantly, the party has broken towns and cities in every corner of South Africa.



The state of local governments through the years of neglect and rampant corruption has led us to this point. But, the fate of the ANC is nothing to gloat about because you see its failures in government have come at a tremendous cost to the people of South Africa. Lives and livelihoods have been lost. The dream of a better life has long been forgotten. The hope of a capable state that places people at the centre of its business has long been destroyed.



So this is a lesson for all of us who have been trusted to govern in coalition governments, by millions of South Africans. Coalition governments must be bound together by a common set of values and goals. These governments should be stable; they should be intolerant of corruption that robs people of critical services.


This is why the DA has reached out to all political parties that are represented in this House, with our proposed legislation that would go a long way to stabilise coalition governments. We did this because we recognise that, the real victims of unstable coalitions and that eventually end up at the hands of the ANC on the citizens.



Legislating for coalition governments will ensure that we insulate people from the whims of greedy politicians, and so stability becomes critical. The DA’s legislation would ensure that coalition agreements are codified and that they are binding to parties, preventing the instability that we have seen to the detriment of residents. It will introduce an independent arbiter that will manage and implement the coalition agreement separate from the politics, a political and independent, like we have seen in Kenya. It would introduce electoral thresholds and while ensuring maximum representation as envisioned by the Constitution. It would seek to amend existing legislation to regulate the frequency of motions of no confidence and instil stability in councils, legislatures and perhaps in this very Parliament.



Passing this legislation is beyond our individual interests as various political parties. It is about investing in the future


of a hard-won constitutional democracy. There are organisations across the country who are prepared to pull up their sleeves and jump in to save South Africa from utter ruin. It is imperative that this institution provides the legislative framework that will allow ... [Inaudible] ... even in the hurly-burly of politics, some ...[Inaudible] ... call for us to reach across party lines to ensure that Parliament fulfils its constitutional mandate, and responds to the issues facing the people that we serve.



Coalition governments are here to stay, whether the governing party is willing to accept this or not. It is therefore our responsibility to create stable and service-led governance through the legislative powers that are vested in us all.

Thank you.



Ms H O MKHALIPHI: Chairperson, the fact of the matter is that, politics of coalition have always been part of South Africa’s political sphere, since the transition of the Democratic dispensation. We have always had some form of different political parties coming together to put together some form of governance. This is not only in local government, but it has been the case in provincial and national government.


The first democratic national government was made up of ANC, the murderous and racist National Party. Nelson Mandela included some Ministers from other political parties, as well as members of the IFP. In KwaZulu-Natal, after the IFP failed to hold on to power of the first provincial government, they had to go into coalition with the ANC, including ... [Inaudible] ... municipalities. The ANC and NNP had coalition in the Western Cape in 1994.



Even here in Parliament, member Koornof who is a counsellor to President Ramaphosa, is also a beneficiary of such arrangements. As a country, we’ve been doing coalition and by its nature, politics will always require us to talk to one another, engage in agreements and trade off even if we do not like each other, or always agree. Coalition politics are not unique to South Africa, but are practised all over the world. Voters do not always vote majority and that is a sign of maturity democracy.



We were recently invited to go to Denmark by the Danish embassy, together with other political parties on a study tour about political party coalition. We learnt three things:


Firstly, coalition politics works. They work if people are concerned about the citizens and the service delivery. The Danish put their egos aside and think about water. They think about electricity and they think about healthcare, education, sanitation and safety to agree on coalitions, something which were on the struggle.



Secondly, coalition politics works because of regular and transparent consultation, including consultation on matters that appear small.



Lastly, coalition politics works when political parties have credible leaders. We cannot have leaders who sit around the table and reach an agreement only to go and do the opposite



House Chairperson, let’s come to the state of coalition in local government. Before we look at the state of coalition, we must first acknowledge that local government is in crisis, municipalities have collapsed. Secondly, the majority of municipalities do not have viable economic activities. As a result, coalition politics becomes about patronage.



Now let’s come to coalition. The reality is that, there is no political party that has tabled a practical and believable


plan, that will make coalition politics to work except the EFF. We just witnessed in Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality that, it was the EFF that had credible - we have reached an agreement and because the ANC does not have credible leaders, the EFF is not in government when there was an opportunity.



Chair, the ... [Inaudible] ... that the ANC rejected the EFF in Ekurhuleni is not true. The reality is that; the ANC does not have credible leaders. They reach agreements today and tomorrow, they backtrack and ... [Inaudible] ... on their decision. Coalitions will not work if you continue to tolerate leaders who are not credible or racist. The EFF has maintained that we are open for engagements. The DA and in particular Helen Zille continues to insult us for no apparent reason calling us names, but you are still ready to engage them because we care more about the poorest of the poor, not the egos of individuals such as Helen Zille.



Coalitions will work and will remain with us for a very long time. So far, the EFF is the only practical party that has presented the practical and believable plan. We take the government and you hold us accountable in Ekurhuleni, and we vote for you in Johannesburg and we hold you accountable. It is simple as that. Thank you very much Chairperson.


Ms S A BUTHELEZI: Chairperson, the political whirlwinds unsettling the socioeconomic and political spheres of our country clearly indicate that the days of a single political party securing an outright majority are over. This is being proven time and time again as the ruling party’s strongholds are being overturned. The era of coalition politics is upon us.



However, such an era will bring its own challenges in respect of how quickly we can all adapt to this new age of South African politics. This, whilst ensuring not only the continuation but moreover the improvement of service delivery and the quality of the lives of citizens.



There is a misplaced perception amongst parties that the creation of local government coalitions is an indication of political weakness. This has resulted in political parties in coalition municipalities competing for increased power. This only negatively impacts the people dependent on those municipal councils. Seized with having to defend legal proceedings, the limited funds and intellectual resources that should be deployed for service delivery to the people are instead focused on political and legal battles.


The IFP has conducted various research trips to countries such as Germany, that have been able to successfully implement the coalition politics model. Coalition governance at the local level should be regarded as an opportunity to collectively do more for communities. As seen in other examples, coalitions need to be able to transfer different interests such as needs and desires over and above material needs and wants into one strategic political plan. Intraparty compromise is something that South African politics has not yet mastered. However, one cannot insist on a singular position alone. There needs to be the maturity of negotiation and compromise.



The possibility of coalition governance is no longer hypothetical as we are part of the transitioning political climate of our country. Whilst being mindful of the spheres of governance and the expressed need for greater provincial and local governance autonomy, we would be in favour of the Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs working together with the provincial and local government spheres to start creating a standardised and uniform framework for coalition governance best practice. I thank you.



Dr C P MULDER: Hon Chairperson, the FF Plus welcomes this debate and I think it’s very important that we do have a


debate dealing with this issue of coalitions in South Africa. The mere fact that we are having this debate is a clear indication that our political landscape is changing and it is changing in a dramatic way ... [Inaudible.] [Interjections.] The days where one specific party, namely the ANC, had a clear

majority are over. We are moving into coalition governments






It was interesting to listen to the hon Direko, in whose name


this motion is, not speak about coalitions but about


collusion. I thought about that and I had a look at the definition of collusion. If you look at the definition of

collusion, it says secret or illegal co-operation or


conspiracy in order to deceive others. Now, some of these coalitions where some parties are involved, unfortunately fits

this definition exactly. It’s also not correct to say that the only coalition that lasted in the past was an ANC-led

coalition. That’s not correct. There were other coalitions. I can mention just one in the Southern Cape called Hessequa,

which the ANC had nothing to do with. It was a coalition between the DA and the FF Plus. That coalition also lasted for five years.


We are here to understand that coalitions have come to stay. That’s going to be the reality and it’s because of our constitutional dispensation. Our Constitution says that we will have a multiparty democracy. Our Constitution indicates that we will have a proportional system of government and that

will absolutely and always lead to a multiplicity of political


parties that will lead us and take us into coalition governments.



If you look at the topic of today’s debate, I’m sorry to say


that unfortunately it’s a wish list because none of these things that are expressed in the topic are part of the reality

in South Africa. Whether it’s a coalition government or


whether it’s a one-party government, in most of them — let me not generalise — we don’t have a deepening and a healthy

political administrative interface. This doesn’t exist. In most, we don’t have good governance. We don’t have quality

service delivery and we don’t have good financial management practices. And, unfortunately to say, we all know what the

state of our local government is at the moment. With all due respect, most of those governments have been run into the ground by the ANC. Now we will have to take coalitions on board to try and rectify that, and we are busy with that.


Let me just quickly mention that there are many other lessons to be learnt from coalitions and the reality in that sense.

I’m going to mention just four and I’m speaking in general terms.



The first one is very important. It says that the biggest


party in a coalition, and it can always be any political party depending on that specific coalition, should be the humblest

of all. Why? Even though you may have the biggest party in the coalition with more numbers than the others, your more numbers

will mean nothing unless you can retain the support of other coalition partners, regardless of their size.



A second lesson is that ideally spoken on a local level, coalitions should be negotiated, and be established and

managed locally with as little involvement as possible on the national level. National structures may set certain broad

principles but if you want effective coalition governments they should be negotiated and managed locally.



The third point is that personal relationships between individuals in those councils are quite often a basis that can build understanding between politicians and the different


political parties, and it’s absolutely essential ... to succeed.



A last lesion is that fewer and more stable political parties in a coalition is preferable to small fly-by-night parties

built around one leader or a few individuals. We see that in


many of the coalitions where one-member parties have a balance of power and it creates absolute havoc.



The last point is that we need ... [Inaudible.] ... to make


possible to have more negotiation time when we go into the 2024 election. We are going to have a coalition in that

regard. Thank you, Chairperson.



Mr W M THRING: Hon Chairperson, after the 1st of November 2021 local government elections, the electorate of South Africa was presented with 66 hung councils. The ACDP notes that none of the competing parties managed to obtain an outright majority in these 66 councils and this has necessitated that coalition governments be established in order to fast-track service delivery to the residents of the municipalities in question.

Clearly the electoral dominance of the ANC has come to an end and this is supported by the outcomes in eight metros where


the ruling party only managed to receive an outright majority in Buffalo City and a majority of one seat in Mangaung.



It is the view of the ACDP that the electorate has spoken. They are tired of cronyism, corruption, incompetence, cadre deployment, infrastructure decay and poor to no service delivery. It must be noted that where the ACDP is a part of coalition governments such as in the metros of Johannesburg, Ekurhuleni and Tshwane, it has always been on the basis of good governance and strong political administrative systems, effective, efficient and transparent financial management practices and quality service delivery. Our members of the mayoral committee, MMCs, in Nelson Mandela Bay and Johannesburg have proven their worth as servant leaders, putting the interests of the voters above personal and political self-interests that sometimes dominates the political landscape today. To underscore this point, the ACDP has not demanded MMC positions where it felt that our newly- elected councillors lacked the experience or the skills for the position.



Coalitions may have some downside risks but where they are set up effectively, present with many opportunities to root out corruption, fraud, and irregular and wasteful expenditure. In


addition, the combined strengths of coalition partners can be put to good use to bring about effective and efficient service delivery.



In conclusion, the ACDP has long maintained that in order to effect good governance, strong political systems and transparent financial management practices, a nonpartisan, independent and professional civil service is required. This includes the space of local government. The ACDP remains committed to quality service delivery and the interests of communities within or without coalition agreements. I thank you.



Mr C BRINK: Thank you, Chair, of all the problems that the constitutional negotiators in this country foresaw in 93 and

96 the unstable coalition government was not one of them. The system of proportional representation was meant to safeguard the abuse of a dominant party. The only coalition that Cyril Ramaphosa and Roelf Meyer contemplated back then, was the ephemeral Government of National Unity. It probably did not occur to them that the proportional representation would sow the seed of an European-style system of negotiated coalition, but less than three decades into this new democracy that is


now the political reality of most of urban South Africa and it will probably be the reality in this Parliament after 2024.



It falls to us then to ensure that the democracy outlives the dominance of the ANC. When people vote for change and when the circumstances demand change, our constitutional system must be capable of facilitating that change. This is incredibly difficult in situations where power is fragmented between scores of small parties and government can be brought down at any time by a motion of no confidence and in these instances, mayors do not have the time nor the power to land their manifestos in government and the outcome of democratic elections can readily be reversed. This is what happened to many of the coalitions and minority governments that were formed after the 2016 and 2021 local government elections.

After 2016 in particular, ANC mayors or administrators were brought back to power when smaller parties were persuaded to reverse the change which they had, in fact, brought about and there are many examples of this from Nelson Mandela Bay to Tshwane, and to Johannesburg. Even after 2021, this trend continued in part because our laws were not written with successful and stable coalitions in mind. In each one of these instances, parties who held the balance of power disregarded coalition agreements and then somehow brought the ANC back to


power. It was never about service delivery or better value for rate payers’ money. Always it was about jobs or tenders now so-called power sharing and this is how coalition politics become king maker politics and how coalition agreements are transposed by blackmail and bribery.



The DA has proposed several reforms to stabilise coalitions and then to ensure that they can deliver on their democratic mandate, of those changes one is to reduce the disruptive power of kingmakers by introducing a threshold of representation and most proportional representation systems around the world have such a threshold. The other proposal is to limit the frequency of motions of no confidence to one or two a year, a change that can be made to the Municipal Structures Act perhaps without a constitutional amendment.

These changes will not completely eliminate instability or even take the dynamism out of politics, but it will give governments time to deliver on their mandates and to build an alternative to one party dominance.



So, in conclusion Chairperson, it’s just important to note that this incubate was started before Tanya Campbell was re- elected as mayor of Ekurhuleni with an increased majority and


so we understand that there is probably ... [Time expired.] Thank you.



Mr A M SHAIK EMAM: Thank you, Chairperson, that’s the fourth one for the day. Thank you very much, I appreciate that.

Chairperson, coalitions whether we like it or not is going to be the order of the day in the elections to come. The question is: Are we ready for coalitions? The answer is an emphatic, no. Then, the question is: Why we believe we are not ready? It is because political parties put their own interest first, then the interest of the very voters that voted them in.



Now what is the problem we’re having with some of the coalition governments selfishness, greed, corruption, remember we are after the resource that is why you would find political parties will want to dictate, who should be the municipal manager, who should be the CFO. This is exactly what is happening. So it is not the interest of the people but that of the parties and when you don’t get what you want or when you enter into a coalition government and three months down the line, you’re not getting those tenders and things you were hoping you going to get to sustain yourself, then the political party you went into bed with is no longer that


sleeping partner, you don’t want them anymore. That is what it is all about.



Now, how do we expect, Chairperson, political parties with different vision, ideology to go into coalition in the interest of the people and survive? If one has got a communist ideology and another one a capitalist, how on earth are you expecting them to survive? It’s not going to happen. I think what must happen is and I know that it is being exploited, particularly by political parties that have the edge, the bigger political parties tend to swallow the smaller political parties and we know there’s very little respect. Smaller political parties enjoy from bigger political parties in coalitions. But what is very important is that these parties when they get together, they should be able to ensure that they put the interest of people first and that is why I say, Chairperson, you know if you separate politics from administration half your problems are over, because they won’t be fighting about money anymore, the interest will be serving the people. Now it is about who is going to get the hands on the cookie jar - that is what is all about. So in order to save these coalitions then make sure they are successful, I promise you even the opposites can work, but take away this urge that they have in control of appointing who the CFO for,


who that I can. I can assure you Chairperson the negotiations


... [Time expired.] I wish it will improve in the near future. Thank you.



Mr F D XASA: Hon House Chairperson, in reflecting on the state of coalitions in local government one recurring thing comes up each time we are faced with a collapse of a coalition — management of coalitions. Management of political relationships between parties in coalition is supposed to be a political art that few are able to master. Mastering this art will take us a long way in ensuring that we have relative stability in coalitions. By management we mean the political management of personalities who lead parties and often conflate their subjective will onto organisational decisions.



Political management is an acquired art that evolves through experience, ability to distinguish between primary and secondary matters, and an ability and vision to understand the end point on any matter and how to keep parties focused on the essence and not the phenomenon. If we ... [Inaudible.] ... that have been successful since 2000. Coalitions are not a new phenomenon. Political maturity, ability to accommodate and the ability to remain guided by principle and the people’s needs have always assisted. So, what has changed if we have been


managing coalitions since 2000 in local government? Certainly the political economy of the country since 2008 had major impact on the lives of the working class in particular. Since 2013 we have not been able to record economic growth except here and there. Local government has steadily been seen to be the resource from which individuals and communities can derive an ability to survive. In this process the legislative regulatory framework has become an obstacle, especially to those who wish to accumulate in this process.



Mobilisation has not necessarily been around needs of the people but needs of this group of individuals who wanted to pursue their interest. In this scenario, good local government policy and its legislation becomes undermined by a subculture that sets in whose intention is not about the people’s needs but about access to power and resources.



The dissolution that we have experienced in voter turnout, today there are more unregistered voters or registered voters who don’t bother to vote than those who go out to vote, and the gap is widening. This is a reflection that the electorate are alienated with what they are experiencing and the sphere of government that is meant to address their needs based on sound government policy and legislation.


Outlining the challenges post the 2016 local government elections and a trend that has continued, in particular after the 2021 local government elections, five issues stand out.

That of governance and administration interface, poor ... [Inaudible.] ... syndicates of corruption and individual corruption and political killings that are used by organised formations whether they are in a form of political parties or pressure groups to destabilise municipalities in order to force decision through coercion.



What many parties cannot accept is that coalition governments are a product of the people’s will in democratic systems. The lack of overwhelming or outright majority confidence in any single contestant is an election itself. The political party coalitions and coalition governments that result out of this are likely unstable or changeable, and so in response to trying to manage this situation we tend to amend legislation and regulations, usually the Municipal Structures Act, to deal with the challenge instead of using existing legislation.



Political parties themselves conducting ... [Inaudible.] ... of their own shortcomings. In Parliament we have excluded an entire category of political leadership from holding office in local government, and we believe that this will sort out the


problem. As we will hear in this debate, the Structures Act is under consideration for further change.



Coalitions are by definition not permanent governance institutions yet stability and co-operative constructive governance can be optimised. Policy action is most needed in the domain of party politics and political culture, a terrain that does not lend itself to regulation. A political culture that does not treat coalitions as substitute for electoral contest need to be engrained.



We require principles to underpin coalitions in formal negotiated binding and publicly ... [Inaudible.] ... Public political accountability on the content of coalition agreements will assist communities to hold individuals and their parties to account, and this needs to be encouraged rather than behind the scenes negotiations in which eyes are on the budgets, positions, public goods and an atmosphere where personal gain is conflated with party political gain or interest.



Political challenges and aspirations for individuals and collective enrichment remain two sources of huge instability that these have to be addressed in a principled approach


coalition. Therefore, managing coalitions must be on the basis of established principles that must manage how parties manage their disagreements in coalitions. Forming coalitions on the basis of written agreements containing as much policy and structural detail as possible is essential, anything else will lead to a demise of the coalition.



While disagreements begin to rise, party political interventions in council administration has to be contained. Work has been done on this but more needs to be done. To deal with the subjective and vested interest of groups that surround councils and want to extract material benefit from these councils, we have to ensure that we insulate municipal management from coalition interference in line with relevant legislation on appointment and dismissal. This will go a long way to assist with stability, ensure professional autonomy of municipal bureaucracy and don’t make the appointment of a municipal manager contractual, this results in instability especially when a coalition raptures.



With regards to caucuses, political management of caucuses is vested in the Whip of that caucus. The Whip has party interest only and desire to politically manage those party interests.

They should not allow themselves to be undermined in this duty


otherwise things will fall apart. Of course the party has the responsibility to elect Whips of integrity and honour otherwise coalitions will suffer the consequences. Political parties therefore have to instil leadership over caucuses to avoid coalition switching under the cover of secret ballots which lead to further instability.



With regards to motions of no confidence the council rules need to regulate this on the basis of consensus that has been reached. Clearly abuse of motions of no confidence is undesirable but these matters are steeped in the rights and therefore any agreement should not limit rights in a manner that will be constitutionally challenged.



Narrow political purposes with criteria should be part of any agreement. It of course raises the broader question, do you put this in regulations and a schedule to the Structures Act so that one does not experience variation. In municipalities, threshold local government and the instability it causes does need to be addressed but within the constitutional framework of what constitute reasonable constitutional proportionality proposals. Threshold that lead to considerable exclusion are unlikely to meet the approval of the Constitutional Court.


In conclusion, all parties need to ask themselves the question: What has made coalitions unstable? Is it really the absence of legislation or is it not the inability of political parties to manage coalitions? Thank you, House Chairperson.



Mr M G E HENDRICKS: Hon House Chair, Dr Corné Mulder is spot on that coalitions are here to stay, but what is evolving is co-governance. Al Jama-ah learned from the EFF that credible leaders is key to coalitions, and I have learned a lot from the speech of the hon Mkhaliphi today. What she says is exactly what is happening in the City Of Johannesburg. The co- governing minority block which Al Jama-ah provides secretarial service to has replaced the DA Speaker and the Chief Whip.

This block sows the benefit of the EFF leadership for the future of co-governing in South Africa going forward, unleashing prosperity and service delivery.



This block has seen how credible leaders of the ANC responded to help remove the speaker and Chief Whip. What is working is that members of the block ... [Inaudible.] ... for the benefit of the City of Johannesburg and their party come second. Even the ANC in the City of Johannesburg embraces this. [Inaudible.] ... of course is that members of the block embrace revolutionary values and they embrace Ubuntu.


So, as one of the leaders, the one man party leaders hon Mulder refers to, we have two councillors and a ward councillor after we trashed the DA. I look forward to working with the EFF national leaders and the credible ANC leaders led by the provincial chair. In 2024 the three parties that will govern will be the EFF, ANC and a block of credible leaders of parties with just one or more seats, which is obviously a nightmare on hon Winde, Hellen Zille and others.



The legislation the hon Chief Whip of the Opposition refers to will not get off the starting block. We died for one man one vote. The PAC stalwarts were hanged. Every vote must count in the National Assembly. Threshold is anti-revolutionary. The Constitutional Court gave independent the right to stand as councillors. The DA now says an independent person must be more than one person. They can’t even count properly. We must teach the DA how to count.



So, what is the nonsense about an ombudsman to babysit coalitions? We need the opportunity to put a motion of confidence whenever it is needed and our Speaker has given leadership to accommodate us. The DA wants to reintroduce apartheid, return to white rule, and sharing power without control. They want to keep the white madams in power. So, we


want to put the case for co-governance, and Al Jama-ah feels that we need to put whatever resources are there. South Africa is going to be proud of the co-governance in the City of Johannesburg. The new speaker there and the new Chief Whip have won the admiration of South Africa. [Time expired.] ...

Thank you very much, hon House Chair, and I hope you support co-governance.





AFFAIRS (Ms T Nkadimeng): Thank you very much, hon House Chair, hon members, good afternoon. It is indeed a great honour and privilege for me to be able to address the House in debating the state of coalitions in local government and the need which we have all emphasized for principles of deepening a healthy political administrative interface, good governance, quality service delivery, and good financial management practices.



Some of our members have already alluded that local government elections since inception in 2000 have produced quite a number of hung councils, which is what we called them then contrary to a language of coalitions of today. The local government elections of 2000 produced 29 hung councils. It increased to

31 in 2006, and peaked to 37 in 2011. The difference in 2016


was that for the first time in history of local government, four of the metros had an undecided vote, with hung councils or coalitions, meaning 40% of our citizens in the country were living municipalities that are hunged. It generated a huge interest which provided a spinner to the difference of 2000 to 2016 – a 15 years or three terms of local government, which had produced beyond what 2016 had in terms of 27 hung councils versus 37 hung councils in 2011 elections, for example. The foundation of 2016 created the 66 of 2021 that we have now including the same metros which were hung.



The Constitution vests legislative and executive authority in the municipality to reside with the council. This effective exercise enshrines them to govern and is crucial for a capable and a developmental local government that we all aspire. As the highest decision-making body, they must steer the municipality, they must determine which strategic direction, and they must take crucial decisions. So, in a coalition, this requires close co-operation between the partners themselves to ensure that the responsibilities of council are carried out effectively. In practice, this has been the opposite. They are often unstable and have been terminated mostly before the end of their council term. This instability relates and directly gives an ... [Inaudible.] ... hon Shaik Emam, indicated lack


of service delivery and a compromise in a municipality that needs to adopt its policies, and in some instances, its Integrated Development Planning, IDP, and even difficulty to adopt their own budgets. The premise and the compromise for municipal administration’s ability to deliver is unfortunately

- hon Emam – hindered by this very same instance. Even though you may want ... [Inaudible.] ...



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Deputy Minister, we are losing you. Deputy Minister!





AFFAIRS (Ms T Nkadimeng): ... advice and expert ... [Inaudible.] ...



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Deputy Minister.





AFFAIRS (Ms T Nkadimeng): ... and this has been the experience. Despite ... [Inaudible.] ...



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Deputy Minister.




AFFAIRS (Ms T Nkadimeng): ... [Inaudible.]



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Deputy Minister. I think we have lost the Deputy Minister. Deputy Minister, you are muted. Can you please unmute?





AFFAIRS (Ms T Nkadimeng): I didn’t mute. Can I switch off my camera with your permission? Maybe the system will be better.



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Yes, I wanted to advice on that.





AFFAIRS (Ms T Nkadimeng): My apologies for that. I didn’t mute. ... as a result, coalitions are unstable as I have said and illustrated. The history of this problematic coalitions have therefore necessitated a programme that the Department of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Cogta, has started to try and assist municipalities to develop binding framework for coalitions that can be used as a guide for political parties in structuring their coalitions in practice. There are arguments even of scholars as to whether this must


be a guide or it must be legally binding even beyond the parties themselves.



Hon members must remember, local government is the only sphere that is constitutionally instructed and mandated to engage with their communities to define and approve their own budgets with regard to the services that they receive, and we call this plan an Integrated Development Plan, which unfortunately take a back seat in municipalities which are under coalitions when they are developing their own interests and even set them aside in order to deal with their own bargaining power over who gets what even in exchange of programmes and contracts with the political parties in negotiating entering into coalitions contracts.



A study which has been done in 24 democracies over the world, indicates that, for example, in Norway, Belgium, Italy and Switzerland, they have reduced the number of policy changes as a result of having more than one party governing in government. We need to ideally look forward to this. If an IDP has been adopted at the beginning of the term, which is a

five-year term, and which can be reviewed on an annual basis but not ad hocly for no reason because of a change of leadership.


In Nelson Mandela Bay, in the term 2016-21, they changed their allocation of human settlements to an extent of never building a single RDP house for the residents in that metro because it was just changes of location from one point to the other without utilizing the budget. Whoever comes in changes and plans a new settlement. Another ones comes and plans a new settlement. When implementation starts, comes in another one. Our problem is that these agreements are mostly fakes, they translate into a programme of no government and usually not tailored to the needs of the people. It is now evident that we need to able to remove all the crux of what could make a coalition frivolous but rather than to be straight forward.



True to some of these arrangements, which have quickly become a norm – we were warned by a book called Marriages of Inconvenience by the Institute of Strategic Reflection, Mistra, it said that there are no goals in these coalitions, there no visions, no plans, and worst of all, there are no programmes. They operate on a stop–and-go mode, and this is what tends to accentuate the problem in the political administrative interface.



Foster in his Recess confirms that the extent of turbulence in metropolitan administrations is demonstrated by comparing the


average tenure of municipal managers, which is usually three and half years compared to 15 months of municipal managers and the record of what they service in five years. That’s where our problems are – hon Emam – in the administration.



We need to find a way of looking on how all the areas which are in the municipality and political parties govern. Rhodes University senior lecturer summed up our 2021 coalition negotiations as: “the ANC sidelined, the DA surprised and the demanding EFF.” The talks were filled with unscrupulous manipulation by smaller parties. Some of the smaller parties said it themselves. Coalitions incentivize promises which are beyond service delivery and infighting in council. This has led – hon Xasa – to the Cogta looking at improving the Municipal Structures Act to create one electoral threshold where a party would be required to secure a predetermined percentage of the overall votes to qualify for a seat in a council. Yes, bigger parties must not be arrogant. You would also want to go to Thabazimbi municipality, which is a 20- seater council. Party A, wins 11 wards and the other party win one ward to collect the 12 wards. The other party, which is a dominant party is sitting in coalition, making a total of nine parties to govern on a 13-seater. That coalition can’t even adopt a budget because it is too big, it is not manageable but


it is based on the fact that others must not govern at all costs. That is also not correct. It is the inability to make appointments and adopt budgets which makes some of these crucial coalitions not functional.



We need to enable the amendment of the Structures Act further to look into the cases which were tried before in KwaZulu- Natal and Western Cape, which gives the MEC a right to institute section 12, but further expand by allowing the MEC to look into expanding the 14 days of the council establishment particularly in a hung council to give more time for negotiations whilst administration is continuing with the business of council. If the option of coalition fails, the MEC must be given time to expand on giving the right of a party that has a majority number to be able to initiate a discussion. That’s what those who went to Belgium and Germany learned. Some of the countries which have always survived on coalitions for more than decades.



The Dullah Omar Institute of Law attests that coalitions must be strategic, and must maintain a long view with the distributing political offices. We are currently seeing parties which openly say: I will not sign into that coalition if you don’t give me Infrastructure, Human Settlements, or


corporate services so that I could hire people who come from my party. That is what weakens the section 79 and 80s because parties are inward looking.



We also need to ensure that the motion of no confidence as chair has articulated, are also dealt with in the Municipal Structures Act. We are looking into enhancing further the development of the Chief Whip code to ensure that the political parties are harmonized in council as a form of what is mandated but rather not a duty that a council can choose to elect a Chief Whip or not to elect. Our code of conduct as it has been developed now, is to ensure that we legislate even on the walking out councils, which deals with quorums and which makes council even more unstable in most of the areas. The code of conduct for councilors, once promulgated will prohibit council walkouts during council meetings and may also deal the issue of quorums and stability of meeting sittings so that council could be able to deal with the issues and the business of council.



Professor Pieterse at Wits University says the whole new law to manage coalitions will be unrealistically unnecessary, but agrees that arguably, we need maturity of executive mayors, mature political parties and the ability to govern across


divisions. Unfortunately, in South Africa, opposition politics seems to be solely lacking in this. Even our own debate indicates how we ... [Inaudible.] ... one another. [Time

expired.] ... Thank you.



Mr M S MALATSI: Thanks very much House Chair, this motion is an exhibition of a spectacular lack of political foresight by the ANC. There is no doubt that it was initially tabled with the intention to be a chest beating festival following its short lived efforts to remove DA Mayors in Johannesburg and Ekurhuleni.



But, as fate would have it, it has now become a major source of embarrassment for the ANC. So much that even the original sponsor of the motion, hon Hadebe, has now ducked like a skilled purse-snatcher to dissociate himself with this motion.



The miserable task of defending his party’s political thuggery to collapse DA-led coalition governments has now been dumped on the shoulders of a helpless backbencher [Inaudible.]



Hon members, the events of the past two months have exposed the desperation of the ANC to loot these metros. They are now


collaborating with political gangsters in the Patriotic Alliance to return to power by hook or crook.



In Johannesburg, they were dazzled by the tantrums of the Queen of Chaos, Colleen Makhubele, to launch what is probably the shortest political coup in history, only for the courts to restore the DA-led coalition to power.



In Ekurhuleni, the ANC had one mission and one mission only: To disrupt service delivery by disrupting a coalition government led by the DA without a tangible plan to establish a functional government. All these failed attempts to return to power in these metros reveal the true character of the ANC.



It does not care about service delivery to residents. Its primary obsession is to regain access to municipal funds so that the can pay salaries for Luthuli House staff and for the 2024 elections campaign.



We now know that the ANC is so broke that it now plans to charge the media to pay to cover its national conference. On the other hand, we have the DA that remains faithful to working with political parties who share our values to form coalition governments that deliver to all residents.


And for as long as we are in power, we will strive to keep the taps running, we will collect ... [Interjection.]



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Hon Malatsi, May I advise that you switch your video for internet connection.



Mr M S MALATSI: ... okay, I will do that, thank you very much. For as long as we are in power, we will strive to keep the taps running. We will collect refuse on time. We will clean neighbourhoods consistently. And we will account for every single cent we spent to improve the quality of life in these metros.



To our coalition partners who have remained loyal to the spirit of the coalition agreement to restore a government that delivers. We are grateful for the opportunity to continue to serve with them.



And to the people of Johannesburg, Ekurhuleni, Tshwane and Nelson Mandela Bay. We want to reassured them that the DA-led coalition government will serve you diligently and with honesty. The reality is that coalition governments are here to stay.


And to the hon member from Al Jama-ah the reality is that if a threshold is introduced ... [Interjection.] [Inaudible.] ... figures that auction their soul ... [Time expired.]



Ms D R DIREKO: Thank you House Chair, the matter of formalising coalition agreements has risen sharply in this debate. The ANC would agree that formalising coalitions given the experience that we have gone through, it would be important. This would require the introduction of guiding policy in the formation of coalitions which outlines the guiding principle and approach to coalition.



Delegated legislation should be sufficient as opposed to legislation. Legislation is less flexible and accommodating and likely to result in further litigations. A broad a regulatory environment best suites coalition to enhance stability in council.



Further, the preference for a coalition should be towards having more executive committees, principle of proportional representation, to be more inclusive and improve stability compared to mayoral executives which enhance weak coalitions particularly in large municipalities, such grade one and grade two categories.


Details of formalising coalition agreement to guide the formation or/and operational functioning of a coalition, should be outlined in the modus operandi of coalition.



Above all, a coalition must be grounded on principle. The purpose of why we are doing it, what is it that you want to achieve? Which is to advance the well-being of our people and a better life for all, not the interest of the political party. Out of forging a coalition on a shared perspective and a programme of action, that will become easier.



Cooperative Governance should be tasked to craft the regulations on coalitions and have them gazetted.


House Chair, in conclusion some of the reasons why coalition is failing is because of political parties like DA. When we are discussing issues that affect the lives of our people, they turn to miss the point and try to score a cheap political point. We are now discussing the issue of coalition and all that they could think about is speaking of ANC instead of the matter that is at hand.



So I feel sorry House Chair for hon Malatsi, he must just have a session of tea with the former members such as Van Damme and


Maimane because they started just like him and now they ended up in the street, frustrated because of the DA.



That’s how they do, they use and throw you out, so he is on the line. When he is busy grandstanding he must also remember that.



Lastly House Chair, we also have the EFF whom are the black


sheep of the family, but the behaviour like the crème de la crème of the organization. Telling us that we don’t have a credible leader which is very worrisome, because when you look at the EFF, they only have one leader, others are just the followers but they come and grandstand telling us about credible leaders. What is it that they know about credible leaders? Because they are followers, it’s a one-man show. So, there’s no democracy in that organization, hence they behave like this when the get this platform. Thank House Chair.



The CHAIRPERSON (Mr M G Mahlaule): Thank you very much hon Direko, hon members that concludes the business of the

Mini-plenary and the House is adjourned. Thank you very much.



The mini-plenary session rose at 16:35.




No related