DA Cape Town no.2 more interesting

The DA announced Geordin Hill-Lewis as it's Mayoral Candidate for the City of Cape Town. An announcement that came as a no surprise.

There are a few important events surrounding the announcement of the mayoral candidate.

The first thing to keep our eyes on is whether the incumbent Dan Plato will complete the current term, or will he move to the national assembly and become a back-bencher or will he move to the provincial legislature.

Should Plato move to the Western Cape Provincial Parliament the second thing to keep our eyes on is if he will become and MEC and who will make space for him in cabinet?

LIFO [Last In, First Out] would probably be the easiest solution, Daylin Mitchell could be dropped as Transport and Public Works MEC and become the answer to the third important thing to keep our eyes on: who will be candidate for Deputy Mayor.

For Hill-Lewis to have governance experience is not that crucial but his lieutenants and especially number two should. It thus looks like an easy, simple move but in politics nothing is easy or simple.

Daylin Mitchell might only be minister for a few months, but he is a former chairperson of the transport and public works, as well as premier and constitutional matters committees. He is also a former deputy chief whip and deputy caucus chairperson.

One can expect the Deputy Mayoral Candidate position to be a bigger competition than the Mayoral one.

Race is a sensitive issue and the DA who believes in non-racialism might give some hope to the current deputy mayor Ian Neilson for another term or Mayco Members JP Smith and James Vos to throw their names in the hat. Neilson, Smith and Vos have the expertise for the position and would give great support to Hill-Lewis as a Mayor. It would however be difficult to convince not only voters and potential voters but also party members that with white Mayor and Deputy Mayor Candidates the DA is not a white party.

From within the DA there would be a push that the number two be a person of colour. Four names come to mind...

Top of the list is Xanthea Limberg, whose name have been previously rumoured as a potential deputy mayor candidate, followed by Zahid Badroodien.

The other two on my list might not have governance experience but they know the communities, are regularly on the ground and to an extend are engaging on the streets. They are Angus McKenzie, the Bonteheuwel-ward councillor, and Reagen Allen, chairperson of the standing committee on community safety and cultural affairs and sport.

Three of the above eight names have previously hinted at aiming for the blue cloak. There could however be wildcard candidates like Patricia van der Ross and Dr. Arlene Adams.

The DA can be very predictable, applying textbook politics, like watching House of Cards and West Wing at once. Thus, when selecting the number two for the City of Cape Town, the DA should be honest and take parties like the EFF, NFP, Good, Icosa, CDR and the Patriotic Alliance serious. 

It should also first decide whether the status quo will do or will they want to stir the pot – like deal with pending disciplinary matters…

A caucus divided

Patricia De Lille is not the first person the DA asks to take off the Mayoral Chain. Once upon a time Peter Marais was axed as UniCity Mayor. This move was defended in the papers with a half-page advertisement and the case went to court. Minutes before a council meeting the court ruled the DA broke the law in axing Marais and saw the Mayor sliding into the council chamber.

Back then the DA said it wanted Cape Town to be a shining example to the rest of South Africa, but that under Marais’ leadership it had been dogged by crisis, controversy and scandal.

Fast-forward to the present and we are watching the sequel, this time Patricia de Lille is the Mayor. For some reason this make me think about Ghostbusters with Dan and Billy, and the sequel with Melissa.

One of the differences between the two though is that whether Patricia takes off the mayoral chain or not, the DA has a divided City of Cape Town caucus.

Although caucus meetings are closed, council meetings are open to the public and from the gallery you can clearly see the cracks in the caucus.

At the time of writing this the DA requested an Special City Council meeting for a Motion of No Confidence in the Mayor and the party laid criminal charges against Patricia de Lille. The criminal charges come after a businessman handed an affidavit to the party, making allegations of corruption and bribery against De Lille. This relates to allege attempts by De Lille to solicit a R5 million bribe.

The MONC, to be debated on 15 February, will be the second. A previous motion by the ANC was withdrawn at the eleventh hour. That happened as the DA caucus got the green light from their federal leadership to support it.

The decision by the Fedex comes after a caucus meeting with a majority vote recommended to the party higher structure that the caucus support a motion in the mayor.

This after councillor Mercia Kleinsmith requested an urgent caucus meeting to discuss a motion of no confidence in the Mayor.

The motion was motivated “all indications are that the party and its structures, the public and this caucus has lost confidence in the mayor to lead this city”.

The meeting with 152 members of caucus present concluded with 8 abstaining, 1 spoilt ballot and 59 votes against and 84 votes in support of a motion.

Taking another step back, days before Christmas the DA announced a subcommittee “found sufficient management and governance-related challenges in the DA’s City of Cape Town caucus”. As 2018 started DA leader Mmusi Maimane announced the party is formally charging Patricia de Lille, with the party’s Federal Legal Commission. This comes despite the party selling its good story the past decade. She is also accused of alleged misconduct for

1. Acting in a way that impacts negatively on the image or performance of the party
2. Failed to carry out duties and responsibilities set out by the standards required by the statutory rules required by the public office.
3. Bringing the name of the party in disrepute
4. Acted in an unreasonable and detrimental manner
5. Unreasonably failed to comply with or rejected decisions of the official formations of the party.

Prior to all this De Lille resigned as DA Western Cape Leader in January 2017. At the time she said it is to focus on only being mayor. Back then I wrote in politics it is anything goes. I also mentioned as Mayor of the Mother City she might lead the biggest DA caucus, but she’s not the first to be a government and party leader.

The resignation came days have she announced a newly revamped Executive Mayoral Committee, with four mini-mayors and a deputy now without a portfolio.

Whether Patricia de Lille is acquitted on the charges or not, both internally and the criminal charges, service delivery in the Mother City is in the hands of a divided governing party. From the 152-member caucus 84 councillors will be happy not to see the first citizen return, or disgruntled that she is returning.

While the party is not addressing the division, one need to ask if the Mayor takes off the chain will there be a push to remove the 59 who supported her. The same question can also be asked if she gets to keep the mayoral chain, if there would be a push to demote or remove the 84 councillors.

We should also not forget the 9 councillors who did not vote and 2 who were absent (on leave). Will they make their alliance known or continue to play neutral?

What if from the 84 or 59 councillors had a change of mind?

The DA’s Federal Congress is taking place later this year, in little over a year we will have a general election and campaigning will kick-start in a few weeks. The DA is determined to win enough votes to be the national government. Before all this the party would want to consider working on unity to say #BetterTogether.

Considering political parties are dependent on votes, it does not take a lot to know the Patricia-saga will cost the DA votes. Insiders say the party’s own polls even suggest this.

Let’s also not forget there is the possibility of a court challenge by DA MPL Lennit Max, after losing the provincial leadership and now citing vote rigging. The courts could order a re-run of the provincial congress.

The party leader took political control over the biggest crisis a DA government has faced. Someone should perhaps advise Mmusi Maimane to allow the experts to ensure we have water. He should perhaps, before all the votes dry up, want to focus on the tension and division within not only the City of Cape Town, but caucuses where the party governs.

You might also be interested in: Own Goals & DA confusion

Own Goals...

Own goals, that could hurt the DA at the ballot box. Those the words of many senior party members in reaction to the ongoing saga surrounding Patricia de Lille.

In a previous blog, DA Confusion, I said you not alone if you feel confuse about the charges against the Cape Town Mayor. Well now we know the charges [see bullets i to v below] but developments since then would appear as if some are jumping the gun [skip to the conclusion if you cannot wait].

Earlier this week the Western Cape High Court ruled Mayor Patricia De Lille be allowed to attend City caucus meetings when matters of governance are discussed, after parties involved reach an agreement. (see bullet d below)

This ruling comes a day after JP Smith returned to party activities and on the same day party leader, Mmusi Maimane, said he would the next day [Wednesday 24 January 2018] announce a multi-disciplinary programme of action to deal with the management of averting ‘Day Zero’ [water crisis].

Maimane then launched and said he is personally taking responsibility for #DefeatDayZero. The DA leader who said he is taking political control also announced a Drought Crisis Team, that notably excluded the Mayor of the first City in the world to possibly run out of water.

Why mention this, because hours after this launch the DA City Caucus held a special meeting discussing the Mayor’s fate.

On Sunday councillor Mercia Kleinsmith requested an urgent DA caucus meeting to discuss a motion of no confidence in the Mayor.

“There are simply too many worrying matters, actions and press releases that are in contradiction with DA policies and values. All indications are that the party and its structures, the public and this caucus has lost confidence in the mayor to lead this city,” Kleinsmith motivated the motion.

A five-hour marathon meeting concluded with 152 of the caucus members voting: with 8 abstaining, 1 spoilt ballot and 84 votes in support and 59 against it.

The City of Cape Town Council has 231 seats. A majority of 116 votes is needed for the motion to pass.

The caucus decision now goes to the Federal Executive for consideration but the green light might not be given before the next council meeting on Wednesday 31 January 2018 – where an ANC sponsored Motion of No Confidence, that was handed in last month, will be tabled.

De Lille reportedly says she is not worried about the decision.

“The party has to decide on that. It is not council, it was the DA’s caucus meeting. I am still the mayor of Cape Town and I can only be removed by the full City of Cape Town. It does not say anything.”

While councillors are constitutionally allowed to table such a motion it is important to note DA candidates for Mayors; deputies and speakers are selected by a selection panel pending the approval of the FedEx, before the relevant caucus formally nominate and vote for such candidates.

Perhaps good to remind ourselves that in especially the last two elections DA leaders travelled across the country selling the good governance and corruption free City of Cape Town. “Where we govern, we govern well,” is what we were told. Ironically the person leading the well-run City is now accused of serious allegations by the very same council she is leading.
Patricia de Lille is also charged by her party for alleged misconduct for

1. Acting in a way that impacts negatively on the image or performance of the party
2. Failed to carry out duties and responsibilities set out by the standards required by the statutory rules required by the public office.
3. Bringing the name of the party in disrepute
4. Acted in an unreasonable and detrimental manner
5. Unreasonably failed to comply with or rejected decisions of the official formations of the party.

To take another step back, late in 2017:

(a) A public war of words broke out between the Mayor and a member of her mayoral committee, JP Smith. At the centre of the spat is the disbanding of the City’s special investigation unit – that resorted under Smith.(b) Smith also wrote a letter to party leaders, that leaked to the media, mentioning speculation of unauthorized security alterations at Patricia De Lille’s home.(c) An official, Craig Kesson, implicated the mayor in serious allegations concerning two senior staff members. Read Affidavit(d) Patricia De Lille and JP Smith were both placed on special leave from all party activities – this included from attending caucus meetings. Read Statement(e) Prior to a DA federal executive meeting where Patricia De Lille’s submissions on why she should not be fired, Federal Council Chairperson James Selfe told City Press “it is not whether the mayor has done anything right or wrong. The issue to decide on is whether the DA has confidence in her and her ability to run the city and to manage the caucus”.“If a decision is made that De Lille should resign and she refuse, we will have to instruct the DA City caucus to support a motion of no confidence,” Selfe added.

 

It could be all a coincidence that the #DefeatDayZero launch, De Lille’s exclusion from it and her caucus voting to support a motion against the mayor all happened on the same day.

What does boggle the mind – considering everything above – is that the DA caucus might have jumped the gun and with their vote declared Patricia de Lille guilty (of the allegations against her) and decided on her punishment, before there has even been a judgment, let alone a hearing.

Metrorail: It's a crisis, but there is a plan

Damages to the rail infrastructure is what we can see but what about the damages to people’s lives who are unable to get to work or home.

These the words of Western Cape Transport Minister Donald Grant, who says commuters should be the number one priority.

Prasa Acting Group CEO, Cromet Molepo, during a media tour to Metrorail’s notorious Central Line says there is a plan…

The tour comes hours after a test train derailed, shortly before the line would have been reopened after it was closed for more than a week. The closure was due to a labour dispute, following the fatal shooting of an armed security guard and destruction of two substations, that are needed to ensure trains can move.

For years little investment took place in passenger rail, and from the little that was invested some went to the wrong pockets.

Current management inherited a system falling apart and as if that was not enough to deal with, crime and gang related activities in various communities have started to not only affect but spill over onto the tracks.

On 12 January I wrote in an article trains are a national crisis. Prasa for the first time in a statement admitted “national intervention is needed”. A few days later ANC member of the WCPP Standing Committee on Transport, Cameron Dugmore, also said “we should consider the situation a national crisis”.

In another article on 17 January I mention the train system can come to a halt in the province. Vandalism and cable theft already started to spread to other lines, and if nothing is done there will be no movement on any of the lines.

Nana Zenani, spokesperson for Prasa, says if we don’t learn from Bonteheuwel and Khayelitsha the system can collapse.

“It is not only cable theft taking place but vandalism of infrastructure and staff and commuters that are robbed and whose lives are in danger.”

During the Central line media tour, deputy director-general for rail at the department of transport, Mathabatha Mokoena, stop short of saying passenger rail is a national crisis. Instead he admitted passenger rail is in a critical state. According to him DoT is committed to preventing trains coming to a standstill and if needs be budget adjustments will be done and even additional funding be asked from Treasury.

Cosatu in the Western Cape have also express their concern for the safety of commuters. “Everyone should be working together to ensure a safe rail environment,” says Tony Ehrenreich, provincial secretary.

Head of SAPS railway police, Maj.-gen. Michael Mohlala, says they will be working more closely with Metrorail to clampdown on cable thieves.

Mohlala said that in future, cable theft crime scenes will be completely sealed off by forensics officers, fingerprints will be taken and compared with metals sold to scrap metal dealers.

Previously, the crime scenes had been walked over by the repairmen and no clues were left.

When asked about deployment of officers on trains, especially during peak, Mohlala said he already requested that deployment of officers be done in accordance to the needs of the rail operator.

Most notably absent was not only City of Cape Town Mayco Member for Transport, Brett Herron, but also ward councillors in the affected area.

When asked about ward councillors who are the first contact with communities, not being invited, Prasa GCEO said he was not part of organizing committee but asked that all stakeholders be invited.

MEC Grant in his speech made mention of including the city. “We all need to work together and pull in the same direction.”

Chairwoman of the Cape Business Chamber, Janine Myburgh, was present. Prasa appealed to her for the chamber to engage their members, considering the state of the railway service, not to dismiss employees for late arrival because of train delays

When asked if he’s satisfied with and the level of communication to commuters, Molepo before I could complete my question said: “No, I can never be. Not if I look at the amount of complaints”.

There seems to be no clear deadlines for what is planned, nor is Prasa giving more detailsMolepo’s response is: “we cannot reveal the details of our plan. Criminals are clever, they watch TV, listen to radio and read”.

Also read:
* Pyne oor die lyne
* Keer 'n ramp

DA confusion

If the charges against Cape Town Mayor Patricia de Lille is confusing, don't stress. Even senior DA leaders don’t know what is going on, or not going on.

The Democratic Alliance is possibly also scoring own goals with this matter and it could deal the party a raw hand at the polls come #Election2019.

Questions that need answers include:

- Why the silence from senior party members?
- If there is proof of corruption why has Mmusi Maimane not visited a police station, to allow the authorities to investigate the allegations?- Why is there a lack of transparency? - If there are discrepancies in the report, which was highlighted, why present a flawed report?- The tender irregularities are regarding the buses. Why is the mayoral committee member for transport not mentioned? Surely if you the political head of a department you meet with your ED and ask questions, if you pick up things are not what they should be?- Bowman Gilfillan concluded that Patricia De Lille is guilty of forwarding City of Cape Town reports to the DA Leader. Mmusi Maimane himself have said this is not true. This makes one wonder can we believe the rest of the content in the BG-report?- The DA has been preaching separation of power between party and state. Yet these events involve the party in state processes [one clear example is a statement on 14 December 2017 that reads: The DA prides itself on excellent governance standards, guided by the values of accountability and transparency. For this reason, the Leader directed the caucus of the COCT to establish an independent investigation to probe these allegations.]- The DA boast and used the City of Cape Town in their election campaigns as the benchmark for good governance, that is corruption free. Why is the person leading that group being accused of serious allegations, why is there now management and governance-related challenges?
Read extract of special City of Cape Town Council meeting resolutions of Friday 5th January 2018 here.

Perhaps to try and put the above questions in context: towards the end of 2017 three things happened:

(1) A public war of words took place between the Mayor and her Mayoral Committee member for safety and security, JP Smith. At the centre of the spat is the disbanding of the City’s special investigation unit – that resorted under Smith.(2) From the above spat; news broke of security upgrades at the Mayor’s private residence, when Smith in a letter to party leaders Mmusi Maimane and James Selfe pointed to speculation that security alterations at De Lille’s home were made illegally.(3) Craig Kesson, executive director (ED) in the Directorate of the Mayor, implicated the mayor in serious allegations concerning two senior staff members. See Affidavit

De Lille says she has proof she paid for the upgrades from her own pocket, while Speaker Dirk Smit is on the record for saying security upgrades were all done within the legal framework.

In October the DA announced De Lille and Smith, who is also the DA City of Cape Town Caucus Leader and Deputy, were put on special leave from all political party activities. It was also announced a subcommittee will investigate the political management and governance situation in the City of Cape Town. Read statement

Following an affidavit from Kesson two separate issues transpired:

(i) The City of Cape Town Council decided to launch an independent investigation into the serious allegations against senior staff members, and(ii) The DA welcomed above investigation and express their confidence in it.

In November the DA issued another statement saying, “it is important to note that the allegations involve serious questions of good governance and maladministration”. It called members to order by saying “we call on all those who have the City and the DA’s best interests at heart to focus on supporting and co-operating with the”. But stop short of mentioning any names. Read Statement

Ten days before Christmas the party issued another statement saying the subcommittee completed its work and “found sufficient management and governance-related challenges in the DA’s City of Cape Town caucus, negatively impacting the City’s mandate to govern efficiently”.
It also suspended De Lille, pending the outcome of the independent investigation and asked De Lille to submit reasons why she should not resign as Mayor.

What remains a mystery is as what was De Lille suspended, as she was already on special leave from party activities and the party cannot suspend her as Mayor.

Section 58 and 59, read together with section 26, 27 and 28 stipulated when a Mayor and councillor vacate office.

Chairperson of the DA Federal Council James Selfe confirmed to City Press the mayor made her submissions and that this would be considered at a federal executive meeting.

A decision will be made, despite ongoing investigations by the city, he added.

“Our inclination is not whether the mayor has done any right or wrong. The issue that the federal executive have to decide is whether the DA has confidence in her and her ability to run the city and to manage the caucus.”

Selfe added if a decision is made that De Lille should resign, she will be informed accordingly. "If she refuses to do so, we will have to instruct the DA City of Cape Town caucus to support a motion of no confidence in her.”

The City of Cape Town is not the only headache the leadership sit with, numerous other caucuses have their challenges.

In October the DA removed their deputy mayor in Knysna, Peter Myers, in a vote of no confidence – this because he spoke out against incidents of maladministration.
In December four George mayoral committee members [Mercia Draghoender, Belrina Cornelius, Gert Niehaus and Johan Stander] were removed and the Speaker Iona Kritzinger and Chief Whip Michael Nyakati are to move to the mayco in a drastic reshuffle.

Then there’s the courtchallenge by DA MPL Lennit Max, after losing the provincial leadership, citing vote rigging. There is the possibility of the courts ordering a re-run of the provincial congress.

The DA’s Federal Congress is also set to take place in April/May and it is expected Mmusi Maimane will stand for a re-election. Leaders and their demographics elected at this congress will be important for the DA, as the party prepares to go to the Union Buildings in 2019 (but the congress and whether the DA will get the keys to the Union Buildings is an opinion for another day).

Dissolve: Making South Africa Great Again

Prior to Woman’s Day South Africa saw opposition parties unite, speaking like one voice, calling on the democratically elected Jacob Zuma to step down as President. A motion of no confidence – the 8th since 2009 – even managed to get 177 votes*.

Less than 48 hours after the DA sponsored MONC failed the party informed the Speaker of the National Assembly that they will table a motion to dissolve Parliament. 

The consequence of such a motion succeeding is a General Election.
Amongst the reasons cited for the motion is the National Assembly no longer representing the will of the people, failing to hold President Jacob Zuma accountable and failing in its duties to uphold the Constitution.
Whether you agree or disagree with the DA and this motion, you have to acknowledge the length the party would go in holding Parliament accountable. 

The DA’s intentions might be pure but it is quite evident the leadership is listening to advisers in the office and not activist in the street. From online scanning it looks as if many of the party’s public representatives, across the three spheres, have expressed support for such a motion – as one would probably expect loyal DA public representatives to do – it is DA supporters and activist, those foot soldiers walking door-to-door everyday who are not in favour of this latest DA-sponsored motion.
On the ground people want to know what besides only talking about Zuma and what he is doing wrong is the DA doing about racism, youth unemployment, crime, gangsterism, land reform, housing, hate crime, etc.

One should also not underestimate your voter and say where we govern, we govern well. In the City of Cape Town residents are unhappy at high electricity prices. Despite governing the Western Cape for 8 years and many of the municipalities for more than five years there is no integrated public transport system (besides George). Very little to no economic opportunities also exist for young people in especially rural towns. Appointments in DA-led council are also mostly individuals from outside the municipal borders and seldom young people, but mostly those with years of experience (this can be good and bad).
One DA supporter sums this up as ‘why can the party not focus on where it governs and build on the gains’.

Political parties have also not reacted favourable to the proposed motion.
The Inkhata Freedom Party (IFP) says the motion is misplaced, misguided, reckless and irresponsible.
Freedom Front Plus (FF+) says it is opportunist. Dr. Pieter Groenewald says the DA must be careful or their behaviour might benefit and strengthen the Zuma faction within the ANC. “Voters will start to get discouraged because their expectation that Zuma will be oust is not met and this will result in voters becoming apolitical and won’t vote in 2019.”
Congress of the People (Cope) says as parties working in collaboration on issues of national importance they have never discussed such a motion. “We believe in supremacy of the constitution and respect the democratic electoral process and its current cycle,” says Mosiuoa Lekota.
The African National Congress (ANC) believes the motion confirms what the party has been says in the MONC debate this is an attempt by the DA at regime change through parliament.
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) says it already approached the DA in a move to have Parliament dissolved and was rejected and will thus not support the motion.
United Democratic Movement (UDM) says of importance is the readiness of the IEC for the 2019 National and Provincial Elections. Bantu Holomisa says the IEC needs to capture voters’ addresses before the Constitutional Court deadline of June 2018. “The IEC should move with speed to ensure that the voters’ roll is cleaned. We need to ensure that the 2019 Elections are credible, free and fair.”

For the DA’s motion to succeed it needs 201 votes. The party itself only has 89 seats and parties mentioned above: ANC: 249, EFF: 25, IFP: 10, UDM: 4, FF+: 4 and Cope: 3. 
Considering the ANC’s numerical dominance (alone), it is highly unlikely this motion will pass. What is also important to keep in mind is that the few ANC MPs who were bewitched Tuesday was unhappy with Jacob Zuma as President and not with the ANC-led government.

One cannot help but wonder why with such a big move, where you need the support of others, was there no consultation with them prior to your announcement. 
DA Leader Mmusi Maimane himself has said it looks highly likely that a coalition government might occupy the Union Buildings after 2019. With that in mind, would that not require a good working relationship now already?

Should this motion succeed and we have the election, there is no guarantee that those ANC voters upset at current events and factions in the governing party will vote for the DA. There is a bigger possibility that the EFF will gain ANC voters. One should also ask will the DA accept the outcome, whether it is majority voting for ANC again or DA shifting to third largest party.

In my humble opinion our opposition should not be too optimistic about the cracks showing in the governing party. Instead of trying to dissolve Parliament, our opposition should present Mzansi with a clear plan and not just say we will make South Africa Great Again. 



The 177 votes is significant considering the 12 opposition parties in the National Assembly together hold 151 seats. On the day of the vote, there was one vacancy in the opposition benches and two were on sick leave. Furthermore one MP indicated he won’t be voting more the motion and another also hinted at that. Having said that and considering 9 MPs abstained, one draws the conclusion about 35 of 249 ANC MPs supported the motion.

Is free Wi-Fi good or bad for Metrorail

Metrorail announced that it would be rolling out free Wi-Fi on Cape Town station later this month and soon after that on the Southern line, before extending this to other lines. This benefit comes despite the crippling service where daily you hear of delays. I was asked do I agree with the Wi-Fi benefit.

This is my answer:

We should admit that yes Metrorail Western Cape is in the ICU and the service will not get better overnight (okay within three to six or even 12months). The lack of service is something I mentioned in a previous blog: Visiting critical but not stable Metrorail

While one can do the blame-game, this will not better the service and that is what should receive attention.

Metrorail Western Cape cannot promise a reliable service within 2014, but they can promise better communication with and to commuters with dedicated staff. They can also promise to take atleast once a week a train in peak-time to understand the frustration of commuters. 

Al read: Another day Another delay 

Now about Wi-Fi:

Data cost in the country is expensive, no matter which network provider you use. Anyone with a smartphone, using data will welcome free Wi-Fi.

Considering the delays and most people make use of social networks like bbm, whatsapp, Facebook and Twitter – if you late because your train is delay or has been cancelled and you need to take another one, you will now atleast not have to make use of your own data but the free Wi-Fi that Metrorail is providing, to inform your loved ones that you will be late and give an estimated time of when they can expect you.

I would think that students would be happy about this announcement as they can now download music with the free Wi-Fi and even movies.

Mthura Swartz, outgoing regional manager Metrorail Western Cape, explains
the Metrorail Wi-Fi

So do I agree with it?

If it’s Metrorail’s way of keeping commuters quiet? Then without a second thought, NO!
If it’s their way to try and compensate commuters? I agree and disagree. I agree because they want to compensate commuters but disagree for not keeping ticket prices the same in the current financial year due to the service being critical.

If it’s Metrorail’s way of admitting the digital world is expanding and want to give commuters added value? Then I agree.

Wi-Fi is not and can never be a substitute for the poor service, but Metrorail should be commended for this benefit that commuters will be enjoying. My only hope now is that Metrorail will better their communication and customer service.

Classify me as South African

This morning our complex had no water... The social media addict I am sent out a tweet to the City of Cape Town and I tagged Gisela Kaiser, executive director for Utility Services at the City of Cape Town, ald. Patricia De Lille, executive mayor of Cape Town and Helen Zille, premier of the Western Cape.

Not that I owe anyone an explanation, I tagged them because it is the director of the relevant department and de Lille and Zille are our public representatives and political head of the city and province.

Kaiser responded swiftly, an official called me and explained what happened and both apologised.

Zille also responded on the tweet saying she would ask Gisela to respond immediately. This response to my tweet, got the following response: "black citizens in your city are getting kicked out of their homes and the gvt. must fix it. But whites get helped immediately?" 

The person then said "I assumed Earl was white because he had his issue fixed "immediately" in the WC. Was I wrong?"

I replied on the first: why must race be an issue? I am a South African citizen. On the second I said we shouldn't always assume. My race should not be an issue.

I understand and respect our country's historic background, but feel despite this and 20years into democracy - race should not be the first thing that pops up.

I doubt if in other countries you would ask what is his/her race, you would rather ask what is the person's nationality.

I thought of this I am coloured and blessed when reading the tweets. 

Yes I am coloured and proud to be coloured, but please classify me as South African!