Thomas Johnson - The Blog

 Since last year when Eskom plunged the country in darkness, perhaps for the first time professional critics - media, professional analysts, business - are acutely assessing the parlous state the country is in. It's approximately where South Africa was during the late 80s. Then it was the state of emergency, internal and external conflict and President PW Botha's kamikaze rule that threatened to take the entire country with him.  Now it's different but no less severe with a dangerously schizoid president and ANC in charge. The difference between then and now is this time there's the real danger of the lights - figuratively and literally - going off and with it calamity. For all the NP's faults, and without romanticising the time, they kept the lights on, industry going and infrastructure working (how Ukraine manages is something Ramaphosa should ask during his pointless and biased so-called peace initiative). But the ANC has found even the simplest governance tasks ...

 Editor of DM168 Heather Robertson yesterday wrote in her weekly column, "Today, 29 years into democracy and with a bumbling Bheki Cele in charge of the police, Ramaphosa nominally in charge of the country and an enfeebled, under-resourced National Prosecuting Authority under Shamila Batohi, our country feels just as ungovernable and lawless as it was then.” The national mood is worse now than it was when Ramaphosa was elected by ANC MPs. It's due to Eskom and unremitting loadshedding that's crushing the economy and national spirit; failure of government, and equally corrupt, SAPS and NPA to make headway against systemic corruption (also Eskom's), and failure of the economy to grow under so-called reformist Ramaphosa and of his numerous promises.  Eskom is the canary of SA's coalmine.  Depression set in after former Eskom CEO Andre De Ruyter revealed the extent of Eskom corruption in the eTV interview.  But still ANC from president down are in denial (what's ne...

 Cape Town's mayor Geordin Hill-Lewis presents as a sincere, energetic officer, like Patricia de Lille before ennui and cynicism got the better of her. But he is a politician and indulges in politicians' hyperbole. In his Daily Maverick op-ed ”Budget comparison confirms Cape Town delivers the most for the poor while offering ratepayers value for money”, he responds to criticism of the ”narrative the city - and by extension the party that governs it - only looks after some (read affluent) communities and doesn't do enough for the poor. Variations of this narrative are often trotted out without any substantiation, as though it were self-evidently true".  Hill-Lewis compares the budgets of South Africa's metros to find "Cape Town manages to outspend the other cities on pro-poor support and infrastructure for basic services while affording ratepayers by far the biggest bang for their rates and tariffs buck". I'm not going to debate whether his/city's ...