Real leadership

Sodibana eLimpopo (we will meet in Limpopo) says a song gaining popularity in the tripartite alliance in the run-up to the African National Congress’s (ANC) December national conference. This serves as a reminder to all those who aspire to lead the ANC about the power of ordinary members to choose their leaders.

As we approach this defining moment, it is critical that we examine the factors that will guide us in choosing our leaders, rather than focusing solely on who those leaders will be.

One of the qualities I will be looking for in the leaders who emerge from the conference is humility.

When I met Oliver Tambo for the first time in Maseru after a raid by the South African Defence Force there, what struck me was his humility. We had gathered in a hall at Roma University to meet Tambo. He wanted to greet “the people from home”.

When we were told that Tambo would greet us, I imagined that we would stand in a line, waiting to quickly shake his hand as he filed past. I did not expect that Tambo would come to us and ask us to take our time to tell him anything we wanted to. As I returned home from that experience, I did not want to wash the hand that had touched Tambo. We felt that we had been embraced and respected by a great leader of our movement.

Another quality I will be looking for can be described as “servant leadership”. The modern concept started with Robert Greenleaf who, in 1970, published an essay The Servant as Leader. This contemporary iteration built on the work of Indian thinker Chanakya, who wrote in the fourth century BC that “the king shall consider what is good, not what pleases him, but what pleases his subjects”.

When we choose leaders, we need not give up our own power by putting them on pedestals that distance them from those that they lead. We need not accord them hero worship or fear them so much that we cannot tell them what we think or feel, that we can only tell them what they want to hear. We need not allow them to think they have the last word and that they may not be challenged. True leadership is about giving people the feeling that they can be heard, regardless of who they are and how junior they may be.

I remember having this feeling with Nelson Mandela. In Parliament one day leaders of the opposition surrounded Mandela to congratulate him on a speech. I happened to be passing in front of the small crowd that had gathered around Madiba and was trying very hard to pass quickly, without being noticed. To my utter amazement, Mandela stopped and asked these men to excuse him as he turned to speak to me. I could not believe it.

When I met our exiled leadership in London in March 1986, I was given a chance to explain my anxieties about working with Bantustan leaders. Coming from KwaZulu-Natal, this was an important issue for me; to understand that not all Bantustan leaders were sell-outs. My leaders patiently explained this to me and when I returned home, I was able to help my comrades inside the country to gain the insights I had received.

A true leader has compassion, warmth and love. In other words, a true leader cares about the people. As a child, one of the issues I had with religion was the way it projected God as a person who punishes people with fire and brimstone. I could not accept that a loving God would want to do this, condemning us to perpetual suffering in hell, instead of being a loving parent, caring for us and correcting our mistakes. A caring leader empathises with the people and shares in their pain.

A true leader earns the respect and consent of the people. During my days as a student and activist, one of the greatest influences on me was the Marxist philosopher Antonio Gramsci. Of all the concepts used by Gramsci, the notion of hegemony is perhaps the best known. To win the support of the population at large, an emergent social group must give leadership and direction before, during and after the revolution. When these conditions are fulfilled, the new social group can be said to be hegemonic.

A good leader exercises collective leadership. This concept needs to be clearly understood to mean listening to and accepting diverse views. It should be understood to mean effective consultation. There are many situations when the term “consultation” has been misused to mean informing people about a decision that has already been made.

Effective consultation involves seeking the people’s support in the decisions that a leader makes. When decisions have to be made quickly, without time for consultation, every effort should be made to report back to the people.

Truth and consensus in decision-making are basic values of a vibrant democracy. The Freedom Charter stresses these values when it states, “The people shall govern” and that “No government may lead without the consent and will of the people.”

This requires ensuring that the people are able to hold their leaders to account. It requires the kind of leadership that values a commitment to the citizens as paramount, instead of being informed only by loyalty to the party. It accepts the notion of speaking truth to power where party members and the citizenry can openly raise issues of concern without fear of being sanctioned. It requires that the citizenry may from time to time exercise their right to protest if they feel their concerns are not being heard. Party loyalty and discipline should not be allowed to instil fear and inertia among members and the public.

Accepting that citizens and ordinary ANC members can speak out and raise issues of public interest in the public domain requires the kind of leadership that upholds respect for difference and open debate.

It is the kind of leadership that promotes accountability to the citizens who have put their trust in politicians by electing them. It is a leadership that engenders open engagement by politicians with members of the public. It is a mature leadership, where party members are not silenced by unwritten rules and traditions, applied selectively in a kind of party discipline that says “we are all equal but some are more equal than others”.

Our constitutional democracy needs an active citizenry that holds all politicians accountable and calls on all of us to exercise our right to speak out in defence of the gains of our democracy. Speaking truth to power is not insubordination, disloyalty or lack of party discipline. It is an expression of constitutional freedom and protection.

Deliberative democratic leadership involves people in true dialogue, listening to one another and arriving at the best answers to achieve the common good, through deliberation and consensus, rather than conflictual debate. Together, people involved in deliberation determine the way forward.

The media play a crucial role in informing the public and raising issues of public concern. Whether it is the issue of babies dying unnecessarily or women and the poor being denied justice by an ineffective criminal justice system, these are issues that the public needs to know and do something about. Our democracy needs all of us to speak truth to power.

The experience of the struggle for democracy taught us to value mass participation. In order for the struggle to be mass-based, we recognised that the people must be their own liberators.

As branches of the ANC prepare for Polokwane, there should be open discussion and consensus on the values and criteria for leadership, so that our choices are informed by the values that we hold dear, which are protected by our constitutional democracy.

Limpopo must give us leaders who care, who unite us and who see themselves as servants of the people.

Nozizwe Madlala-Routledge is an ANC MP

Elite Club for the wealthy!

Johannesburg – The ANC was selling “face time” with cabinet ministers and government officials in an effort to raise funds, the Sunday Times reported in its early edition.

The scheme already had 2 000 paid-up members and promised businesses knowledge of “upcoming government decisions”. It was run from ANC headquarters Albert Luthuli House in Johannesburg where a call centre processed applicants.

It offered “silver”, “gold” or “platinum” membership for between R3 000 and R7 000. Big corporates were charged between R12 500 and R60 000.

The Sunday Times quoted an unnamed agent at the call centre as saying that the scheme was “a private ANC business initiative to assist business people to network with ANC policy makers”. It was also intended to help the country achieve its target of six percent economic growth.

The agent said members of the scheme were better placed to succeed in business than those who were not members. They gained insight into what government was doing and why and learnt of “upcoming government decisions”, she told the newspaper.

Renier Schoeman, the ANC’s national co-ordinator of corporate liaison, was in charge of the scheme.

ANC treasurer-general Mendi Msimang confirmed that ministers and government officials, including directors-general, were invited to functions organised exclusively for members of the scheme.

He denied that this amounted to selling access to government officials.

“I do not see anything wrong with it. It is meant to facilitate networking between ordinary business people and those in government. It is all about bringing people together.” He said government officials benefited by being able to identify “bottlenecks that may be there”.

The Sunday Times quoted scheme member and Limpopo businessman Tom Boya as saying that deputy minister of Sport and Recreation, Gert Oosthuizen had briefed members about opportunities linked to the 2010 Fifa World Cup long before the issue had become public.

“It opens doors and you can also get invited to high-profile ANC activities,” he was quoted as saying. He paid R3000 a year for his membership.

Party funding expert from the Institute for Democracy in SA, Richard Calland, was quoted as saying: “Selling access to power merely serves to allow already privileged people to buy influence in a way the great majority of South Africans cannot”.

SAPA

 

The above article was carried by News24 today and apparently was published in the Sunday Times. I think this opens up the door for some lively discussion on the issue of immorality and corruption. Apparently ANC high profilers like ANC treasurer-general Mendi Msimang, fail to see and understand the problem with a scheme like this.

 

• This scheme opens up the door to the privileged few blacks who can afford to paid large sums of money to the ANC, once again excluding the poor and underprivileged masses.

 

• These privileged few get access to information well in advance of the ordinary citizen, putting them in a position of unfair advantage to position themselves to benefit from this information and opportunities. 

 

•  Those with access to ministers and high-profile ANC officials have a better chance of influencing ANC policy on a number of issues, but particularly economic policies. Chances are that they will be inclined to push their own agendas rather than that of the poor less fortunate masses. After all, business people want to make more money and nobody hands out money if some kind of return is not expected. BEE (Black Economic Empowerment) is a classic example of the rich black elite enriching themselves while the poor remains poor or even getting poorer.

In my view, it is immoral of the ANC to once again create a scheme that benefits a minority group, while the masses are ignored. No ordinary citizen has access to the ANC executive or even our MEC’s. Try and get close to the majority of them and experience the enormous difficulties a South African citizen encounters to meet with our MEC’s. In the years of apartheid, we fought against the ideology of minority groups ruling the majority and regarded it as immoral.

What is the difference between apartheid and the new tendency of an elite black group ruling the masses?

In a country that propagate equality for all, even to the extend that criminals enjoy the best human rights, where is the equality in a scheme where the rich can buy into and become members of an elite club with “silver” and “gold” status according to the amounts paid? In return they have access to information long before ordinary citizens.

It is nothing less than corruption in a very well disguised form.

What is the difference in Shaik paying a minister or member of parliament large sums of money to get access to information that puts him at an unfair advantage to his competitors and rich black people paying the ANC to get access of information that will put them at an unfair advantage?

In my books there is no difference. The one is as corrupt as the other.

That the scheme exists is confirmed by mouth of Renier Schoeman, the ANC’s national co-ordinator of corporate liaison, who is in charge of the scheme. That it is immoral and corrupt needs to be pointed out to the President of the ANC and South Africa.

The ANC promised equality for all and calls itself the “People’s Party”. Is it not time that it starts looking after the people of South Africa in all aspects of their life and commits itself to rooting out inequalities, immorality and corruption?

Or has the ANC become in itself an immoral and corrupt party?