23RD ANNUAL GENERAL CONFERENCE
OF THE INKATHA FREEDOM PARTY
Theme: "The IFP in Government to build a new South Africa
with the effort of all and for the benefit of all"
PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS BY
MANGOSUTHU BUTHELEZI, MP
ULUNDI: JULY 18, 1998
Our National Chairman and Honourable Premier of our Province, Dr BS Ngubane; the Rev Michael Abraham and other religious leaders present; our Honourable Acting Deputy Chairman, Mr LPHM Mtshali and Minister of Arts, Science, Culture & Technology; His Excellency the President of the African National Congress and Deputy President of the Republic of South Africa, Mr TM Mbeki; members of the Royal House present and amaKhosi; H.E. Mr J Froger, Ambassador, The Netherlands and Mrs Froger; H.E. Mr S Bak; Ambassador, Jordan; H.E. Mr A.R. Mpungwe, Ambassador, Tanzania; H.E. Mr LC Jain, High Commissioner, India, and Mr MK Lokesh, Consul General; H.E. Mr A Hatakenaka, Ambassador, Japan and Mr Y Naito, Second Secretary; H.E. Mr T Brotherus; Ambassador, Finland, and Mr M Laine, Second Secretary, and Mrs P Laine; H.E. Mr LR Mokose, Ambassador, Lesotho; H.E. Mr Shapua Kaukungua, High Commissioner, Namibia; Mr A Moyo, Counsellor, Zimbabwe; Mr JY Laurent, First Secretary, France and Mr L Delahousse, Counsellor; Ms D Goldthorpe, Consul, United Kingdom and Mr P Reilly, Second Secretary; Mr JZ Bocca, Consul, Mozambique; Mr M Cuc, First Secretary, Romania; and Mr Aly el-Hefny, Charge d'Affaires, Egypt; Mr Hans Beier, Honorary Consul, Germany and Mrs Beier; Mr P Bjovig, Honorary Consul, Denmark and Dr Bjovig; members and representatives of political parties here today: Mr Renier Schoeman, Mr Danie Schutte, Mr Cobus Dowry, Mr Charles Ntsizi and Mr SV Naicker from the National Party; Mr Errol Moorcroft, Democratic Party; Mrs P de Lille and Mr M Muendane, Pan Africanist Congress; General Constand Viljoen, Leader of the Freedom Front and General T Groenewald; Mr A Rajbansi, Leader of the Minority Front; Dr F Hartzenberg, Leader of the Conservative Party; Mr M Mabetha, National Chairman and Mr S Nkabinde, United Democratic Movement; the Honourable Chairperson of the Women's Brigade, Mrs EEN kaNkosi Shandu and Deputy Minister of Public Works; the Chief Executive Officer, Mr VJ Matthews and Deputy Minister of Safety and Security; the Chairperson of the Youth Brigade, Mr M Khawula and the Chairperson Emeritus of the Youth Brigade, the Reverend Musa Zondi; members of the National Council; Members of the National Parliament; Members of provincial Parliaments; distinguished guests; Chairpersons of Regional Councils; Mayors, Councillors and Indunas present, ladies and gentlemen.
I wish to add my own welcome to the welcome that has already been expressed on our behalf to members of the diplomatic and consular corps who are attending our Conference. I also welcome the presence of leaders of political parties who are attending the opening session of our Conference. I must add a special welcome to the President of the African National Congress, Mr TM Mbeki, who is also our Executive Deputy President of the Republic of South Africa. His presence makes this particular Conference an historic occasion. We would have understood if he had delegated any other office bearer to attend this Conference because of his very heavy schedule. His presence, and that of leaders of other political parties, makes this Conference a very special South African occasion.
Most likely, this twenty third Annual General Conference of the Inkatha Freedom Party is the last one before the general national and provincial elections scheduled for May next year. The next elections are going to be a destiny-determining time for our country, for its people and for the Inkatha Freedom Party. This Conference must decide how our Party will position itself in these elections and what type of mandate we should seek from the electorate.
The mandate we receive from the electorate will determine the options we shall have after the elections. In seeking this mandate I trust that the body politic of the IFP will operate in the same way we have always conducted ourselves since the inception of our organisation twenty three years ago. We have always acted in the interests of the country as a whole, seeking feasible and sustainable solutions in pursuance of a long-term vision. We must ensure that the decisions we take on this occasion reflect the same philosophy because, now more than ever, the future of the country hangs in the balance.
The next elections will prove whether democracy can put roots in South Africa and can empower a government capable of solving the country's severe problems. If the next elections fail to deliver what the country needs, it may take many decades to produce a new generation of leaders who will walk on the path to economic prosperity and social stability. In many respects I believe that the elections of 1999 are more important and inherently more risky than those we held in 1994. We are deeply aware that if the country fails, no one will stand to gain. Given the measure of the stake, all South Africans of goodwill ought to be brought together by a common effort to secure the country's success.
The first democratic legislature of South Africa has consolidated the gains of democracy and redirected the policy framework of our country to conform to the new democratic order, including the goal of achieving social justice. We have moved the country in the right direction and have firmly tabled the need to redress the present social and economic imbalances which are so much part of the legacy of our past. The new Parliament to be elected in the next elections will need to move the country towards bringing about tangible widespread economic progress in a social environment of stability, law and order. Voters will need to decide at the polls how this will need to be done, with which techniques and at what pace.
At the outset I must stress that while we can debate amongst different political parties how we should go about promoting social justice while striving towards economic prosperity, there should be no doubt about who remains responsible for this effort.
If the country succeeds we all stand to gain, and if the country fails, we shall all lose in the process. It is only with the participation of all South Africans of goodwill, irrespective of race, colour, religious affiliations or political allegiances, that we shall be able to bring about change for the better. Achieving national consensus on the modalities and specific direction of change remains the challenge of the new Parliament, and we are all bound to prepare for this national consensus even during the period of our electoral campaign. We cannot allow this electoral campaign to become the opportunity for mud-slinging and for an escalating trading of political insults. We must allow debates to flourish, which undoubtedly requires free and robust political criticisms when they are due. However, we should avoid calling on the electorate to vote for the dog that barks the loudest, for he is not necessarily the one who will bite the hardest in the end. I am reminded here of an old saying that: "Brag is a good dog, but Holdfast is better."
I remain aware that if we break the country into divisions during the electoral campaign it will be very difficult to pull it back together next year. The problems confronting us are too severe for any portion of our electorate to remain alienated from the effort that collegially we must mount to bring South Africa into the third millennium with the hope that we can succeed in fulfilling the needs and aspirations of all those who are feeling the pangs of despair. National consensus cannot be achieved without sacrifices on all sides. Insulting one another through the media is easy and often psychologically rewarding. Seeking reconciliation across profoundly different political ideologies and social and economic agendas, is hard and politically painful.
We shall not seek national consensus because it is the simple thing to do to solve our problems. We should seek national consensus because we know that it is the hard and painful thing to do but is the only way to begin a long process through which some of the problems affecting our communities may, in the end, be solved. Birth is the most exciting experience for any mother, and yet it also comes with a lot of pain. We will not reach the destiny of the people of our troubled land before enduring a lot of pain.
However, national consensus must be truly national and truly consensus. We shall not seek short-cuts and try to move forward with a type of consensus which is less than national and leaves behind certain segments of our population. The IFP has suffered enough in the past because of the notion of "sufficient consensus" and surely we do not wish to see "sufficient national consensus". We also cannot confuse consensus with co-option against one's own will. National consensus must be based on a plan for the future in terms of which all segments of our population can identify a personal stake to be gained at the end of a process on which we embark together and which we must complete together.
We must consider carefully the alternative facing all of us at this crucial juncture of our history. The old South Africa was built through the blood and sweat of black people and was built primarily for the benefit of white people. In that process infrastructures which remain unparalleled in most countries of our continent were developed. Great prosperity was created for small segments of our population and some of that prosperity trickled down into the poor areas, accounting for the fact that, in spite of racial discrimination and oppression, our black areas received infrastructures and public services of quantity and quality superior to that enjoyed in many other regions of our continent even after their liberation.
We are now faced with the opportunity of scavenging on the body of the old South Africa to distribute equally that which was concentrated in the hands of the few. I submit that, as the theme of this Conference indicates, there is a better way to go about it. This is not the easy way, but it is rather the hard way. It is nevertheless the right way. We shall not become scavengers on the old South Africa. It is incumbent on our generation to give birth to a new social and economic order from which all our people may find satisfactory sustenance for many centuries to come. It is our responsibility to set in place a process from which a new country can be built, if necessary, with the sweat and tears of all South Africans, but for the benefit of all South Africans.
National consensus should be about building a new country in which we all can prosper. I want to seek a mandate from the electorate which reflects the willingness of South Africans of goodwill to make sacrifices and invest in the future of our country. The situation confronting us is serious. People know that the economy is not doing well. People know that our communities and our daily lives are being ravaged by escalating criminality. People know that they are becoming poorer by the day because of price increases. A small pocket of people are doing well and are benefiting enormously from the present state of affairs. We did not bring about liberation to enrich a few but because we are committed to pursuing genuine political and economic liberation to bring freedom to all those who remain enslaved under the yoke of poverty, unemployment, ignorance through lack of education, and a lack of essential services such as health care, sanitation, electrification and running water.
An army of people of goodwill and enthusiasm has taken up trenches at all levels of our society and is eager to build a new world for themselves and their communities. New people have entered job opportunities from which they were once precluded, and have brought into them their enthusiasm and willingness to work hard. The 1994 elections have opened a new climate of enthusiasm and hope which has transformed work-places across the country, from shopping centres to banks, from mines to orchards, from port docks to building sites. A labour force came to the fore willing to work and build a new country. New entrepreneurs have sprung on to the market place bringing new energy and imagination into our economy. However the efforts, the enthusiasm and the resources of these people of goodwill have been dampened by many factors which we must now commit ourselves to redress.
Government has not performed and delivered as expected. The economy has not reacted and performed as we hoped. A culture of violence, lawlessness and criminality has sprung out of the conflicts of our past to permeate vast segments of our society. A culture of indolence, complacency, greed and personal ambition has also distorted the measure of the expectations of many people and their willingness to dedicate their efforts to rebuilding our country. We must develop a plan and a vision which will enable these fundamental flaws in the functioning of our society to be corrected within an identified time-frame. This plan cannot be the brain-child of government alone, but requires a unity of mind and purpose among all South Africans of goodwill. We will not only need to change how government operates and how we manage our economy, but we will also need to transform the hearts and minds of many of those who are now unwilling to accept the discipline, the commitment and the dedication which the times demand.
The IFP is committed to bringing about a profound change in how government works to redirect the management of our economy. We are also committed to bringing about a revolution of goodwill which can empower the people of goodwill wherever they work and live, and which shall crush the ambition and greed of those who are putting their personal interests ahead of that of the country and of their communities, families and colleagues. The IFP intends to remain part of the governance of the country because the country needs the IFP to bring about the changes necessary to consolidate national consensus and to create a long-term plan to solve our problems. I am not asking anyone to vote for the IFP, or to follow me, simply to end up on the opposition benches.
It is absurd to think that the party of the people of goodwill should be in opposition to the government of the country. The IFP is asking the people of South Africa to support it to remain a force in government and to carry their voice, their moral fortitude and their commitment to our future into the governance of the country.
When a new Parliament begins in May next year it will heed my warning that we can no longer proceed without a long-term plan. We must declare now what we intend South Africa to look like twenty five years down the road, and from that image we must retrace our steps to identify exactly what needs to be done to get there. If in twenty five years we are to fulfil the promise that all South Africans may enjoy a free and dignified life without the fear of economic oppression and the uncertainty of social instability, we shall then accept that what it takes to get there is not easy and will require hard options, austerity, courage and determination. Unfortunately, in many respects the action of government has been weakened by half measures, ambivalence and ineffective solutions. We cannot reach national consensus by trying to please everybody on strategies and options which remain ineffective and ambivalent.
We need to have a stronger IFP to ensure that national consensus is achieved on strong and hard options which lead South Africa out of the present rut which is hindering its progress. Two years ago, I committed myself in Parliament to ensure that the political axis of South Africa could be moved towards the centre and away from the destructive influence of the communists and trade union barons. At that time our Government was preparing a macro-economic plan which then seemed adequate to face the problems confronting us, and which the IFP supported. Unfortunately, the strategy developed to implement it, the so-called GEAR strategy, was delayed and in many respects made ineffective because of the unwillingness of trade union barons to walk that road.
It is reassuring that during the recent conference of the South African Communist Party, President Mandela and Deputy President Mbeki have indicated their unwillingness to let the communists within their midst continue to delay our national economic growth. However, the damage has been done and we must consider that GEAR may no longer be sufficient to redress the problems confronting us. I firmly believe that the IFP must seek re-election in government to ensure that South Africa can go beyond GEAR. GEAR was developed as a minimalist strategy and may no longer be able to deliver its intended results. GEAR targeted a 6% rate of economic growth by the year 2001 which now seems to be clearly unobtainable, while the dramatic devaluation of the rand suggests that perhaps we should aim at an even higher growth rate to keep our country in balance with the rest of the world. We need to go beyond GEAR to bring strength where GEAR has failed. GEAR accepted the IFP proposal that we should jump-start the economy and balance our budget through a comprehensive process of privatisation. But privatisation sunk into the quicksands of politics, greed and personal ambitions.
Going beyond GEAR means that we need to set privatisation back on track and accept the longstanding IFP proposal that privatisation be conducted not on a political but on an economic basis, and be driven by an independent commission which completes the process within a rigid time-frame of months rather than years. We must go beyond GEAR to redress the perception that the ambivalence of government has created in domestic and international financial markets. Perceptions will survive in spite of many of the underlying facts and can only be changed by profound changes. Our government has given mixed signals to domestic and foreign investors in respect of its macro-economic inclinations. The negative signal we have given through our labour legislation, which has established features typical of a corporate State, and has empowered beyond reason a new cast of trade union barons, has far offset the positive signals given by our fiscal responsibility, and the fact that in spite of pressing social demands we have kept under control the growth of the public deficit.
The weakness of our economic policy might not be the cause of the present currency crisis, but it made us vulnerable to it. It is a terrible indictment of our new democracy that since the lifting of sanctions, our currency has lost about 60% of its value against the world's hard currencies. The value of currency is determined by demand and supply and it is peculiar that our currency was stronger when sanctions gave no cause to investors to buy rands. We cannot close our eyes to this fact and blame others for it. The Government must accept that greater heed should be taken of my warnings of three years ago, when I stood up in Parliament calling for hard economic options.
In the management of the economy, half measures are often the most detrimental. Experts believe that our failure to go all the way in lifting foreign exchange restrictions is part of the problems facing our currency today. We have achieved bringing about some fiscal discipline but we may not have achieved enough. It is only by the year 2003 that we will begin reducing the size of our national debt determined as a percentage of our gross national product, while it will take even longer before it can be reduced in absolute terms.
Going beyond GEAR means accepting the need to reconsider aspects of our labour legislation which have impaired flexibility in the labour market, and bringing about a courageous plan to attract both foreign as well as domestic fixed investments. We can no longer ignore that some of our best corporate citizens are moving resources abroad and seeking opportunities abroad which they no longer see in their fatherland. We must increase the consumer and the corporate rate of savings and create the capital necessary to jump-start the type of economic growth which can build a new country.
We need to develop a national plan, of which trade unions must become the spearheads, which promotes a rigorous work ethic and a striving towards productivity. Along with this plan, we must have a national campaign which involves our churches, our NGOs and our communities to promote personal discipline, respect for authority and dedication to our families and communities. We can no longer allow our hospitals, schools and public offices to be in their present state of disarray. Finally, we must become serious about crime. There is no reason why we cannot win the battle against crime and crush crime once and for all. Let us crush crime under the elephant's mighty foot. Many of these measures are not easy and are hard because they may hurt.
I did not fight for forty years to bring about freedom and political liberation to leave the generations which shall come after me with the legacy of a country in which the youth can no longer dream of a much better future. My generation had a dream that one day all South Africans could be politically free. My generation still has the dream that one day all South Africans can have a prosperous life and, by the strength of God and His wisdom, I shall never give up on this dream. I, for one, am willing to accept the price and endure the pain required to bring that dream to fruition.
We must also have the courage to recognise that perhaps the IFP was right when, over and over again, we pointed out that we cannot build a new country with the State apparatus of the old one, and that we need to bring about a profound reform of our administration as well as our system of government. Undoubtedly this reform will also hurt, but the longer we delay it the more it will hurt. This reform will not only require a reassessment of our constitutional framework but will also need to go far beyond the Constitution. Last week I gave to my colleague, the Minister of Provincial Affairs and Constitutional Development, Mr Mohammed Valli Moosa, a set of constitutional amendments which, inter alia, seek to bring about genuine devolution of power to provinces and local government as the IFP has always advocated. We need to move policy formulation from the national to the provincial level of government, and devolve downwards the enormous and mostly unnecessary administrative capacity which the central government has gathered to perform functions which provinces could do better, faster and with more accountability. Today more than ever, supporting and voting for the IFP means supporting and voting for one's own province, whether one is in KwaZulu Natal, in the Northern Cape or in Mpumalanga.
Undoubtedly, in the short-term, bringing about genuine devolution of power and transferring policy formulation to the provincial level will create hiccups and possibly even confusion. Yet, this remains the only route available if we wish to avoid government becoming the bottle-neck of delivery. For as long as we do not have sufficient administrative, human and logistical resources where delivery takes place, the battle will remain lost. The fastest and most reliable way to develop capacity at that level is to move the power of policy formulation to where capacity is to be developed. If provinces are induced to thinking about how to solve the problems confronting them, and adopting legislation to that end without relying on their "big brother" in Pretoria or Cape Town, they will be forced to seek the best allocation of resources to develop what they need.
Government has become a part of the problem and we must choose hard options and, if required, drastic measures to redress the imbalance between the large amount of money South Africans invest in their government, and the small quantity of tangible services and products which they get out of it. We spend too much money and we get too few schools, hospitals and police stations. The issue is that simple and the solution can be equally simple if we have a government as strong as an elephant with the will to cut where cuts are to be made, and chomp unnecessary super-structures to push resources, people and money downwards towards the outlets of delivery. These are not easy or painless solutions, but if we wish the end we must have the strength to wish the means.
Two months ago the IFP launched its new logo which is captured in the image of the elephant with his family. The image of the elephant symbolises both what needs to be done and who we are. We need a strong government which moves unhindered on its path with the strength of national consensus and with the resolve, the wisdom and the purpose of an elephant. We of the IFP are the elephant, as throughout our existence we have moved along a straight line, opening new territories, marking new grounds and leading the way. We were the first within the liberation movement to advocate the need for devolution of powers, privatisation, a rigid constitution which is the supreme law of the land, a strong Bill of Rights, and a free market-based economy which accelerates our rate of economic growth as a precondition to promoting the wealth necessary to finance the many social programmes we need. All these features of the present debate were tabled by the IFP with clairvoyance and years ahead of their time. We have walked straight towards our goal with the resilience and the wisdom of an elephant. Because of the synchronism between what needs to be done and who we are, the time for the elephant has come and the time for the IFP has come.
The weaker the IFP after the 1999 elections, the weaker will be the government of South Africa. The stronger the IFP, the stronger, the more pragmatic and the more long-sighted will be the government of South Africa.
At the next elections people will need to decide whether they want to walk the path that the IFP has always advocated. We have never made irresponsible promises of things which we cannot deliver, and I have often stressed that the road ahead is hard and uphill. We are asking the people to support the IFP not because we are promising a leisurely downhill ride towards greater confusion, greater poverty and greater unemployment. We are concerned about the poorest of the poor and those who are unemployed. We are concerned about all South Africans because we know that unless we have a plan to address the aspirations of the poorest of the poor and the unemployed, no one will ever be free in our country or secure in his or her relative prosperity. We are inviting people to follow us on a hard and uphill drive towards prosperity which will require sacrifices and austerity.
I cannot promise you how long it will take to climb the mountain, nor can I tell you how difficult a climb it will be. I can only swear that this is the only road I see existing and that I, for as long as strength is left in my body, shall leave no stone unturned and no effort spared to walk it, ahead of all the people of goodwill and sound morality who are willing to rebuild our country from the grassroots up. The IFP has paid high political prices to pursue with integrity its long-term vision, and we shall continue to pursue it for as long as people are aspiring to a better future. The majority of South Africans are good people. They long for a government which finally reflects their good nature. We have proven that we can be trusted to pursue this objective. Trust cannot be bought on credit as some people seem to be doing too often in politics. I know that especially those who are extremely poor will extend their trust only to those who have earned it in hard political cash. The whole of South Africa needs a political leadership which can be trusted and which has been tested by time and strengthened through decades of struggle. South Africa needs the tested and trusted leadership of the IFP.
Like the elephant, we bear eternal memory of our past and whence we come from. We shall never forget where we come from and what we had to endure to be where we are. One may let political bygones be political bygones, but one can never forget them. In our quest for national consensus we may need to stress commonalities over differences, but we cannot ignore our past, nor can we close our eyes to the tragedy of the present. We cannot forget the thousands of our members and sympathisers who were killed merely because of their support for Inkatha; nor can we ever forget the over 400 leaders and office bearers of the IFP killed in a systematic plan of mass assassination. The killing has not stopped. While it has been a source of relief that the low intensity civil war that raged in this province for years has abated, the reality has been that the political violence in certain parts of the province between members of the two governing parties in this Province, the IFP and the ANC, has continued, even though on a sporadic basis.
We are all concerned about the violence that is now taking place in Richmond which has cost so many innocent lives. But I must say that in the KwaZulu Natal Midlands, the IFP has suffered the loss of many lives, including babies. In the Richmond area itself, the IFP has lost several members which all seems to be forgotten. Many of those murders have up to now not been solved. Inkosi Majozi of Indaleni in Richmond was pushed out of his area of jurisdiction and fled to Exobho where he ultimately died. Inkosi Molefe in the Hlanganani area was also murdered in cold blood. All these murders have never been solved. I mention this to remind South Africa at large that the IFP for years was subjected to these assassinations, and not one of these murders of our leaders in the Richmond area has ever been solved. I do not say that if the police can solve the current mayhem in Richmond that they should not proceed to do so. All I am doing is reminding people that for the IFP in that area, this is something we have endured for many years, and I well remember a number of funerals of our IFP members that I had to attend in that area.
National consensus does not mean passing over existing differences in philosophy and outlook towards politics. This year when I replied to the address given by President Mandela at the opening of Parliament, I stated that:
[we] must normalise politics in our fledgling democracy, strengthening its dynamics so that opponents can be respected without becoming enemies. Personally, I do not think that anyone in this House is an enemy of the people, for everyone sitting in this House is a representative of the people. We must accept that the interests of the South African people are diversified and that all are equally entitled to be heard and represented without being lambasted. Within our own political system and at all levels of society we must promote a culture of respect and tolerance.
I must thank President Mandela for the bold initiative he took when he reportedly stated that he would support a "merger" between the IFP and the ANC or a proposal which could be made to offer me the Deputy Presidency of South Africa or that of the ANC. I must also thank the many ANC leaders who publicly went out on a limb in making offers for an ANC-IFP merger. We must reconcile the country but we cannot seek expedient solutions. For many years I have been the promoter of reconciliation between the IFP and the ANC and I have called for the unity of intent of all South Africans and of all the major political parties representing them. I believe in this unity of intent, but not in the weakening of democratic dialectics.
I also wish to thank the President for his words at the ANC Conference in Mafikeng when he acknowledged the existence of co-operation between the ANC, as the ruling party at national level, and the IFP, as a minority party in the GNU, despite our differences.
I spoke these words five months ago, and on this occasion I must also acknowledge the efforts which have been made by ANC leadership at national level to normalise relationships. It is very discouraging, though, that their efforts are constantly countered by the irresponsible behaviour of the ANC leadership in KwaZulu Natal who are missing no opportunity to create divisions and foster causes for conflict. Even on the issue of traditional leadership, which has been one of the most divisive between the IFP and the ANC, at the national level efforts are being made to find a common ground which can accommodate traditional leaders. Oblivious of what we are doing at national level, the ANC leadership in KwaZulu Natal has remained fiercely opposed to traditional leaders to the point of bringing several law suits against traditional leaders, which they have lost one after the other. One of such law suits would have had the practical effect of abolishing the House of Traditional Leaders as it challenged its establishing law. Another one was aimed at depriving traditional leaders of their ex officio position in Regional Councils. These are but some of the examples of the unwillingness of the ANC in KwaZulu Natal to seek reconciliation and to adopt the same attitude which the IFP has chosen at national level with respect to the ANC.
The type of insults with which Dumisani Makhaye has saluted the launch of the new IFP logo, speaks volumes about the contempt which the ANC in KwaZulu Natal holds for the IFP. Since the IFP and the ANC first met on January 29, 1991 in Durban, we in the IFP have stood steadfast by the agreement we reached then that "killing talk" would be banished forever. But political hatred remains part of the agenda of some ANC leaders. This is a painful and regrettable reality that we cannot wish away and which is jeopardising the possibility of building national consensus. ANC leaders from KwaZulu Natal who operate at national level have been much more amenable to the idea of national reconciliation than their colleagues in the province. I remain committed to the idea of reconciliation for the sake of South Africa. For this reason I must denounce the political ambition of these provincial political leaders who are jeopardising progress and creating opportunities for their political self-promotion. This is the type of behaviour we do not need if we wish to build a new country.
By the same token, we must ensure that any reconciliation achieved between the IFP and the ANC does not get ahead of a process of an all-inclusive national reconciliation and national consensus. This process must be driven by a common plan for the future in which all political parties can identify a common stake and a pool of shared values and goals. The country would be torn in pieces if, in the name of national consensus, we allow racial tension and resentment to surface. I believe that the commitment to balancing our society by addressing the needs and aspirations of the poorest of the poor, the unemployed and those who were previously disadvantaged, is equally felt and understood across all social and ethnic divides. No one can prosper unless we all prosper. Therefore, I believe that we cannot reach national consensus by ascribing different intentions to fellow South Africans.
There are differences amongst political parties which will need to be sorted out not by calling one another enemies, but in the same way in which we dealt with the issues of the transition, which was through negotiation. Issues such as those affecting an unequal distribution of land, the lack of economic empowerment of the great majority of South Africans and the great imbalances between rural and urban areas, are not going to go away. Their solution requires the willing co-operation between those who have and those who do not have, and between those who in the short-term have to lose and those who in the short-term have to gain, in order that a framework may be formulated in which in the long-term they can all identify something to gain.
The next Parliament of South Africa will need to face the real issues of our country which were ignored during the time of transition in spite of many attempts by the IFP to table them high on the agenda for negotiation. The IFP intends to transform that term of Parliament into a forum in which these issues can be really negotiated in open discussions. The first Parliament of South Africa was inundated with legislation which we had to adopt and we did not take the time, nor did we create the space, to have proper debates on issues such as macro-economic strategies, land distribution, urban-rural inequalities, the distribution of employment opportunities and most of all, the issue of poverty and unemployment. The next Parliament will need to discuss and negotiate these issues as a plan for the future based on national consensus.
The IFP remains committed to the poorest of the poor, but wishes to be a political home for all South Africans irrespective of race, colour or social and economic conditions. Our philosophy and our message fit the needs of the poor because they fit the hopes of the rich, by creating the synergism which together can build a new country capable of accommodating both. Throughout my life I have always brought people together and have never regarded any fellow South African as an enemy to be destroyed, because I knew that in the end we all have to share our fatherland and work together to make it prosper. At times I was harshly criticised and even ostracised because of my positions.
I shall continue to carry forward the promise that the IFP remains the home of all those who believe that through true freedom, hard work and integrity, and with the help of God, we can make our families, our communities and our country the place in which our dreams can safely flirt with the evolving reality.
FORWARD WITH THE REVOLUTION OF GOODWILL! FORWARD!
FORWARD WITH EFFORTS TO BUILD A NEW SOUTH AFRICA! FORWARD!EENDRAG MAAK MAG!
AMANDLA!
MATLA!
MATIMBA!
#2709