“While this is an unprecedented move‚ the ANC correctly in its motion details many‚ but not all‚ of the maladministration that the mayor is responsible for,” said Madikizela.It may be said that a true test of any political party is what it does when confronted with grim allegations. Cape Town’s mayor has been in the firing lines for some time now. Madikizela stated that the DA had finally reached the decision to remove her due to the ‘untenable and destructive role’ she has played in the mismanagement of the Mother City. In a vote last week, the caucus reached a conclusion of 84 to 59. In favour of handing de Lille her marching papers. And so, the stage looked all set for her departure. Then, in an apparent act of pettiness, the ANC suddenly withdrew the motion. ANC’s Xolani Sotashe spoke to TimesLIVE, saying:
“We won’t help the DA remove de Lille. They must do it on their own. There are bigger problems in the DA administration than de Lille.”
“While they had initially claimed that their motion was brought on by numerous allegations of maladministration against the mayor‚ they have demonstrated today that they would much rather engage in petty party politics than do what is best for the people of Cape Town‚” he said.Both Zuma and de Lille are ill-equipped to occupy their office. Yet, the ANC has essentially protected both of them. Why does the ANC want to see an inadequate, inept mayor at the helm of DA-run Cape Town? Why have they not supported the DA’s decision?
“Yes, she is corrupt‚ but she can be rehabilitated (and the quicker she leaves the DA by her own accord the better),” said the ANC’s Sotashe. “As the ANC‚ there is no one that we say we can’t accept in our ranks. If she wants to come‚ if she’s got an interest in the ANC‚ we will engage. Anything is possible. There is no dustbin for a human being. People can be rehabilitated.”And that, ladies and gentlemen, is everything that is wrong with our government.
“It is truly saddening that her conduct has forced us to act to remove her,” said Madikizela. “However‚ no matter someone’s history or popularity‚ we have a greater obligation to protecting the principles of good governance and ensuring effective delivery to all‚ especially the people of Cape Town.”De Lille has played an important role in the democratic history of South Africa. It’s hard to believe, though, that the DA, Cape Town or the country will forgive her recent transgressions. It was recently announced that a special council meeting will be convened on February 15 to consider the motion of no confidence. This time, it has been tabled by the DA, and de Lille knows what’s coming. So, why is the DA so determined to remove de Lille? A council-mandated investigation showed that, as mayor, de Lille has demonstrated behaviour simply unbefitting of her office. She’s been charged with misconduct and accused of gross dereliction of duty, as well as conduct amounting to deceiving council. Let’s take a look at where it all began, and the mistakes she’s made leading up to this moment.
"Regarding renovations at my house, these were paid for by myself and I am prepared to make the proof of these payments, made by myself, known as part of the proper legal processes."She has claimed that the auditor-general had declared her innocent of any misconduct regarding security upgrades to her Pinelands home, funded by the council. Madikizela, though, trashed these claims and called them ‘blatantly false.’ “It is simply intolerable for a sitting mayor to mislead her party and more importantly the people of Cape Town in such a deliberate and inexcusable fashion‚” he said.
“Her failure to manage this correctly and to communicate accurate information has played a material role in the current public panic and negatively impeded the city’s response to the current crisis‚” said Madikizela. “She actively withheld information‚ misdirected officials‚ delayed budget decisions‚ interfered with project plans and undermined the rollout of augmentation projects as a result. Furthermore‚ she failed to push national government to fulfil its legal responsibilities – at the cost and risk to the residents of Cape Town. This is in of itself has posed a massive governance risk.”