Question Time Special Question Time

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.