In matric, I was fortunate enough to go on a school trip to France. There were many things that I enjoyed about that trip (lunch on the beach with friends, making it to the top of the stairs at the Arc de Triomphe, cruising down the Seine River), but there were also moments that weren’t so great (being forced to stammer my way though the French language, the glaring supervision of Nazi-trained teachers). One such would-rather-forget-but-will-always-remember incident happened at a bus stop somewhere between Marseille and Paris. Taking a break from bussing through the French countryside, we arrived at a Travel Stop and, on descending from the bus for our first break in several hours, were given time to get some food. We were also told in no uncertain terms that any food that we bought was not to be eaten on the bus.
Now, I have never been really good with rules and, after buying my food, I made my way back onto the bus, hoping that I could inconspicuously tuck into my burger. At this point, it is necessary for me to point out that I was not the only double-0-seven eating her lunch in the bus. All 25 girls snuck onto the bus with meals in our bags, pockets and under our coats. No sooner had the bus doors closed, had Mrs Rover (*named changed to honour the secrecy of the Nazi) risen promptly from her comically small seat, and demanded to know who had brought food onto the bus.
In what I thought then was an heroic act of martyrdom, and now see as a bold act of stupidity, I admitted to being the culprit. I was tried at the Court of First Offenses, and sentenced to eating my lunch in solitary confinement on the pavement next to the bus.
Did it make it less wrong that I had broken the rule because my peers had done the same thing? By that logic, the more murders committed would mean we should give leaner sentences: moral relativity taken to the extreme. But that’s not what it means. I wasn’t less wrong, there were just more people not doing right. My admission of guilt and subsequent humiliation did not purge my devious “friends” (term used very loosely) of their crimes. I was not the sacrificial lamb that could cover the sins of many, because I was in the shameful process of atoning for my own sins. If justice were to prevail that day, all 25 of us would have been burning our behinds on the sidewalk. But the Nazis were satisfied to use one as an example to many, therefore legitimising their inaction and exempting the others from their crimes.
Now, did I share this anecdote because I am hoping for overdue sympathy? Partly. But, I also think I kind of get how Sicelo and Gwen felt yesterday when His Honourable sacked them as Cooperative Governance Minister and Public Works Minister respectively. My emotions are still mixed regarding this action, and perhaps with time I will shed some of my cynicism. Until then, here are my thoughts.
In general, I have two problems with cabinet reshuffling:
The first is that it suggests a lack of specialist knowledge: we keep going back to the beginning when we should be reaching the end. This is the second time in a year that our President has decided to shake things up. Last year, he replaced existing ministers with those who he felt would better serve the country’s interests. (It worries me that we can appoint people as MP’s who don’t recognise their role is one of service in the first place!) In his Press Conference a year ago, the Big Guy said, "We had to change the way government works in order to improve service delivery. Our mission was guided by improving the quality of the lives of South Africans." That reshuffle saw 7 ministers lose their jobs. Ironically, Public Works Minister Geoff Doidge was replaced by Gwen Mahlangu-Nkabinde – as a result of a similar lease scandal that ended Gwen’s career yesterday.
I understand that being President must be a difficult job. Without trying to be smug about it, there really are a lot of responsibilities that are put on one man, and the standard by which we judge the Top Guns is [justifiably] rather high. But let’s, for a moment, consider the extent of the satire that lent to two people being sacked from the same position, for the same reasons, less than a year apart. Not even Shakespeare could summon the kind of creative genius needed to fashion that kind of dramatic irony. How is it possible that the country’s Number One could make the same blunder and appoint an ignoramus in the same position twice? Perhaps it suggests that he who chooses is himself an ignoramus (although I am loathe to insult the country’s most important citizen. Whether we like him or not, his position does carry some weight, and demands some – if limited – amount of respect).
I think the issue here is that we need to start appointing people into positions who have some kind of knowledge in the role that they are going to fill. For example, it makes no sense to me that the Deputy Minister of Economics (Mahlangu-Nkabinde’s previous position) would take over the role of Public Works Minister. What happened to the Public Works Deputy? What knowledge did Mahlangu-Nkabinde have to fill that role in the first place, when her only other experience was in Environmental Affairs and Women’s committees? I understand the need to get rid of the loose screws, but am I the only one who thinks it ineffective to replace the screws with bubblegum? Deputy Minister of Rural Development, Thembelani Nxesi, takes over the controversial position, with no experience within the Public Works ministry. I do not want to set the former school teacher up for failure, but now he has to go back to the books and learn how to run a ministry that he knows very little about. How well do we think that will end?
My second problem with this constant two-step is that it works too well as a distraction of what is really going on: our government’s inability to nip corruption in the artery. Zuma’s [delayed] expulsion of the two ministers and suspension of Cele makes people feel warm and fuzzy, and gives more confidence in our government than should be warranted. Much like the injustice that befell me on the cold pavement of a French Travel stop, the Three [dishonourable] Musketeers are mere pawns in a chess game much bigger than just three pieces. Granted, they needed to lose their jobs. But let’s not get so blinded by the party balloons and chocolate cake that we do not realise that there are snakes in the grass who are yet to be caught.
It is not enough to fire a corrupt minister, and then send him/her off to some obscure location as an ambassador. Or, in the case of Toni Yengeni, slap him with a light prison sentence and then give him a spot in the committee set out to investigate the very scandal that got him locked behind bars in the first place! It unnerves me that nothing has been said about the millions that these three have stolen from the tax payers. I salute the President for his actions, but the story should not end here.
Kenya had a good year last year. After the terrors of 2007 – 2009, 2010 saw them sign in a new constitution and experience much needed political reform. In the process of rebuilding their nation, the Kenyan government – led by President Mwai Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga – created an Ethics and Anti-Corruption Commission. The Commission’s mandate and sole purpose is to investigate corruption (http://www.kacc.go.ke/whatsnew.asp?id=197). I call for our government to do the same. Until such a time, I will say ‘Well done for the effort, but I am still not convinced!’
Having said all this, I do believe that this is a good start, although I am not one to celebrate starts. Our country has been going in the wrong direction for a very long time, and it is going to take a lot of retracing of our steps to make things right again. In fact, there is nothing to even suggest that we are on the right path yet. But I do feel comforted that the Public Protector’s job is not just ceremonial, and that the Old Man actually listened to her recommendations (albeit a bit tardy). I also applaud our President for taking action. Let’s not forget that Jackie Selebi had a much longer run than Bheki Cele before he was shot down.
[Side note: I think that it is fitting to mention the exemplary job that Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma is doing in the Department of Home Affairs. Not all our ministers are bandits, and yesterday Dlamini-Zuma’s ministry had its first clean audit in 16 years. Kudos for a job well done!]
Whether Zuma’s actions were being spurred on by invisible puppeteers (perhaps promoting a school teacher to such a high position was a favour to COSATU), an ill-intentioned step towards Mangaung (it is no secret that Zuma is crossing fingers and toes for a second term) or a genuine interest in showing some leadership (perhaps he is getting weary of the constant reference to his big head), I am definitely proud that the headlines were good news this morning. I can’t comment on where our country is headed, but if we can keep this up, things are looking bright.
We need to be able to trust our government, and hope beyond all hope that soon the people who govern us do not become as the men described by Shakespeare in Measure for Measure: “The jury, passing on the prisoner's life,/ May in the sworn twelve have a thief or two/ Guiltier than him they try.”
No comments:
Post a Comment