Support and advance the cause of democracy in South Africa by returning politics to the people in the Senate.
Support and advance the cause of democracy, communities and service delivery by making local government transparent in their activities and immediately and continually observant, answerable and responsive to the needs of the communities they serve.
Apply strict adherence to the rule of law at all levels of society.
Most of the above will be enabled by the adoption of TEAL as the only tax in South Africa.
Out the window will go patrimony, nepotism, graft and corruption. While the DDF cannot guarantee the absence of these practices in the market-place and in the public service, what the DDF can guarantee is that any evidence of such practices will be pursued timeously, diligently and to the full extent of the law, irrespective of whomever is involved.
It seems that if you are prepared to be a professional bureaucrat at whatever level in whatever field, that is, you are prepared to do your duty without picking sides and indulging in favouritism, you are going to be attacked by people whose political agendas you threaten by simply doing your job. This happens wherever you are. It happened and is happening toGlynnis Breytenbach, it happened toLindiwe Msengana-Ndlelaand now it seems to be happening toShadrack Sibiya and Anwa Dramatof the Hawks (our elite crime fighting unit), for apparently doing too good a job and endangering politically protected persons.
A Direct Democracy Forum administration would empower the likes of Breytenbach, Ndleli, Sibiya and Dramat and anyone else who is doing their jobs without fear or favour and however possible would free them from unjustified political interference.DDF policiesspeak for themselves, particularly those on theJudiciary, SecurityandLocal Government.
The Direct Democracy Forum have always chosen to believe in the impartiality of the Independent Electoral Commission in the electoral processes of South Africa. The DDF have always willed that impartiality into the forefront of its consciousness in the belief that if we cannot depend on IEC impartiality we cannot depend on the entire political process in South Africa. Sadly, it seems we were naive in that belief and guilty of some wishful thinking. It seems that even the IEC are capable of politically manipulating the electoral process, this according to the M&G on-line report IEC credibility questioned after Tlokwe judgment.
In a nutshell, an IEC official, John Mokodi, disqualified independent candidates for a number of Tlokwe by-elections without just cause. They met the minimum requirements and should have been registered without question, instead they were disqualified, presumably because they were ANC opponents in highly controversial by-elections. The Electoral Court found for the independent candidates who took the matter before the court. So far as we know there is a process involving a number of IEC officials in registration decisions. How can they all have agreed on this matter?
Clearly there needs to be an urgent investigation into the facts of the disqualifications and in the registration verification process, and any involved in deliberate wrongdoing need to be removed from the registration process, indeed from the IEC itself. That the IEC should investigate this publicly and urgently should go without saying, but it needs to be said. The IEC need to act swiftly and unambiguously to restore the confidence of both the electorate and the political establishment, in the institution and its processes. Surely heads must role and fixes be made.
A DDF administration would ensure that all the activities of the IEC are beyond reproach and that any incidents that damage its credibility would be responded to impartially and swiftly, in line with the DDF‘s approach to all administrative matters in South Africa. The DDF believe in constitutionality, within the party and within South Africa as a whole. This belief is reflected in DDF policies.
The Direct Democracy Forum believes that successful prosecution would set yet another precedent in the challenge to the reigning political elite, that even the most senior of them can be held accountable for their actions and abuses. The DDF believe the government of the day are avoiding this precedent at all costs so as to avoid a domino effect that could bring down the highest of the high in the corridors of power.
Does this mean the scrabble to avoid that domino effect arises from widespread criminality in the corridors of power? The DDF suspect as much. What other reason can there be for such telling and panic induced behaviour? The alternative of letting justice prevail and letting the truth out is certainly being avoided, almost at any cost.
A DDF administration would stand back and allow the full prosecution of criminals in government, no matter who they were, nor the manner of their criminality.
The state must be above reproach in all matters to engage the trust of its citizens. This is something DDF policies will ensure at all levels of government.
The DDF understand that people in government who see opportunity to enter into business dealings with Government are tempted to do just that, and there should be clear cut and reasonable rules which permit freedom of association and freedom of trade without compromising the integrity of either the government, the service provider or the transaction itself.
The only way this can happen is for the government employee/service provider, to completely disassociate himself from government (resign) and tender (get in the queue) along with all the other bidders, and that all the other bidders should be privy to the same information available to the most privileged bidder.
The penalty for not disengaging in this manner should be an all expenses paid sojourn in one of our prestigious places of incarceration. In short, deal-rigging, should be a criminal matter with meaningful consequences.
The DDF are committed to this sort of transparency and corruption busting. DDF policies speak for themselves.
All involve politicians diverting or stonewalling investigations into their activities. There is indeed something rotten in the state of South Africa that a Direct Democracy Forum administration will take the wraps off and let the law prevail.
Our bureaucrats are not the only people subjected to power grabs and interference in their jobs. It seems South African athletes are subjected to similar attacks. The South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (Sascoc), a body designated by the Minister of Sports and Recreation as mandated by theNational Sports and Recreation Act No.110 of 1998to act as an umbrella body for multiple sport activities, such as the Olympics and Commonwealth games, is trying to assume overriding authority over SA’s sports federations.
The act does not state that the body allotted that task (currently Sascoc) has the right to interfere in or with the various national sports federations, either in their leadership, management or selection processes, yet this is exactly what Sascoc seem to be attempting with Athletics SA (ASA) by inserting Sascoc choices into ASA (at least one of which apparently resulted in financial mismanagement at ASA).
This is apparently a similar pattern of interference experienced by other national sports federations. In terms of the new companies act, to which both Sascoc and ASA are subject, you cannot have control of one non profit company vested in another and this seems to be what Sascoc is attempting to achieve. ASA would not play ball and Sascoc suspended ASA from Sascoc.(do Sascoc even have the right to do that?). Sascoc also seem to be usurping the reporting channels of national sports federations to Parliament by inserting themselves into that line of authority and accountability. This doesn’t look good for Parliament or South African sports or SA sports federations.
The practical effect for South African athletes is theyno longer have representation at the IOC or the Commonwealth Games and are no longer recipients of any funding that is normally channeled through Sascoc. A ray of light is that the International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) recognise ASA and not Sascoc as the controlling body of athletics in SA and continue normal relations with ASA and athletic events under IAAF auspices continue.
A Direct Democracy Forum administration will ensure that power grabs by Sascoc will cease and the authority, accountability and responsibility of national sports federations to their members and Parliament will be reinstated and reinforced. Sascoc will have to limit their activities to that of mediator and coordinator of multiple sports activities, as envisaged by the act. Then our national sports federations can get on with doing what they do best – seeing that our sports men and sports women continue winning on international playing fields and bring honour to our country.
There is an expression – organised chaos. The DDF interpret that to mean chaos organised so as to obscure truth. That is what the Limpopo textbook saga seems to be, that the system was manipulated and abused in order to allow a series of competing service organisations some with connections to bureaucrats involved in the ‘consumer-side’ of the operation to profit from the chaos, and to confuse and obscure what actually took place.
Reading the M & G report is not that enlightening, not because the M & G are particularly incompetent, indeed they are not, but the report attempts to bring to order this state of organised chaos and to the extent that it illustrates that chaos quite successfully the M & G succeeded in their efforts, if not in their intentions.
A DDF administration’s response to such a situation would be to remove all those involved in the chaos and start afresh – take control of the textbooks and the delivery system, place all of that in the hands of someone competent, and effect delivery within the shortest possible time. 30 days for those books already printed and bound, 60 days for those still requiring printing. It would at the same time point forensic investigators at the original problem, determine the causes, and prosecute, criminally and civilly, all involved in the fiasco, and whatever clever little boytjies were involved in and profited from the chaos would live to regret their involvement and their profit.
This is the only response possible – fix the problem and punish those responsible for the problem, as quickly and thoroughly as possible.
We’ve posted on this topic before at ‘textbooks should be a given‘ and each time this issue is raised we become a little more enraged and determined to stop these debacles and incompetences and to deliver what is needed on time and for ever. See DDF Education Policies.
These two reports go hand in glove – the Auditor Generals’reports on government institutions (Only 22% of the 536 entities examined received clean audits) and the M & G report on Public Service and Administration Minister Lindiwe Sisulu’s efforts to make the public service more accountable for their shortcomings and the DA’s efforts to pass a bill that would prohibitpublic servants doing business with government.
Here all the players calling for better controls are all on the same page, sort of, realising that it is essential to have clean government. They just differ on the means of achieving that common goal.
The Direct Democracy Forum have their own opinions as to how clean government can be achieved. Here are some of those ideas:
An upper house of parliament (the Senate) drawn from the streets that the governing party, viz. the majority in parliament, and the cabinet itself, must answer to.
A similar arrangement at local government level where elected councils and councilors are answerable to a representative body of ordinary citizens.
Directly elected representatives to all legislative chambers rather than the list based electoral system.
Shorter terms of office (4 years for Parliament and the President) with their terms of office overlapping.
Shorter terms for local government (Councilors, mayors and other top office bearers required to resign and stand for re-election each year).
Constituency power of recall of all directly elected officials and representatives.
These national and local senates would have similarly short terms of office with 50% of each body being replaced each year and 100% replaced over any two year cycle.
All of this is outlined in theDDF policiesin the DDF website.
We are almost prepared to guarantee that such scrutiny and regulation would hold the attention of everyone intent on remaining in office, and encourage them to cooperate with their constituents to identify and meet their needs, and fulfill electioneering promises. Without meeting those needs and fulfilling those promises their terms of office will be even briefer than expected. No more 5 year terms of office and unfulfilled promises.
Andjust for the record, no DDF administration will ever permit public servants, elected or appointed, to do business with government, nor to hold shares or non executive or executive or management positions in nor to receive rewards or remuneration of any sorts whatsoever from any business doing business with government.
Sadly,this report is believable and is simply about business as usual.
A Direct Democracy Forum administration will find ways to make political interference in policing matters impossible. The DDF will ensure that by including theNPA as a constitutionally protected Chapter 9 institution, and ensuring that the only consequence for political interference in police matters is criminal prosecution.