Mayor row indication of Mbeki’s influence

THE centralisation of power at Luthuli House and more specifically in the hands of ANC President Thabo Mbeki has already caused considerable divisions within the party with delegates venting their feelings about the issue at the National General Council meeting in Pretoria last July.

It is precisely this centralisation of power that lies at the heart of the confusion as to whether Nelson Mandela Bay mayor Nceba Faku will be named to serve another term as it is the ANC president’s prerogative to appoint the executive mayors of the six metros.

After the ANC’s regional executive had stated on two occasions that Faku’s name was not on the list of candidates seeking election on March 1 – he had previously announced that he wished to step down – it was revealed yesterday that no decision had yet been taken at a national level on the mayor’s future.

Translated that means Mbeki had not yet decided whether Faku should remain in office or not.

We would defend the right of political parties to organise their internal affairs as they see fit however undemocratic this might appear to be. But at the same time we would question whether it is healthy for one man to decide who will be appointed premier of each of the nine provinces as well as the six metros.

This question is of considerable import – the Eastern Cape is a case in point – as it has in the past often resulted in serious divisions between the elected ANC leaders on the one hand and those appointed to head provincial government on the other, with the ensuing clash necessarily affecting service delivery.

While we are not suggesting that had he wished to remain Faku would not have been duly nominated, we are perturbed at the concentration of power in the hands of one man and the fact that this has and can lead to the imposition of premiers and mayors that have been rejected by the people in democratic elections for positions within the ANC, with the resultant creation of two centres of power.

Gays’ action unacceptable

FOR the Gay and Lesbian Alliance (GLA), it is perhaps perfectly acceptable to be irresponsible and unethical by cheating its way into having possibly tainted blood accepted by this country’s blood banks.

But it is also now clear that this organisation is acting on behalf of a minority of homosexual people in its current campaign to force the SA National Blood Service to accept all donors without discrimination.

Other gay formations have condemned the actions of the GLA that saw its members, as well as people with HIV/Aids, apparently donate several litres of blood over the past week to the SANBS under false pretences.

Generally, South Africans are fully aware of the Constitutional provisions that outlaw discrimination against anyone on various grounds including sexual orientation, and might under different circumstances, feel sympathetic to the struggle of gays to gain acceptance as blood donors.

However, when the struggle takes the form of tactics like donating HIV/Aids-infected blood to the country’s blood banks under false pretences, solely to attain acceptance of equality, the rules of engagement take a different and adversarial turn.

Donated human blood is an absolute necessity in order to save lives, and no society can tolerate a threat to that supply.

On that score the actions of the GLA deserve to be condemned.