Question Time Special Question Time

Question Time Special

Similar Content

Browse content similar to Question Time Special. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!



Tonight, a special edition of Question Time. We are in


Johannesburg. Our panel is partly made up of a new generation worried


about the way this country is going, partly made up of people who worked


with Nelson Mandela, and with our audience here to debate what the


future holds now that Mandela is gone. Welcome to Question Time.


On the panel, Lindiwe Zulu, on the NEC of the African National


Congress, an adviser on international relations to President


Zuma. Lindiwe Mazibuko, parliamentary leader of the official


opposition party, the Democratic Alliance, and one of South Africa's


youngest MPs. Pik Botha, Foreign Minister in the last apartheid


government, who later joined the African National Congress. The


radical black consciousness activist, Andile Mngxitama.


Journalist and radio presenter, Eusebius McKaiser, and the African


born British Labour MP, leading campaigner against apartheid, Peter


Hain. Our first question. Given the booing


and jeering towards the president which we witnessed a few days ago,


does the ANC is still have the majority of South Africans behind


it? I think it was an interesting moment for South Africans. Many


people are saying it was outrageous to interrupt the funeral, the


memorial with the jeering of President Zuma, who was not the


person we gathered to honour. Many people are saying it was great South


Africans felt free to express their discontent. I think it was not


ideal. I would have liked President Mandela to have had an honourable


sendoff without those kind of politics, but perhaps the world


needs to know where South Africa is. To answer your question, there


is dissatisfaction with President Zuma. There is massive


dissatisfaction with the ANC, but he is at the centre of that. Issues


around corruption, lack of delivery, he is a symbol of what is wrong with


the ANC and increasingly people are speaking up about that. I hope it


will materialise at the ballot. It does not help to only complain


during times of mourning. People must express themselves


democratically and perhaps we can start to move towards a more vibrant


multiparty democracy. Yes, it was very unfortunate, the choice of


expression, the freedom of expression and the booing of the


president on a day like this. It is something that as South Africans,


all of us, including in the African National Congress, are completely


disgusted with, as a matter of fact. The bottom line is that in the


African National Congress if people have got issues that they need to


deal with, they have a platform within the African National Congress


to raise those issues. They have been opened to do that. If the


African National Congress needs to take a decision on the basis of its


principles, that decision will be taken by the African National


Congress how to deal with this. This is what should not have happened. We


are respecting the greatest man to have lived during our time. What


about the antagonism it shows towards President Zuma? It does not


matter what antagonism people might have had on President Zuma at that


point in time. The fact of the matter is that we had almost 100 and


something heads of state visiting South Africa to give respect to


Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela. That should have never been a platform


for anybody who was unhappy with anything, irrespective of which


political party he comes from. The worst is when it comes from the


African National Congress, because the African National Congress


believes that its own members should not find themselves in that space.


But put it into the context of the fact that we have a memorial


service. I would like to mention something. During the time of


apartheid, people worshipping and comrades. Within funerals, the ANC


would say Long live ANC and that is where we mobilise, within funerals.


People are tired of the president that spits Mandela's name. The


president that oppresses the poor, the president that keeps introducing


things we are annoyed at. So are you saying it was right, if you felt


like that, during the memorial? I think we all loved that, and we all


respect what he did for this country. There is no dispute about


that. But I am saying there is no platform to express our feelings.


How can you say that? You are sitting here. This is the very


platform where people have to express themselves. Like the


government of the day, Lindiwe is misreading the mood of the country.


That is what it is fundamentally about. As a South African, I am not


disgusted by the booing. What is too easy to do is to say it is ad


decorum at a memorial service for the greatest global icon, two blue.


What is harder to do is to ask yourself, why would a nation in


mourning do something that goes against what is decent? That is the


question to ask. Pik Botha. If I may. Yes, you may. There is a


challenge. He passed away, but his legacy cannot die. And I think there


is a challenge for all of us, for the government, the citizens, the


churches, the private sector. I think we must go and reflect. Are we


honouring his legacy, or are we violating that legacy? And did you


think the booing violated the legacy? I am hesitant. I am making


an appeal now. Let us do what he did. He refused to be dictated to by


the bitterness of his past and 27 years in prison, and decided for


himself that if we want to make progress in this country, we must


forgive and we must move forward. His words to me, when we often met,


alone, privately, at his request, Pik, we need each other to succeed.


But the question is whether President Zuma is unpopular and


whether it was right of a section of the crowd to boo him, despite the


fact that it was Mandela's memorial. It drew a lot of international


attention, as you know. David, listen. The memorial is for Mr


Mandela. I think we must not argue and have unpleasant discussions. I


think we must concentrate on his legacy and what he did for all of us


and his dreams. And the ANC included, not excluded, they must


also ask themselves, are we true to his legacy? Do we know him? How


often have you met him? How often have you had discussions with him?


Where were you when he divorced Winnie? Did you phone him, did you


side with him? This is my point. We were together. We had discussions of


a private nature. When I had a cancer operation, when I came round


he was standing next my bed holding my hand and saying, Pik, we want you


to get well. I went through the same ordeal. We need each other. This is


what the purpose must be. I think it is unfortunate that there is an


emphasis on one aspect of Mandela's legacy, and this legacy is


reconciliation without justice. In fact, Mandela is a revolutionaries.


He takes up arms, he questioned authority, he wants justice. So if


Jacob Zuma is the representative of a government that does not listen to


people, then we are going to question that. We must question it


at all times. I want to argue that the booing is consistent with


questioning of an authority that refuses to listen to the people. The


woman at the very back. I would like to ask to the ANC lady, because she


is telling us about the right platform. And yet the ANC never show


us the respect in the first place. If the ANC did listen to the people


in the first place, that booing would not even try to be happening


on that day. Because the ANC never give us the rightful platform. You


do not give them the platform to make their voices heard. The


platform that she is talking about is a platform where each and every


one of us, each and every time we have to vote for a government, we


have freely gone to elections, without any harassment, without any


intimidation. That is a platform, because it is a platform for you to


decide who you want to vote for, number one. Number two, we have


given the platform because the in which we live, we have said


ourselves, those communities have a platform where they can express


themselves. You have the local structures, where unique to know


where those local structures are. You need to know who your MP is. You


need to know who is your local struck. Those are the structures


that you have to express yourself. At the bottom of all of Lindiwe's


responses is the fundamental refusal to engage with why people are angry.


You say there are platforms and structures, and you have a lady


saying, where are they? People feel they do not have a way to engage the


ANC to make it change its behaviour. You are asking the wrong question.


It is not right to ask whether it was wrong or right, it is simply a


reflection of where South Africa is. I want to say that Jacob Zuma


has lost the aspect and the popularity of the South African. The


lady who is sitting on the panel, she is defending the indefensible.


She is falling herself. -- fooling herself. I was startled by it


because this was an event to commemorate probably the greatest


figure of our generation, not just in South Africa but across the


world. So I was startled. But having a year ago made a documentary for


the BBC on what was going on in South Africa after the Maricana


massacre, I was not surprised, because there is a lot of resentment


at the grassroots about an unwillingness on the part of the


leadership in that it will, the president, to actually listen to


people and reflect their wishes. In a way I was not surprised but I


think the key thing for the ANC leadership is to take the country


forward and listen to people. If it does so, as a supporter of the ANC,


I believe it can succeed. But many people here, I have down, including


ANC members and past activist 's, like one of the leaders of an


underground organisation alongside Nelson Mandela, very critical of the


present leadership. It is important the present leadership listens to


that. The lady in white. About this thing of platforms, now she is


saying we have been given the platforms with our votes, which


means they are going to give us the platform on the dates of the votes.


After, they are no longer coming back to us until the five years.


I want to ask the lady of the ANC, President Zuma did not ask the


mission to build his house, his swimming pool. Why must we ask the


permission not to boo him? The house being one that cost something like


?12 million. I don't think the President has come out to say he


wants to have permission to boo or not to boo. Let's put things in


perspective because if we are going to be jumping all over the show,


we're going to end up not being focussed. Firstly, we are talking


about the booing. I make the statement clearly from the African


National Congress point of view. That what happened there was not


illegal, but it was ethically not correct because the platform


which... APPLAUSE


Was a platform of giving respect to former President Nelson Mandela. You


were reported as saying those responsible - it was human lighting


and those responsible would be dealt with - did you say that? Absolutely.


Yes. I did! These are members... How can you... These are members of the


African National Congress. We have a constitution in the ANC. We have


regulations in the ANC. We've got rules in the ANC, so when you break


those rules of the ANC, there must be a consequence. If it was not


members of the ANC, some other people, then would not say we will


deal with them. In this particular case, we know as a matter of fact it


was... How can you know that? This is chilling! What will you do - will


you get surveillance footage? Can I get this opportunity? Can I get this


opportunity... You were saying it is only... We know because when it


happened it was embarrassing. Therefore, the people who are


responsible for the event which is Government, had to go and speak to


them and ask them, that even if you have programmes, can we at least get


this event over? And then you can deal with your programmes.


A quick point. Firstly, I thought the first propaganda defence was it


was... In addition to that, David, the most important point is the ANC,


because of its large elect ral majority feel invensible. They --


invincible. They could potentially commit suicide. You don't deal with


people, you... APPLAUSE


You've all had your say. We have many more questions our audience


want to raise. We only have an hour for the debate. We have done quarter


of an hour already. I will move on to another question. You can join


the debate on Twitter in Britain, or indeed wherever you are in the world


watching this. Right, let's move on to a question.


This from Esau Mudau, please. Is racism over?


Certainly not. South Africa remain remains by and


large a Racist society. In 1994, we did not end racism. Our ideal of the


konslation meant we did not address the question, which shape shapes


racism. The land question. 20 years later only 7% of the land has gone


back to black people. The issue of transformation of the labour market.


The issue of poverty. The issue of even the housing, where black people


live. We have continued to exist, as it was under apartheid. The ANC, to


make thicks worse, has provide -- make things worse, has provided


services to black people which is sometimes inferior to those applied


by the regime. The house - you must go and look at one of those things


so. The truth of the matter is structurely South Africa remains


antiblack, because black people suffer in South Africa. That is when


the miners demanded the living wage, the police were sent in and they


were massacred, instead of - and that was done to protect white


capital. That was done to protect the interests of the ANC leadership,


which has joined white to oppress black people. The black majority in


South Africa have a vote, but let us be clear, we remain marginalised.


The ANC manages the project. If you go to cape town, see the conditions


of black people. APPLAUSE


It is only 20 years since Nelson Mandela was elected President in the


first ever democratic election. We've had racism in South Africa


started under British colonial rule and was intensified under apartheid.


When I was a boy, my parents were active in the struggle in Pretoria.


Black people could not sit on the same park bench. Couldn't go into


the same parks. I could not play football or cricket with anybody who


did not have a white skin. That has stopped. So apartheid in its formal


institutional sense has been abolished. You cannot abolish the


legacy just in 20 years. Of course you still have racist attitudes. Of


course you still have a lot of institutional heritage here. But


when I come back to South Africa, compared to when we left in '66,


this is a completely different country. It is a country in which


people do have rights. It may not be perfect. You cannot become perfect


in just 20 years when you have this long history. There 's a lot of work


to do. Recognise what has been achieved.


APPLAUSE The man on the right there. You,


Sir, yes. Yes, you, fire away. Vy say institutional racism in South


Africa still continues. Right. The thing is, there has been


transformation of some sort. That has not been helped by ANC policy.


There needs to be a redress in policy. What do you mean by that?


Racism so, you still have massive racism in corporate environments.


You still have black kids who struggle to get into private


schools, who are still, because they are in lower classes and because ANC


handed out education, it is so interior, they have an inability to


move on and get into university and liberate themselves. On that point,


it needs to be noted that you cannot have and you simply cannot have this


redress happening in three years, five years - it needs to be over the


long-term. APPLAUSE


I think what is happening here is we're not answering the gentlemen's


question. Racism is a fundamental problem we live with in your


country. We have to acknowledge it and look it in the eye and talk


about how to deal with it socially. Racism inequality is the economic


fruit of apartheid. Poverty is black. Access to education and lack


to resources is black. All these fruitses of apartheid are with --


fruits of apartheid are with us today. I would articling a lot of


what you just said -- I would argue a lot of what you just said is


racism. Under apartheid it is better, is a shock indictment. To


say... I am from the Democratic Alliance. I do not deny the ANC has


not made massive strides... You cannot say a Government that was


guilty of a crime against humanity did a better job. You are trying to


be radical. I don't think that is responsible. Also what you are, what


you are also doing is stirring up this white capital, black capital


question and ignoring theishes at play, that is the ANC has got


labour, big business, politics all in one point, working together


against the vast majority of people who don't have access to these power


blocks. -- power blocks. If you go to the western Cape, where the


Democratic Alliance is in power and you look at the conditions of black


people, where we live, on farms, you know, you said our people are being


shot and removed by your Government there. I mean, the farmers were


killed by a demanding a living wage. You say it is not racism. You accept


that less than 10% of the wealth of this country is owned by black


people. The majority of wealth is in white hands. For you, that is not


racism? I do not accept that. I agree with you when you say that


there hasn't been enough success... One at a - don't... Please, don't


speak... Rather than a battle to eradicate racial equality. You want


to create a race war and you want to intensify and accentuate racism in


order to ensure you get platforms to speak on. And instead of issues you


should be dealing with. Malcolm X spoke about those who


identify with the oppressors. You speak like... And you speak like...


And you speak like a racial nationalist and a... Is racism over?


I want to get back to the real question. Not the colourful


rhetoric, even if it gets you applause. It does not help us. On


the issue, I actually only partly agree with you on the question. I


agree there is a difference between racism and the structural racism.


You cannot divorce the two. Because the reality is that when we talk


about apartheid geography, for example, that is not an economic


problem, not a social economic problem. As black people we


experience that as black exclusion there the democratic South Africa.


APPLAUSE Pik Botha? Yet again I want to make


an appeal. I think our people here would be interested to know that at


one stage during a discussion with Mr Mandela, he reprimanded me,


saying to me, you are driving your white right wing into rebellion. I


said, would you rather negotiate with him? He said to me, no. No. You


know and I know that none of us would wish to live or govern a


country where we are threatened by the devastation of violence.


Mr Mandela seriously and earnestly believed that political power


acquired by violence is not sustainable. And that is why he was


prepared not to be dictated to by the bitterness that he had


experienced, but said at times, a leader must move ahead of his flock.


These are his words. There are times when a leader must move ahead of his


flock and make decisions even if they are unpopular, on the condition


the leader is convinced it is for the benefit and the long-term


benefit of his question. The question was - is racism over in


this country? Is it over in your view?


There are signs of it. Then it is our duty, it is our duty


to try and eradicate it in a way that doesn't give offence. You take


the Cape Province, for instance, where this lady has an important


role to play. The whole world knows that the so-called brown people, I


consider them also as - we speak Afrikaans.


So, my point is, we know that since then the brown people were in the


majority there. To come and tell the brown people, no, you are only so


many per cent of the population, that's only so many per cent can get


jobs. This is the closest to racism that I ever got.


The issue of racism in South Africa is on its way out. If we were to


implement the legacy of comrade Nelson Mandela, it is on its way out


and it is our responsibility to make sure that it walks out of the lives


of South African people. The African National Congress has always stood


for nonracial. We fought for it to say we want a South Africa that is


none racial, none sex unionist and democratic. In order -- sexist and


democratic. In order to get there we have to stop scratching each other's


faces and get to the question how we collectively move towards the way


Madiba did. I tell you when Nelson Mandela walked out of prison, there


were many of us who were not in the country here, who were outside in


exile, who were ready to come and fight if it meant killing somebody,


we were going to do this. However this man here walked into our camps


and said to us, I hear you, that this is what you want to do -


however the South Africa that you need is a South Africa that is


reflected in your own document freedom charter. That said South


Africa belongs to all that live in it. Black and white.


APPLAUSE The woman in the front. The problem


is that like people always remain at the bottom, whether you are


middle-class or wealthy, you remain at the bottom. The white people


always remain at the top. We have mental issues am aware we need to


eradicate white supremacy thinking and black inferiority thinking. The


important question I want to ask is, Nelson Mandela gave the oppressor


property rights, peace, but what did the oppressor gives the black


people? I'm sorry, let's hug and kiss. Until we address that issue,


we will realise that racism is still a big issue. What did Nelson Mandela


give? Nelson Mandela assisted in giving South Africa across the


board. He gave his own life to make sure that all of us, black and


white, take responsibility. The whites, as you say, they might have


their superiority complex. The blacks might have so-called


inferiority complex, but one thing I can assure you is that there is a


difference between his time when he was here and now. I would not be


sitting here, you would not be sitting there. We would not be


living where we live. I think we owe it to the legacy of Madiba, as this


panel, as this house. He says in his speech, I have fought against black


domination and white domination. In other words, we need to come to a


point where we realise that democracy is a system, and freedom


is a way of life. We need to accept each other, from where we come from


and from where we intend to go. As the panel is sitting there, I see


the leaders of South Africa who are giving us hope that they will work


together to a better South Africa. This cheap political scoring is not


going to assist this country and the legacy of Mandela. We spoke earlier


about the ANC listening to how people feel, understanding where


they are coming from, and what is happening here is that we are


talking about an anger that exists, particularly among black South


Africans, a sense of dispossession and lack of access to economic


resources, but also to dignity and pride, that comes with what is left


from the apartheid past. I think what is dangerous is that that anger


can be turned into a cheap political tool for people to then turn each


other into racial opponents, people who say they stand for black people


against white people, for Indian people against coloured people. That


is a huge danger that exists in our country. If there is a legacy of


Mandela it must be that we cannot accept that all addicts can be


turned into a racial battle in which only the heads of political parties


that advance racist policies become the victors. I wanted to make a


British point, which is that there was a British youngster, young black


youngster murdered on our streets called Stephen Lawrence, by racist


white folks. Britain has never had apartheid but we have had racism


deeply embedded in our society and it takes a long time to get it out.


We should distinguish between that and the difficulty the ANC is facing


in government and maybe the shortcomings it is criticised for.


There is a difference between these issues. Go onto another question. I


would like to know, is it not time for South Africa to pursue a more


radical approach to wealth redistribution, similar to that of


Zimbabwe? Well, Robert Mugabe, approach, if you want to use that as


an example, to land distribution, I believe in land distribution. I


think that is right. What Robert Mugabe did was to grab the land,


putting not just the odd white farmer out of work, but 100 black


farmers on every farm. The farms fell into destitution. Zimbabwe,


which used to feed the whole of southern Africa, had to start


importing food. If you are going to tackle land redistribution, you have


to do it sensibly and make sure if you are transferring ownership the


farms are farmed in an efficient way, to feed the people, and not end


up like Zimbabwe, having to import food, which is a crazy and


reactionary policy. We do not need European methods of doing our land


reforms. There is no way you can justify, Peter Hain, to tell us how


it should be done. We will do it our own way. In fact, we need our land


as a matter of urgency. We are not talking ANC. The ANC is a tiny dot


on the map of South Africa, because we have many parties here. Even the


people who vote to not even make up half of the population of this


country. And we are saying, look at me, I am still fairly young, a


future decision-makers. We are going to do quite rapid what Mugabe did.


future decision-makers. We are going will not address the issue of


Zimbabwe here, because I fully agree that when we talk about


redistribution of wealth, it is important that it also addresses the


past imbalances. Number two, the whole issue of redistribution of the


land, the African National Congress put in place proper legislation and


regulation in order for us to address that. The reason we did that


was simply because we are not going to collapse our South Africa. We are


not going to kill any of the systems that were going to be good for us as


a way forward. The African National Congress has access did that some of


the mechanisms that were put in place to address those issues are


not effective. It is this very African National Congress that has


come out to say the policy is not working. Let us look for another way


of dealing with it. Because at the end of the day, the black people who


have been without land for a very long time, we need to give them


their land. However, as a matter of principle, we are not going to take


the land and give it to people when you have not empowered them enough


to be able to produce, in order for the land to be productive. My answer


to the question is that we do not need radical land redistribution


policies like Zimbabwe. The reason is that it is an unnecessarily high


risk solution to a correctly identified problem. But what is the


problem? The problem is actually implicitly conceded in what Lindiwe


has just said. It is that the existing policies, in terms of their


design, are perfectly adequate but the ANC has not faithfully and


efficiently implemented it. They are behind their targets of land


redistribution. I cannot do a proper government audit of how much land is


owned by the state. They have messed up black economic empowerment.


Education is in a poor state. My question to South Africans in this


audience is that if our indices on inequality, employment and poverty


looks different and the land redistribution policy had been


faithfully implemented, would that gentlemen have posed that question?


The gentleman in the front. I would like to agree with what you are


saying. The ANC and this government need to smell the coffee. They do


not need to use politics and diplomacy and talking about having


peaceful talks and the rest of it. What we need to smell the coffee


over is basically, you are talking about redistribution of wealth, when


the ANC is redistributing this wealth among their leaders. We need


this money to be redistributed to the people. If you go and look at


employment, if you go into the history of 1920, or 1930, like the


boat's time, the African farmers of this land taught the white man how


to farm in this land. It is those old governments that created the


railway lines to create employment. The problem is we do not have


qualified leaders to run the government. We need people that are


qualified, leaders who will not redistribute the wealth to


themselves but rather redistribute it to the people that need it.


Peter Hain, it would be good for you to update yourself on development in


Zimbabwe. There are four books written by Europeans on the success


of the programme, as we speak. Our former president, Thabo Mbeki... Why


do they have to import food? There was a crisis in Zimbabwe. The UK and


the US refused to honour their part of the agreement with President


Mugabe and ZANU-PF. They took the land. It is not true that they gave


the land to their cronies. Land in Zimbabwe, more than 275 families


have the land is now whereas before it was 4000 white people supported


by the UK. You have not done your part and you have no moral right to


talk about Zimbabwe. But let's talk about South Africa. There is not


land reform here. You save the is, you say it is a perfect Wallasey


that must be implemented. You say as black people we must buy back our


land which was taken from us, stolen from us, and take this money and


give it to those who have done so. It is unacceptable. The ANC does not


have a land reform programme. It is a piece of paper which says buy back


the land. I will give you one factual example. The ANC, for


example, labours under the legal ill illusion that it is compulsory in


law to pay market price. It does not even understand its own difficulty.


It is a government problem, not a policy problem. Instead of policies


serving the interest of the people, they are still keeping on serving


the interest of the few, you get the pick. So already, as a result of


that, we cannot actually visualise anything that will actually be of


any benefit to those who are dispossessed. We are here to discuss


the legacy of Nelson Mandela and what is going to mean for the future


our country. Andy Lay spoke earlier about how it is difficult to choose


which Mandela to celebrate. I would argue that this very fashionable


word, radical, which is just another word for let's throw out


reconciliation, the Constitution and do what our gut tells us, get


revenge, all of this talk about radicalism is to fundamentally


abandon Mandela's legacy. He was at the forefront of the construction of


our constitution, which does advocate a willing buyer, willing


seller system. Not for fun, but because we need an economic base


from which to grow our economy and enable more people to buy land and


become part of the rural economy. You know who buys the land, the


government buys the land on behalf of black people who are dispossessed


from land ownership under apartheid and colonialism. Let me finish. It


is not black people who are funding land reform, it is meant to be


funded by the state. The state is meant to provide black South


Africans with capital to buy land, provide them with the training and


the means to farm the land, enable us to grow our rural economy and


feed the nation. That is how to grow and economy and drive


reconciliation, not with cheap answers to complex questions. The


woman on the far right. When we talk about the land, I feel heavy back


pain, because to me land is part of what you call economy. It is our


wealth as South Africans. When you talk about the land issue, we are


facing a problem here. I am talking to all of the panel. We are facing a


problem where there will be the issue of waiting. We are still doing


policies. Wait. But while we are looking and watching, this cake of


wealthy is finished. You are eating, deleting this cake. And at the


grassroots level, we don't even get the leftovers of what you are trying


to distribute, whatever slice of cake to yourselves. We are facing


that problem. This legacy, we know, we have been crying. You cannot even


see us. You say we must respect the legacy of Mr Mandela of saying,


reconciliation, forgiveness, but can it happen without reparation?


All this debate about racism and everything, is the oppressor white


in South Africa. Yes, there is a place for whites in South Africa and


that place must be in a just society. The idea and the idea of it


is important. We cannot say, let us unite. Let us in a consy lay Tory


mood. You cannot say, I must be friends with you. When you come to


my house, you kick me out. We meet in the street. You say we must be


friends. You have not taken the house, you have taken pr me.


-- from me. Can I make this point? No, you always make three when you


have room for one. Pik Botha? If I may be allowed.


David, I really think that first of all, we must at least have a


credible picture of the total South Africa. More than half is so arid


and unproductive that it is very difficult to survive. The most


productive agricultural lands are in different areas, Eastern and Western


Cape. The problem at the moment is, of course land that was taken away


must be restore restored, but there is also a duty on us to make sure


that our black commercial farm farms have the experience and must be


assisted, you know, to do the right choices as far as seeds, the crops.


When you say land that was taken away must be restored - do you mean


all white land must be taken back and given? No. What do you mean? In


many cases, black tribal people, traditional land was taken away to


consolidate the homelands. The National Party thought we could


escape from the immorality of apartheid by creating independent


state states. We p spent billions creating these. That was part of


apartheid, the homeland was. You cannot justify it? I didn't try and


justify. Would you listen for a moment before you make more remarks.


My point is this - it was for us an escape route to escape from the


immorality of apartheid. You could not measure the economic


integration. That is why the great challenge was in South Africa, you


either have to remove apartheid all together. You can could not reform


it. You had to remove it all together and start negotiating with


the A nsmt NC lead leadership for a new constitution with all the values


we must adhere to and that would contain the legacy of Nelson


Mandela. We succeeded in that. We did succeed in this.


I am going to - no, we only have a few minutes left, sadly. I wish, if


more women put their hands up I will call on them. Let's talk this


question now from Kgotso Mashabela, please.


How does the Government deal with crime and corruption, especially


when it has been committed by those who occupy the highest offices?


Zulu, a question for you. It is this Government that has put these


systems in place. And you know, it is also good for people to be


tolerant. We came here to listen to each other. We came here not to poke


at each other. So, this... It is this very Government that has put in


place systems to deal with white colour crime. It is this -- white


collar crime. It is this institution, through institutions


which has put - by the way the very public protector was not born


somewhere - it is this Government that put that office of the public


protector in place. And the public protector is doing


her responsibility. She has all the powers to catch, and by the way,


everybody has got the right to complain, write letters to all


institutions that deal with corruption. Are people convinced


this is happening, do you think? Of course they are convinced. There's


no problem? No, no, no. I am not saying there is no problem. I am not


saying there is no problem. Yes, there is a problem.


The fact that they are institutions in place, that our citizens have to


take advantage of, means this Government is committed. It doesn't


matter where, what level of the office. Here, I am talking about the


public protector. The public protector is investigate... Your


audience must listen to the response. This is a political lie on


the part of the ANC. There are two important wrongs in


what she is saying. Number one, the fact that in theory we had


institutions of oversight doesn't mean they are culturally embedded in


the political system. The public protector she's talking about is


coming under very explicit pressure from the ANC Government, that gets


it to ask her whether she has a political agenda. Don't praise the


public protector's office for existing, but then secretly put


pressure on her. Number two... If you want to deal to answer the


question directly with this problem, there are things which have not been


done yet which you can. In the private sector. Firstly let's call


it corruption. Make sure we it corruption. Make sure we


criminalise the debaif Yorks, not just fine -- behaviour. Not just


fining them. Finally, when it comes to staying in pace corruption, you


have something which you lack currently, withsy a political


leadership which can publicly flog public corruption. Where is the best


example, President Jacob Zuma being silent while we are asking questions


about a swimming pool apparently being security.


Yes. I said I would come to you. On the gangway there. You say the


Government is very committed to dealing with white collar crime. I


am very aware there's a lot of crime within the Government and there's a


lot of corruption. I am very aware the media tend to focus on that as


if corruption is of a black Government thing, whereas there's a


lot of corruption in the private sector. Just an example. Any


Government corruption story is on the front-page. I myself, when the


corruption came out - it was on page ten or something. I leave to a side


and put it out there. If the Government is dedicated to rooting


out white collar corruption, this is a platform for us to discuss such


issues. What will the ANC do if it is found, and I am sure we all have


an opinion on this, but if it is found that Jacob Zuma actually did


use taxpayers' money, incorrectly so and immorally so, to build his


house? Don't give me a political answer. What will the ANC do?


You'll have to... You'll have to answer - it is fair you should


answer, but briefly. It is not complicated. It's not complicated.


Give the answer then. Once there is an investigation, there is an open


investigation. The processes for that investigation. Number one.


Number two, there is Parliament. And this question, by the way, don't


forget it came from her sitting here. She's had the opportunity,


even in Parliament, to question the President, standing there at the


podium and pose her questions. When I talk about institutions, I mean we


have never said as the African nags African National Congress just...


All right, she has given her answer. All right!


Because you are a President does not give you immunity from the


institutions taking action against you. That is your answer.


I think you have hit the nail on the head. Is that not the answer you


were hoping for? That is not an answer. You have hit the nail on the


head. The problem with corruption is people feel there's no


accountability. Somebody misuses public funds for personal use. Big


business engages in cartels and collusion - it is corruption,


straightforward. They are able to budget in their budget for how much


they'll have to pay the competition's commission for


engaging in that. It feels like there are no consequences for people


who misuse public money or who misuse public trust. So the real


question you are posing is important. I am committed to the


fact if President Zuma has been found to misuse public money for his


home, he must be fired. Parliament has the power. Parliament is the


institution that hires him. We elect him at the end of the election. The


constitution enables us to fire them. What is what she said. I don't


think you did say it. I did. I did! You are not an MP. You are not a


representative of the ANC - what can the ANC do... . ? Do you think the


ANC, if true, should be A nsmt NC be recalled? If any of us are found in


any space of corruption, action must be taken. OK. All right - the man in


the third row. You, Sir. What you just said - I don't agree with with


you. From what happened recently where the mayor got caught doing


corruption and got promoted by the ANC, how can you say... The major


got caught in -- mayor got caught in corruption. He got promoted. This is


an extraordinary occurrence. ANC fired its own mayor. The ANC


councillors were fired by the ANC from the city council. There's no


accountability. No accountability in this country? The problem the ANC is


facing in Government seems to be with two things. One from local


Government to the top and secondly, lack of delivery. For example,


educating more, double the number of children than pre-apartheid days,


but very poor school standards. That has to be dealt with. I want to say,


celebrate what you have achieved and what the ANC has achieved. Millions


more getting housing. Millions more getting electricity. Millions more


getting water.ful incomes going up. A great deal has been achieved. You


cannot forget that. Peter, there is an important qualification. If I


may, just in 20 seconds. The entire theme which has run out of Peter's


commentary in an attempt to create balance. I love you to bits. You are


one of my favourite South African born British politicians. The only


one. You guys are doing what. What is important for us as South


Africans to do, Peter, is say, do you know what we are sick of


thinking of ourselves as a teenage democracy. Let's not engage in an


troll poll gi of expectations. We must have high standards of


expectations. APPLAUSE


Go on! The man on the gangway here. No, no, no, I want to go to the man


on the gangway there. You, Sir, yes. In the brown jacket. In the question


of corruption, I think this lack of emphasis on supporting the


whistle-blowers, for example. That is one element T other question I


wanted to direct to her, is when will they recall Jacob Zuma? That


point has been made. You know, the terrible thing is our hour is up.


It is. Go on, then! No, you have spoken


already. You have, haven't you? No. I am not going to go to somebody who


has already. The lady in the front here.


All right, somebody there... Wait, wait, wait! The lady in the front.


Yes? One point over there. We know when all is said and done


this is a much nicer country than it was pre-1994.


APPLAUSE Thank you very much. Our hour is up.


I am afraid. Question Time is off the air for three weeks now while


the UK Parliament takes a break over Christmas. We will be back on


January 9th in lieu wish ham in London. Then on 16th January in


Durham. If you would like to come to either, apply via our website or


call us on: If you are listening to this on 5


Live, you can continue the debate on Question Time Extra Time. I am


grateful to all our panelists who came here to take part. Sorry to


those of you who did not get a word in. I am grateful to those who did


speak. Thank you very much indeed. From Question Times in Johannesburg,


good night.


Download Subtitles