The ANC Succession Race

Many commentators have linked the race for president of the ANC in 2007 to that of president of SA in 2009. And for good reason – the past 13 years, the same person fulfilled both roles and in all likelihood this will continue into the next round of elections. However, I feel we seriously need to separate these two positions. The two entities, the ANC and SA, face quite distinct challenges that may require different skills and expertise. As such, the requirements for the post of ANC president may be quite different than the requirements for the post of president of SA. It may be that in two years time, when the 2009 SA General Election comes along, the same person will be able to fulfil both posts, but it may also not be the case.

I have found that most political commentators and analysts have assessed this by looking at who is available within the ANC, and then who is the better candidate, particularly at leading SA. I think we should look at it from a different perspective – similar to advertising these positions – and first develop criteria for each position before evaluating candidates.

The criteria for each position must be developed along three key aspects:

• What will the challenges be for each institution in the next 5 to 10 years?
• What will be the role and responsibilities of the President each institution given these challenges, and where necessary, separate these from the roles and responsibilities of other office bearers?
• Given these roles and responsibilities, what skills, experience and expertise are required for each position?

Only after this should we “invite applications” and determine who is the most suitable candidate for each job. The ANC will most probably object to suggestions that the post of ANC president be discussed in the open since its “internal”. However, I don’t believe the discussion should favour any particular person, but rather stay as objective as possible in describing what is required of each position. It is then up to the ANC members to determine who should fill the position of ANC president later in 2007, and up to all SA voters to determine which party presents the best candidate for the post of SA president in 2009 and best/most favoured policies. The purpose of this is to stimulate more constructive debate about the succession race, in particular it becoming a more informative debate for everyone. Below are just some of my thoughts so far – I encourage others to add their comments / suggestions:

1. ANC President:

Potential Challenges in the Next 5 - 10 Years:

• Possible split between left (Zuma / Socialists / labour) and center-right (Mbeki / Business) groups in ANC
• Keeping the tri-partite alliance from disbanding
• Transformation from liberation movement to responsible governing party must continue
• Incidence of people simply using the ANC as way to self enrichment / empowerment
• Corruption scandals around ANC members emerge and/or escalate, e.g. possible fallout from Arms deal from foreign investigations– possible senior ANC members charged and/or implicated
• Traditionalists vs Modernists
• Debate about party funding

Roles and Responsibilities:

• Provide strong leadership within the party
• Represent and promote the ANC to the public
• Participate in developing party policies
• Engage with outside stakeholders, including alliance partners, party funders, etc.

Required skills and expertise:

• Leadership skills
• Good communication and negotiating skills between different factions within the party and alliance
• Understanding of the ANC history and policies
• Preferably struggle and/or union experience

2. South African President

Potential challenges in the next 5 to 10 years:

• Changes in Zimbabwe and other neighbouring countries
• HIV and AIDS, especially AIDS orphans
• Crime & Violence
• Poverty and Inequality – possible social unrest
• Economy and supply constraints
• Skills and Education
• Urbanisation and rural development
• Climate change and the impact on South Africa, particularly the poor
• Globalisation (China, US, EU, Mid-East tensions)
• 2010 World Cup
• AU, APRM and NEPAD

Roles and Responsibilities:

• Represent and promote South Africa and Africa on the world stage
• Lead and manage the cabinet
• Develop and implement policies to address challenges & govt priorities
• Interact with opposition parties and parliament
• Engage with other African leaders on the continent

Required Skills and Expertise:

• Leadership skills
• Good communication and negotiating skills
• Understanding of budgeting and economics
• Good organisational and coordination skills
• Knowledge on the SA Constitution and laws
• Awareness of the socio-political context in SA, i.e. diversity of SA and major issues in SA
• Fluent in English and at least three other South African languages
• Preferably more than 5 years experience in government / cabinet
• Willing to travel

Investments in Social Values

“Apartheid contributed directly to the destruction of family values that were built over many centuries by the indigenous people of our country. Apartheid contributed directly to the collapse of the moral fibre in many of our communities.” (Charles Nqakula, as reported in Business Day, 14 Feb 2007))

What is government doing about this if so many – including me – acknowledge this to be the major root causes of crime in SA? Crime and security experts acknowledge that adding more cops, more guns and more jails to the overstretched criminal justice system will simply turn the country into a "fortress" that forces criminals to use greater violence to get the goods; a vicious cycle (Cape Argus, 10/2/07). Believing that reducing and eradicating poverty will restore the moral fibre and thereby reduce crime is wishful thinking. Providing employment and raising family incomes will not necessarily address issues of juvenile delinquency and other roots of criminality such as racism, class struggle, respect for others and their property, valuation of life, and many more that resulted from the havoc created by apartheid.

Yet, how much money and resources are government pouring into correcting the mistakes of apartheid in terms of family values? The existing Moral Regeneration Programme is not enough. We need thousands more social workers, probation officers and community development workers. Their salaries need to be increased significantly to attract more people to the profession, as well as stopping existing workers leaving for greener pastures. Currently, they hardly earn enough to pay back their study loans, never mind home loans. They need offices that do not appear worse than shacks, proper vehicles to visit victims/survivors in rural / outlying areas, sufficient back-office support so files don’t get lost or misplaced, more supervisors and trainers to ensure the quality of their work, and much, much more. One small step in the right direction would be to implement the recommendations of the TRC, but much more is needed.

Just like investing in education is a long term strategy for economic growth and development, investing in reconstructing social values in families and communities damaged by apartheid and violence should be seen as a medium to long term crime prevention strategy. Besides, the long term benefits of such a strategy will be much more than simply reductions in crime.

Transparency in Cricket Governance

It was with happiness when I woke on Monday and heard the news that for once, players have "striked" over decisions made by umpires, which resulted in the first ever forfeiture in international cricket. I applaud Pakistan for standing for what they believe in. There is absolutely no transparency in how cricket umpires are held to account for their actions or decisions they make. I accept they make mistakes, but they should be accountable for these mistakes, just like players have to accept the mistakes of umpires. This action will finally put the spotlight on how the ICC deals with umpire accountability. This is why I say: Hooray for Pakistan.

I have not watched the game, but I have since read as many first-hand accounts as possible. My conclusion is simply that the umpires, Darrell Hair and Billy Doctrove, were at fault by accusing Pakistan of cheating. Not only accusing, but also founding them guilty and sentencing them. It is not about the punishment, a meagre 5 runs. No, it is about being accused and punished for something you know you did not do, and the way it was handled by the umpires (and now the ICC). That is the issue. Everything thereafter is a consequence of this one decision. What Pakistan then did was outside the rules and they should be held accountable for that. What the umpires then did was within the rules despite enormous external pressure to bend those rules. They should be applauded for this. Simple and uncomplicated. But that is not the issue, and I believe the whole cricketing world (outside of Australia) accepts that. The rules are strict, but they need to be. What was unjust was the manner the rules were applied, i.e. the procedures / processes.

There are two main accusations against umpires Hair and Doctrove: insensitivity and disrespect towards the Pakistani team. First off, umpire Hair must accept that he should not accuse people as cheaters without first getting some proof (and the condition of the ball is simply not enough). Cheating is a very serious accusation for Pakistan. It is extremely insensitive, and probably knowing how sensitive the current Pakistan team is about such accusations, I can only assume that is was meant to provoke. In this regard, I see many similarities between the racial slurs against South Africa in Australia, the Materazzi-Zidane incident during the World Cup, and the prophet Mohammed cartoons incidents in Europe.

Secondly, as Inzamam put it afterwards, it is about respect. Umpire Hair did not respect them (the Pakistani team) to even warn them of his suspicions, nor did he respect them when making his summary decision without informing the Pakistani captain, nor did he respect them by offering an explanation when he visited them in their dressing room after tea when asked by Inzamam, nor in informing them that they have forfeited the game, letting them assume the game was still on half an hour after it was called off. Pakistan was within their rights to demand such respect from both the umpires, as umpire Doctrove is guilty as accomplice for not opposing his colleague when it mattered most. Why should a team respect umpires that do not respect them?

The ICC must accept that it has to take responsibility for what happened, since umpires Hair and Doctrove are their employees. The current procedures do not allow players to protest such serious issues in a timely and transparent manner. If they don?t, they can expect similar, or worse, situations in future. Maybe not from teams or national cricketing boards, but they cannot control the behaviour of fans. It is not the rules per se, but the procedures and processes in which they are applied and the code of conduct of umpires that is at fault and needs to be addressed. I am both sorry and happy that it had to happen like this, as it is something that needs to be addressed in this modern era of professional sport and new technology.

I believe Inzamam, and by implication the Pakistani team, will be found guilty on Friday for bringing the game into disrepute. And I believe they will accept the punishment. However, if they are found guilty of cheating without supporting evidence, I would support them if they pack their bags and go home. They should not be forced to back-down on their principles. Simple as that. They will be fined for this, sure, but they should just have a collection at home to pay the $2m fine, or better yet, sue umpire Hair and the ICC for slander. Now, won't that be something?

Creating an African Feel at International Rugby Matches in SA

What makes one rugby stadium different from the next? If you are on the field and the stadium is packed to capacity, then there is very little difference between Kingspark, Newlands, Twickenham, Stad de France, Ellispark, Millenium Stadium, Sydney, Ballymore, Perth, etc. If you are in the stadium, you are not able to see its location relative to its surrounding area, whether it is close to the sea, in the middle of London or Paris or Sydney, etc. I believe you will agree with me that it is the crowd that creates the difference, i.e. the crowd creates the atmosphere at rugby games. And today with easy international travel, a big part of the crowd is your own supporters, so one stadium must surely feel like the other.

My feeling is that during a game, there is not enough of an intimidating feel for teams playing against the Bokke in South Africa, and at the same time enough of a motivating force for the Bokke. We could use the Vuvuzele, but I heard it is banned in some stadiums because it creates too much of a noise (if there is something like that). There is probably some "Whities" who considered it too African to be used at a rugby game, considered a “Whity’s game”. It is used more widely at soccer matches, considered to be more an African game. Or maybe it is just us “Whities” that watch rugby, who have not yet caught onto it. Whatever the case, we must still create a (South) African feel at rugby games that intimidates opponents and, at the same time, motivates the Bokke.

African Drums: I would like to think we can make a real African atmosphere by inviting drummers with their African drums into the stadium, at least 100 but hopefully as many as 200, spread on all four sides of the field in roughly equal groups. If the crowd goes quiet, it is their responsibility to keep the vibe going, if the Bokke score points, it is up to them to cement this into the minds and hearts of the opposition. If the Bokke must defend, they should create an atmosphere that motivates the players to continue defending till they are “last man standing”. It thus becomes a matter of psychology, which is as much part of the game as skill.

To support this, one should play songs “indigenous” to South Africa, such as Impi, Scatterlings of Africa, Mendoza, Zola, etc. over the sound system. This has been part of cricket (and probably rugby as well) for a while and I believe successful to some degree, making playing against SA in SA so much harder.

With Kingspark in KwaZulu-Natal, i.e. the Zulu Kingdom, it would be fitting to get this started here. So that the next time the All Blacks, Wallabies, English, French, Lions, etc play against the Bokke at Kingpark, they would really feel as if they are playing against the whole nation, not just the 15 men on the field. And this they should feel right throughout the game not just at the start or after halftime.

The Memories of Songs

My favourite songs all evoke specific memories of my past; or rather, I associate some good memories in my past with certain songs. It could simply have been the song that played on the radio while I was in the car, or a song that was played over and over and over again by others. Some of these are:

• Joyride by Roxette – played over and over and over by a girl when we were on a school tour to Natal when I was in St 4. You guessed it, she got the nickname Joyride on that tour.
• Go West by the Pet Shop Boys. It played on the radio when we left Oudtshoorn in the small Karoo, South Africa, after an athletics camp in January "19-voertsek". Now for all that don’t know, the Small Karoo is dry (semi arid) and it gets hot in summer, easily above 45C at midday – even 9pm it is still above 30C. Go West triggers that specific memory.
• The song that is playing now: “Lisa se Klavier” by Koos Kombuis (Afrikaans song by a South African musician) reminds me of one camping trip in St 8 when we were sitting around a “kamp vuur” (camp fire) in the bush. The one guy pulled out his guitar and started playing it – To imagine it, close your eyes and imagine looking at the stars (the location is 100km from the nearest city and 30km from the nearest town): it is a clear night with all the stars in full armour and just the sounds of the night, the fire, sea in the distance, and the guitar playing: "Lisa se Klavier". Ahh, it takes me back to a great time.
• Fight the moonlight by Leann Rimes reminds me of the time I worked as a trucker’s assistant and going to the movies with this big truck. I mean, have you ever seen someone take a Mercedes Benz truck to go to the movies?

Then there are also the songs that remind me of certain movies. Yes, most often it was a song in the movie, or the actual theme song, but hearing that song reminds me of the movie:

• Iris by the Goo Goo Dolls will always remind me of City of Angels. Why do I remember it – a good friend of mine at that time (unfortunately we have lost touch since) was enthralled by the movie.
• The theme song of Titanic: My Heart will Go On (by Celine Dion) reminds me of freedom and let your spirit fly away – follow your dreams, as Jack did in the movie.

Ag, then there is just other songs that evoke emotion in me – Impi by Johny Clegg will always remind me of South Africa, my only home. I am passionate about this country, this continent and all her people. If I close my eyes as I listen to the song, I can see the Zulu warriors / boys playing in the field, proud of themselves, their nation and this country. My association is probably with the scenes from the movie Shaka Zulu that I watched as a boy growing up in the Eastern Cape. Other songs that remind me of home: Scatterlings of Africa (also by Johny Clegg and Savuka), Africa (by Toto) to name but a few. Not to mention the songs that reminds me of my university days – the best days so far in my life. It will not be the best days of my life, because I know that those still lies ahead of me.

There is the songs that Supersport used in their ads on TV: Its my Life (by Bon Jovi), Real Good Time (by Anke Pietrangeli). Then there is also the song: More Than a Feeling by Boston that SAB (SABMiller now) used for one Castle Lager advert: South Africans having a braai on the roof of an apartment block in Manhatten, New York. And I don’t even drink beer.

A discussion on songs won’t be complete without mentioning the reason for most songs being written: Love. It my case it is not so much love, but romance. Lady in Red by Chris de Burgh will always remind me of the formal dance I attended with a woman friend at varsity. At another dance, it was: Lou Vega's Mambo No 5 – not a great song, but we had a great time that night. I can’t even think of all the other songs that remind me of other girl friends, or the songs that just reminds me of what is still to come.

That is why I find songs remarkable – it is my trigger so good memories. It reminds me everyday that today is another day to make new memories. Just writing this is another memory for the future. Songs make me dream, and it is these dreams that keep me working and toiling to reach each day.

Redrawing the Sport Boundaries in South Africa

The current debate in South African rugby raises the question: Why is rugby, and probably many other sporting codes, still administered according to the old era boundaries? Why is there three administrations for rugby in the Western Cape, i.e. Western Province, Boland and South Western Districts instead of one administration? Why is rugby in the Eastern Cape not administered by one union instead of two, with sub-districts according to the district boundaries? The boundaries of the three administrations in Gauteng, i.e. Vaal Triangle, Central Gauteng (i.e. the Lions) and Northern Gauteng (Blue Bulls) are still based on the old apartheid era boundaries. Why not just have one administration with sub-districts based on metro and district boundaries?

Those in power of these unions don’t want to change for fear of losing their power, with their arguments centered on the rich history, culture and traditions of these unions which would be lost in the process. In the process, they retain their power, the old era culture and traditions of selectivity and exclusion, thereby ensuring rugby stays mostly White. But it is time to create new history, new traditions and new rugby culture that is in line with the new South Africa. It would support the integration of “Black” and “White” school and amateur rugby in each province. Furthermore, it may help address the sustainability and transformation issues of professional rugby in South Africa. The chaos of having 14, then 6, then 14 teams in the Currie Cup in the last three years, as well as the current impasse on the selection of the five Super 14 teams, are clearly signs for change which we should grab with both arms.

My suggestion: Let us have one professional team per province, with the possibility that Gauteng can have two. Until they are strong enough, my suggestion is that Limpopo be incorporated into either Mpumalanga or the second Gauteng team. There would thus be 9 professional teams. Let them compete for the Currie Cup, with the top 5 teams qualifying to play in the Super 14. Drop the Vodacom Cup that nobody really cares about, and allow the 5 teams to contract players from the other 4 unions for their Super 14 campaigns. I believe this would be advantageous for ensuring sponsors spread their monies to all 9 franchises since there is always a chance for their team to qualify for the more prestigious Super 14. There are many more advantages for such a structure, which, but for space, I would list here.

I could then proudly support my Eastern Cape team in the Currie Cup, and hopefully in the Super 14, if and when they qualify and not be “forced” to support the Stormers, Sharks or Blue Bulls, none of which I support, nor do they care about my support anyway.

It is time the leaders of rugby administration took the bald step and ensure that South African rugby become fully part of the new South Africa and ensure the long term sustainability of rugby in a multicultural South African society. The new cricket franchise system has shown that this could be done.

Measuring the Progress of Transformation

How should we measure the progress of transformation in South Africa? There are many that use the situation in South Africa under Apartheid as a benchmark, but this is actually ridiculous. How can one compare freedom enjoyed today by millions of South Africans to a situation where the majority of South Africans were virtual prisoners in their own country? Similarly, one cannot compare access to services since millions were denied the most basic of services under Apartheid, while at the same time, the minority received services that compares to the best in the world.

Another method of comparison that is often used is the experiences of other African countries, especially their experiences since independence. The argument is that South Africa was also colonized, suffered injustice and had to fight for its freedom. But the South African experience and situation is unique in Africa. South Africa is the most “Westernised” country in Africa. It has a large first world component, and even poverty in South Africa does not compare to poverty in the rest of Sub-Saharan Africa. Should we then compare our progress to the experiences of industrialized countries? No. South African history, the existing power relationships, the heterogeneous society with its many cultures and languages does not compare to the mostly homogenous societies found in industrial countries. I could find many more arguments against using African countries and industrialised countries as benchmarks, but it would only sidetrack the issue.

So, if we cannot benchmark ourselves against our past, neither against other African countries, nor against industrialized countries, what should our benchmark of progress be? My suggestion: THE FUTURE. Future generations would ask the question we ask of previous generations: have they done enough? Have they made enough effort, no, not just effort but produced actual outcomes, to ensure that all people in South Africa would live in a better country? We should continually ask ourselves how we want South Africa to be in 10 or 20 years.

Every generation blames previous generations for all the problems they face. Many people today blame the previous government of Mr Mandela for slow transfer of land to those forcefully removed since 1913. Similarly, many blame Mr PW Botha for not changing the political situation in South Africa in 1984/5 as intended. We can go back and blame Mr Verwoerd, Mr JBM Hertzog, Mr Jan Smuts, Mr Cecil J. Rhodes, even Mr Shaka Zulu or Mr Jan van Riebeeck for all the troubles we experience today. However, we often forget that most of these people thought that the decisions they made were in the best interest of South Africa (as it was then) at that respective time, based on the benchmarks they had at these respective periods in history. Slavery was accepted practice till the early 19th century. Colonialism was accepted practice till the mid 20th century, in the process denying the majority of Africans the right to vote on who governs them. Not only were Europeans culprits of these “wrongs”, but many African societies’ committed accepted practices within their societies and with other societies, such as slavery, war and exploitation. We can say with hindsight that these decisions and practices were wrong.

In this light, we must ask: What would future generations think of the choices and decisions we make today? Would they say our Human Rights practice is sufficient or too lenient? If it were determined in 15-20 years that our idea of Human Rights is the main cause of the lack of discipline and order and the subsequent breakdown of society and world wars, would they convict us of this? What about the rights of animals? When the majority of animal species become extinct due to our preoccupation with economic development and using natural resources for our immediate economic benefit, would they convict us of not doing enough to conserve the environment or overusing resources? If the polar ice caps were to start melting, would we be blamed for not listening to warnings we have today? Closer to home, if we have civil strife in South Africa in 10-15 years because of insufficient land redistribution or slow empowerment of Africans due to low, but accepted, targets today, would we be convicted and “sentenced” for not doing enough?

Zimbabwe is an example where those that cried: “you are going too fast” in the 1980s and early 1990s, are the same people that blame the current government for not doing enough in the 1980s and 1990s. However much the Zanu-PF wants to blame Britain and the USA for this, they should take responsibility for the fact that they did not push hard enough to transform the economic landscape in this period when they had the power to do so. Indeed, they were doing well according to the benchmarks of their era, especially against other African countries.

How do we measure or benchmark against the future and ensure that we have done enough? We should take the current situation into account and set ourselves the maximum possible outcome of transformation. For instance, a 50% improvement in public service delivery in one year is probably an ambitious target, but if it is possible, we should aim to achieve it. If we failed by only achieving a 40% improvement, it is still better than achieving a target of 20% which were considered a good reasonable target. In the latter case, future generations would ask: Why did you have a 20% target if you could have achieved 50%? Similarly, setting a target that a third of the SA rugby team must be non-White by 2007 could be viewed as low considering that more than half of all current rugby players in South Africa is non-White. Our target should at least be 50% by 2007 and then 75% by 2011. There are many other examples where our benchmark should be the future.

South Africa has the advantage of knowing the experiences of Zimbabwe and many other African countries, as well as non-African countries like India and Indonesia, to name but a few. We must use this knowledge and decide how we want South Africa to look in 10-20 years time. We must then make sure that we do everything possible to ensure that the next generation won’t have reason to blame us for the problems they experience. Indeed, only if we aim for the near impossible will we be able to make a real change to our world.