'Waste of time' - says DA as it withdraws from National Dialogue
But the senior GNU partner has withdrawn from the National Dialogue, describing it as a waste of time.
Leader John Steenhuisen accuses president Cyril Ramaphosa of double standards, for firing deputy Trade and Industry Minister Andrew Whitfield, while protecting underperforming ministers.
"They know that the performance of DA ministers makes some of their contributions pale into insignificant. And most importantly they know that the opportunities for looting and stealing of public money are shrinking wherever DA is present and wherever DA reforms are implemented," explained Steenhuisen.
"This flagrant double standard that protects the likes of Simelane and Nkabane but acts against Whitfield prove that in the ANC universe the only thing you should dare not be, are competent, honest and hardworking," Steenhuisen added.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
SowetanLIVE
an hour ago
- SowetanLIVE
DA rejects Simelane, Nkabane departmental budgets
The DA has followed through on its threat to vote against departmental budget votes of ministers who are facing allegations of wrongdoing. This after the party this week voted against budgets of the departments of human settlements and higher education led by Thembi Simelane-Nkadimeng and Nobuhle Nkabane respectively. This decision was taken as a direct response to President Cyril Ramaphosa axing trade and industry deputy minister Andrew Whitfield, of the DA, last week for defying his order that none of the members of his executive were allowed to go to the US at the height of the diplomatic tensions between the two countries. The DA in response argued that Ramaphosa had been harsh on Whitfield and that it was not acceptable that he fired him for such a minor transgression while he still kept Simelane and Nkabane in his cabinet. Unlike Whitfield, the DA argued, Simelane was accused of corruption and Nkabane stood accused of lying to parliament. Instead of dealing with the two ministers who were facing serious allegations, Ramaphosa decided to axe Whitfield for going on a trip without getting permission, the DA argued. DA MP Luyolo Mphithi on Wednesday said his party was voting against Simelane's budget vote because of the corruption allegations she was facing. Mphithi said the DA was concerned that instead of firing Simelane, Ramaphosa had moved her from the department of justice to human settlements. 'You'd think that the response to this that the president would have shown minister Simelane the door, he did not. He asked for the report that he stayed with for three months,' said Mphithi. 'And even though the DA sustained pressure asking the president to act, he lacked courage to act and instead decided to dump minister Simelane at human settlements, one of the most important departments for South Africans.'
The Herald
an hour ago
- The Herald
DA rejects Simelane, Nkabane departmental budgets
The DA has followed through on its threat to vote against departmental budget votes of ministers who are facing allegations of wrongdoing. This after the party this week voted against budgets of the departments of human settlements and higher education led by Thembi Simelane-Nkadimeng and Nobuhle Nkabane respectively. This decision was taken as a direct response to President Cyril Ramaphosa axing trade and industry deputy minister Andrew Whitfield, of the DA, last week for defying his order that none of the members of his executive were allowed to go to the US at the height of the diplomatic tensions between the two countries. The DA in response argued that Ramaphosa had been harsh on Whitfield and that it was not acceptable that he fired him for such a minor transgression while he still kept Simelane and Nkabane in his cabinet. Unlike Whitfield, the DA argued, Simelane was accused of corruption and Nkabane stood accused of lying to parliament. Instead of dealing with the two ministers who were facing serious allegations, Ramaphosa decided to axe Whitfield for going on a trip without getting permission, the DA argued. DA MP Luyolo Mphithi on Wednesday said his party was voting against Simelane's budget vote because of the corruption allegations she was facing. Mphithi said the DA was concerned that instead of firing Simelane, Ramaphosa had moved her from the department of justice to human settlements. 'You'd think that the response to this that the president would have shown minister Simelane the door, he did not. He asked for the report that he stayed with for three months,' said Mphithi. 'And even though the DA sustained pressure asking the president to act, he lacked courage to act and instead decided to dump minister Simelane at human settlements, one of the most important departments for South Africans.' 'It seems that this president does not take an issue with the fact that a person accused of corruption sits in his cabinet and will have to look after a budget of R30bn that is set aside for South Africans,' he said. Ideally, Mphithi said, the DA would not have a problem with voting for the department of human settlements' budget as it relates to people's housing and security but they could not do it because of the allegations faced by Simelane. 'The DA will always support the granting of funds to house the vulnerable at the same time fast-tracking jobs and growth to give many more South Africans the dignity of being able to buy and own their own houses,' he said. 'And though this budget and the department have many challenges under normal circumstances it would be supported. However, we sit with a minister who faces corruption allegations who has not been accountable to the South African public. And it is because of this we struggle support this particular budget.' Mphithi and the MK Party's Thulani Gumede raised several issues with the human settlements budget presented by Simelane, saying it was not dealing with some of the key issues faced by South Africans in the sector. 'A critical examination reveals a fundamental flaw, an overall real decline in the department's budget. None of its five main programmes demonstrates above-inflation increases,' said Gumede. 'This systemic underfunding of human settlements initiatives will inevitably worsen existing backlogs and impair the progressive realisation of adequate housing.' He said his party could not vote for as it would mean they accepted the decrease in allocation. 'I asserted during the committee meeting last week and I reiterate now that this draft budget must be rejected. It's real term decline across key programmes particularly in integrated human settlements and informal settlements upgrading directly contradicts the constitutional obligation to provide adequate housing and the strategic goals of the national development plans,' he said. 'Accepting this budget will constitute a retreat from addressing deeply entrenched structural inequalities and the pressing needs of the vulnerable communities for basic services and dignified living conditions.' TimesLIVE
The Citizen
2 hours ago
- The Citizen
Malema's revenge politics puts ANC on notice
Julius Malema could be using the no-confidence threat to pressure the ANC, warning that arrogance will cost the party once again. EFF leader Julius Malema has vowed the EFF will vote with the DA to oust President Cyril Ramaphosa in the mooted motion of no confidence. If this move is successful, it could see DA leader and Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen becoming the first white president since the dawn of democracy in 1994. Malema warns of 'white president' 'I want to warn you that this country will have a white president. Steenhuisen will be president if the ANC is behaving the way it is doing,' said Malema yesterday. 'The motion of no confidence will come, we will vote with the DA. Then, when it is time elect a president, we will abstain and the ANC will lose.' Although Malema undertook to vote with the DA, he said his party is not working with the DA. However, the tone of Malema's threat to vote out Ramaphosa appeared to be a complete rejection, but it also indicated a readiness to compromise – a veiled attempt to lure the ANC into agreeing to cooperate with the EFF. MK party's silence However, Jacob Zuma's uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) party remains a dark horse in the debate, as it has not yet expressed its stance on the matter. Some analysts believe it could surprise everybody by voting in Ramaphosa's favour and, later, make demands to the ANC to accommodate it in the government of national unity (GNU), or strike a deal on Zuma's criminal charges. ALSO READ: What do you think of Malema's Bill to nationalise the Reserve Bank? Political analyst Prof Dirk Kotzé said MK would usually vote against any DA proposal, which made it likely for them to side with Ramaphosa. At the same time, the party could abstain to avoid being associated with either side as they also had issues with Ramaphosa, said Kotzé. Is there room for persuasion? There were fears that if all the political parties voted to oust Ramaphosa, considering the top four parties could cooperate to push him out, the president would be out. However, pre-vote dealmaking was imminent, especially with traditional ANC-backing parties such as Al Jama-ah, Patriotic Alliance, United Democratic Movement, Pan Africanist Congress and others likely to support Ramaphosa's stay. But Malema cautioned some of these parties could be persuaded by their Israeli and big business funders to remove Ramaphosa. 'A worse situation for the DA' But Kotzé, who doubts the no-confidence motion could happen, said if it did, there was a chance of a 50-50% split to have Ramaphosa ousted. He said the ANC needed only 10% plus one to ensure Ramaphosa stayed in power. 'If the DA removed Ramaphosa, what is the option for them? It will be a worse situation for the DA if Ramaphosa is removed,' he said. ALSO READ: WATCH: 'Even Donald Trump is scared of the EFF' – Malema 'I think the DA is not serious about the motion; it's just part of its strategy to push the president to agree to its demands.' The move is also seen as Malema's revenge against Ramaphosa, who excluded the EFF from the GNU. Malema said when the EFF and ANC vote percentages were tallied, along with those of pro-ANC smaller parties like Patriotic Alliance, ActionSA, and others, they would exceed 50%, which would ensure Ramaphosa was saved. Malema blames ANC arrogance for its decline He said the EFF warned the ANC in 2016, but the party never believed it. 'Now it's going to happen because the ANC had been arrogant. Even when it was humbled by the voters, it still acted in an arrogant manner. 'When [the ANC] are voting with us, they win. But when they don't vote with us, they lose. The decline started in 2016, when they lost the metros,' he said. 'It's going to happen again if they are not going to change their attitude. We are going to fold our arms and they will lose again.' NOW READ: Malema promises urgent aid for Mthatha flood victims, calls on the wealthy to help
