Next week Parliament’s powers and privileges committee begins its hearings of charges against 20 Economic Freedom Front (EFF) MPs relating to their behaviour during proceedings in Parliament involving President Jacob Zuma and Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa. But over the weekend African National Congress (ANC) secretary-general Gwede Mantashe issued a statement on behalf of the party’s national executive committee appealing to Parliament to protect Zuma and Ramaphosa from what it called continued "humiliation and embarrassment". This relates to the R246-million “security” upgrade by the state of Mr Zuma’s private home at Nkandla and Mr Ramaphosa’s involvement in developments at Marikana when police opened fire on striking workers and killed a large number of them. Both the Democratic Party (DA) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) rejected the appeal and said they would continue holding the president and his executive accountable to Parliament. (* A comprehensive analysis of this is being sent to subscribing clients in a Research Note).

·  What to make of it: The ANC statement in itself seems rather innocuous, couched in nice-sounding pro-democracy pro-parliament affirmations. However it is the veiled threat contained within it that is troubling, especially when viewed together with other recent developments and what appears to be a growing undemocratic tendency or trend in the ANC. The ANC cannot seriously expect  the opposition in Parliament to protect its two most senior public representatives – and by extension the majority party itself – from  "humiliation and embarrassment" caused by their own actions and which they have not fully accounted for in Parliament. But this is less an attack on the opposition parties than on  the institution of parliament and the work it is supposed to do. And how the ANC itself and Speaker Baleka Mbete handled the EFF in the first place should shoulder much of the blame for the rowdiness an disruptions in Parliament.  The hands of ANC MPs are not clean either. In the past they have acted much the same towards other parties while this time round they were as insulting as EFF MPs at times, for instance calling DA parliamentary leader Mmusi Maimane a “rent a black”.  Between elections Parliament is the only platform in South Africa where democracy can be seen to be working and where the president, his executive and most other senior public officials are held to account. It is therefore also the only place, apart from the media, where the ANC, as ruling party, is vulnerable to criticism and to full exposure of its failures and scandals. It seems the ANC therefore feels a need to counter this. This should be seen together with threats by Mantashe to move Parliament to Pretoria where the ANC has more control;  the chairwoman of the National Council of Provinces, Thandi Modise, saying MPs’ freedom of speech must be curbed to ensure the integrity of Parliament (what a contradiction in terms); and the ANC decision for the president and his executive to rely more on izimbizos (meetings) to account to citizens rather than Parliament which Mantashe says is becoming irrelevant to people because of the disruptions. It should further be read  together with the ANC’s attacks over recent years on the judiciary, the media, and the Public Protector….and now Parliament itself (of course in the guise of protecting Parliament). There have also in the recent past been attempts to interfere with the electoral processes. Expect more of this as democracy in SA increasingly comes under attack.

Cadre deployment, double standards & the SABC

The application of double standards in politics will be taken a step further this week when Parliament’s communications portfolio committee on Thursday begins its hearings into the tertiary qualifications of SABC board chairwoman Zandile Tshabalala after she failed to meet a deadline to submit proof of her claimed degree and postgraduate diploma. She could possibly be suspended. The decision to hold hearings was driven by the ANC majority in the relevant committee with opposition parties’ support. However, opposition appeals that action also be taken against the SABC’s chief operating officer, Hlaudi Motsoeneng, who lied about having a matric and awarded himself an exorbitant salary increase, have been rejected by the ruling ANC. Both Tshabalala and Minister of Communications Faith Muthambi have defended Motsoeneng.

·  What to make of it: Why such double standards? It all depends on political connections, how useful or expendable you are and just where you fit into the political play of the day. Motsoeneng was exposed by Public Protector Thuli  Madonsela at a time when the ANC has some serious beef with her, while Thsabalala was exposed by Parliament. Therefore the nuances differ. The ANC and Minister Muthambi came to Motsoeneng’s defence with indecent haste and can hardly backtrack now. Motsoeneng is also a “useful idiot” in the ANC’s propaganda war and selling the party’s “good story to tell”. In fact he is so eager to please his masters that he has even called for all journalists to be licenced a la Zimbabwe style. Motsoeneng himself has very limited media experience as a current affairs producer for a small regional radio station and no matric, yet he effectively runs one of the biggest broadcast corporations in Africa. For Tshabalala there also was an obvious benefit in laughing off the Public Protector’s recommendations to remove Motsoeneng and defend him with the words  that Motsoeneng was “groomed and promoted” for his job over a very long time and that “there are many similar cases like him in the country”, she herself of course also being one of those cases it would seem. In the bigger picture however, this is just “unfortunate” fallout from the ANC’s cadre deployment policy, its strategy to turn the SABC into the party’s political mouthpiece and its strategy to “transform” the media in general, which means either bringing the media under the party’s control or under “friendly” control, or forcing it to be less critical of the party through tighter political control and regulation.

New SARS head

President Jacob Zuma has appointed economist Thomas (Tom) Moyane as the new head of the South African Revenue Service. His appointment becomes effective this Saturday. Moyane previously worked at the state information technology agency. SARS has been without a head since Oupa Magashula left office under a cloud earlier last year.

The nuclear deal that isn’t quite the deal…by a long shot

It has been announced with much fanfare that a “nuclear power deal” has been signed by Russia and South Africa that could lead to the construction of up to eight nuclear reactor units with an  installed capacity of about 9,600 megawatts. While the cost is said to be about R650-billion it is also being said it could eventually run up to around R1-trillion. The joint announcement by Russia’s state-owned nuclear company Rosatom and SA’s Energy Minister Tina Joemat-Pettersson was met with more scepticism and reservations than praise.

·  What to make of it: Note that this is still only a cooperation agreement, more of a statement of intent than an actual signed procurement/ build contract. In the words of Rosatom and Joemat-Pettersson “the agreement lays the foundation for the large-scale nuclear power plants procurement and development programme” using Russian technology. It is not the first time SA has signed such a contract with Russia. Industry experts are sceptical that the agreement actually wraps up SA’s nuclear procurement. Rosatom’s words seem to have been carefully chosen to make it seem like a fait accompli when it is not quite that, probably to gain an advantage in its bid for the SA nuclear contract over its rivals in China, France, the US, Japan and South Korea. Politically and internationally there are still many hurdles. Joemat-Pettersson also indicated that this was not the real deal yet when she said:  "This agreement opens up the door for South Africa to access Russian technologies, funding, infrastructure, and provides proper and solid platform for future extensive collaboration”. At home and abroad the government will be challenged by the anti-nuclear lobby. Problems may be encountered internationally around the issue of sanctions against Russia regarding developments in Ukraine. It will also expose SA detrimentally within the geo-political context of developments in Eastern Europe. At home there will be much opposition to the financial strain the high cost of such an ambitious nuclear plan will impose on SA taxpayers and electricity consumers, especially with the inevitable cost overruns that are likely to accrue. There will also be resistance to SA becoming Russia’s long-term debt slave (Russia has offered to lend SA the money for the venture). The details of the initial agreement are not transparent, prompting the Democratic Alliance to call for full disclosure. Any such deal also raises questions about SA’s bilateral commitments on nuclear energy with other nations. Opposition parties already raise concerns that such a deal will also limit SA’s ability to effectively negotiate and procure nuclear capacity from other nations in future. Some experts are also sceptical about the standard and safety of Russian nuclear technology; others say it is the best as Russia is at the forefront of nuclear technology development. And SA’s final electricity plans, its nuclear plans, and the legal and regulatory regime for such a nuclear programme still have to be finalised. While other countries will still be involved, Russia seems assured of at least a large slice of the action, at least if it is up to President Zuma (and no, it was not the reason for Zuma’s mystery 6-day visit to Russia recently). Despite SA indicating in December last year that it might delay the construction of nuclear power plants and focus instead on coal, hydro and gas as alternative energy sources, Zuma has repeatedly signalled his preference for speeding up the programme and giving the deal to Russia.  Last year an unsigned draft agreement circulate that sought to give Russia exclusive rights for the construction of nuclear plants in SA. It was to commit the government to having to secure Russia’s consent should SA wish to enter into any other agreements with other organisations or countries.

·         Late Flash: Just as we were about to send out this Monday Briefing government officials indeed released a press statement saying this was not a contract to build power plants, but rather the early stages of a non-exclusive agreement with Russia. The officials said South Africa's nuclear cooperation deal signed this week with Russia is part of a tender process. It will still involve a bidding process before any final contracts are signed.

Written by Africa-International Communications political analyst and editor Stef Terblanche