In the wake of the historic 29 May election, which saw South African voters elect a Parliament without a clear majority for any party, the FMF believes political leaders should respect these wishes by not attempting to artificially construct a new majoritarian regime.
“The electoral math is such that attempting to form a traditional coalition government is fraught with unacceptable risk, no matter how such an arrangement is configured,” argues David Ansara, chief executive officer at the FMF.
“The interests of ordinary South Africans would be far better served by a decentralised, ‘no-alition’ regime, which allows parties to independently serve their constituencies on a case-by-case basis rather than being co-opted into serving the often questionable interests of the former majority party.”
A ‘confidence and supply’ arrangement, says the FMF, is an alternative that avoids many of the risks of a formal coalition. In terms of such an arrangement, the larger partner would be able to govern as a minority government, but secure in the knowledge that its Cabinet can remain in place (confidence) and its annual budget will be adopted (supply). Confidence and supply would also ensure that a President is elected within the allotted constitutional timeframe.
The benefit of this alternative approach according to Ansara is that, “the governing party would need to lobby for support for every new bill it introduces in Parliament (other than the annual Appropriation Bill – the budget), but this is not a bad thing. It will, for the first time since 1994, mean that laws are adopted through persuasion and compromise rather than brute parliamentary force.”
“Much of the widespread policy failure of the last 30 years has come as a result of having unchecked power concentrated within the hands of a single dominant party.
This is how political power became perverted. The only feasible way of limiting such power is through the radical decentralisation of government,” Ansara concluded.
