In SA’s recent political history there have been two watershed moments. One was the 1994 elections, when, for the first time, all South Africans, irrespective of race, voted together for a common government. The second occurred this week, when the post-apartheid mould of one-party dominance was, to all intents and purposes, broken.
Since 1994 the ANC, trading on its anti-apartheid credentials, has been the dominant party in our politics. A key feature of the municipal elections was the reduction of the ANC’s national vote to 46%, from nearly 55% in the previous local elections. This was coupled with the party’s inability to gain a 50% majority in the psychologically important councils of Johannesburg, Tshwane, eThekwini and Nelson Mandela Bay, or make inroads in DA-controlled Cape Town.
The outcome sparked negotiations aimed at cobbling together governing coalitions in municipalities across the country. Neither the main opposition, the DA, nor the EFF, the third-biggest party, seemed able to meaningfully capitalise on the ANC’s losses.
The negotiations must be aimed not at dispensing party patronage, but at achieving what is best for the country and its voters. They must have as a primary objective the effective provision of municipal services through the appointment of ethical and suitably qualified people. South Africans have suffered for too long as a result of the misgovernance of most of our local authorities, which has disrupted the provision of basic services.
The negotiations must be aimed at achieving what is best for the country
In the wake of this week’s election results, President Cyril Ramaphosa called on the leaders of the various parties to work together. “If we are to make this a new and better era, we as leaders must put aside our differences and work together in a spirit of partnership, of co-operation, of collaboration and common purpose in the interests of the people of SA,” he said. There has been speculation about a possible coalition between the DA and the ANC, despite their divergent ideological orientations.
Were such an alliance to take place, it might put in jeopardy the political futures of Ramaphosa and the DA's John Steenhuisen; both would have to manage tensions that would be heightened between factions in their respective parties. In the ANC, there would be many who feel that an alliance with the DA, which they see as a party of white privilege, would be a bridge too far. Similarly, a strong lobby in the DA might find it unacceptable to partner with a party it has regarded as corrupt for so long.
While it is true that an ANC-DA rapprochement, even if tactical, would come with risks for the leaders, a failure to respond appropriately will likely imperil our prospects of rebuilding our local government so that it truly begins to function in the interests of all South Africans. A new model of conducting local politics, of co-operation for the public good as opposed to a sectarian, winner-take-all approach, might even provide a template for our national politics.
Ramaphosa is correct to emphasise the need for party leaders to work together in the interests of all. This applies not just to the ANC and the DA, but to parties across the board. Among the duties of leadership is the ability to respond to changing, and changed, realities — instead of burying heads in the sand, or hand-wringing over what might have been.
The result of this week’s elections represents a historic moment in our developing democracy, ushering in a new reality for our body politic. The question is whether we have the calibre of leaders capable of seizing the opportunity. Leaders with vision, and who are prepared to chart a new, more inclusive and constructive path not only for their followers but for the country as a whole. That is the kind of brave and visionary leadership last seen during our country’s transition from apartheid 27 years ago.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.