On Wednesday 6 November, Makana's DA caucus marched into the Grocott's Mail newsroom. It was a little after 10am, a crucial special council meeting had started at 9am, and they were furious.
On Wednesday 6 November, Makana's DA caucus marched into the Grocott's Mail newsroom. It was a little after 10am, a crucial special council meeting had started at 9am, and they were furious.
"We are all here because we want to make sure there is an accurate reflection of what happened this morning," DA leader in Makana, Les Reynolds said.
The delegation had staged a mass walkout from the Council meeting over several alleged procedural flaws.
Inside the Council chambers earlier, Grocott's Mail had witnessed Speaker Rachel Madinda-Isaac calling for Reynolds to table the motion he had submitted to municipal manager Pravine Naidoo on Thursday 31 October.
It was a motion of no-confidence in Executive Mayor Zamuxolo Peter, citing lack of political oversight and leadership over the numerous infrastructural and financial crises during his term of office.
But Reynolds refused to table the motion, explaining that the standing rules of Council state in Section 84 (5): "The speaker must, for the purpose of considering the said motion, forthwith upon receipt of same, determine the date, time and venue of a special meeting in terms of rule 4. The date of such a special council meeting may not be less than fourteen and not more than twenty-one days from the date the speaker received a copy of the motion concerned from the municipal manager."
In the meeting Reynolds said he had submitted the motion to the municipal manager on 31 October, and the 14 days had not lapsed according to the rules.
"Unfortunately I can not put my motion, because of the standing rules of order. It's not even seven days and this meeting is sitting and as much as I want to I can not raise this motion," Reynolds said.
In response, Madinda-Isaac asked the Council if anyone opposed Reynolds's opinion on procedure.
ANC Chief Whip Vuyani Kolisi said, "I oppose the statement of the DA. If you look at the act it says 'may'…once you talk of 'may' you have the prerogative to say yes or no."
Councillor Piryawaden Ranchhod seconded Kolisi.
After the DA was outvoted by 20 councillors to table the motion, the Speaker ordered the meeting to continue. Reynolds then tabled the motion of no-confidence in the Mayor and Madinda-Isaac asked if anyone opposed it.
Again Kolisi stood up. He said, "When you are driving a car on the road, there are rules of the road. When you see a red robot you stop… I reject the motion on those grounds."
Ranchhod seconded the rejection and the Speaker declared the motion overturned.
The frustration of the delegation to Grocott's Mail appeared to hinge on what they said was a misuse of the word, "may".
"We believe the Speaker strategically misinterpreted the rules of order," councillor Brian Fargher said. "The rules say the meeting 'may not' be held in less than 14 days. Both Naidoo and the Speaker insisted that the word 'may' indicated an option. They did not regard it in its context ('may not') as a fixed rule."
Reynolds said that among other floutings of the rules of order was that the "rejection" of his motion was in fact another point of view.
"She was confused," Reynolds said. "She didn't realise that the so-called rejection was in fact another point of view. In other words, she in fact had two motions on the table.
"Kolisi's was in fact a counter-motion. It should have been the original motion that was put to the ballot, not the counter-motion," he said.
What next for the DA? Grocott's Mail asked.
"We have to strategise. It's a three-month wait before we can do anything more if the motion is rejected. But we have sown the seed," said Fargher.
