ANC whip: Opposition cooked in big ‘blue pot’

ANC chief whip Mathole Motshekga.

ANC chief whip Mathole Motshekga has lashed out against opposition parties working together in Parliament, saying they’re all being “cooked in a blue pot”.

Opening the debate on Zuma’s state of the nation address in the National Assembly yesterday afternoon, Motshekga said all the opposition parties would, during the debate, voice the “views of the DA, dressed in different party colours”.

He went on to say: “These views would be dressed in different suits and faces on this podium, but we know that they were cooked in a blue pot.”

He also said they were singing from the hymn sheet of their political “master”.

Motshekga said the views of the parties expressed would “not be a reflection of the aspirations of the diverse constituencies who votes some of the political parties” in the opposition benches into Parliament, but that of the DA.

“We are aware of the increasing difficulties confronting these parties, particularly the principal challenge of their dwindling appeal to the electorate. However, by selling their soul and surrendering their autonomy to the DA means they can no longer claim to represent the views and aspirations of the constituencies they represent in this institution,” he said.

He said this did not serve the democratic system.

Motshekga’s comments came in a week when academic and struggle stalwart Mamphela Ramphele announced she would start a “party political platform” with the aim to start a party that would contest the elections and that would seek opposition cooperation.

Most opposition parties in Parliament, with the exception of the APC and PAC, last week held a joint press briefing slamming Zuma’s state of the nation address, and repeating that they had no confidence in him.

The parties last year teamed up to introduce a motion of no confidence against Zuma. The matter was, however, not put on the order paper and it lapsed.

DA parliamentary leader Lindiwe Mazibuko last week said the parties would reintroduce it once the Constitutional Court has ruled on the case.

The case turns around whether the majority party needed to give permission for a motion of no confidence to be tabled.