Saffers

[Sards]

A Milnerton boy swimming for South Africa at lunch time in the Olympics...


It's going to be fun changing the green and white for blue and white for my boys

[Chilli]

A Milnerton boy swimming for South Africa at lunch time in the Olympics...


It's going to be fun changing the green and white for blue and white for my boys

Are you leaving for Greece?

[Rinkals]

If the DA attack a measure which is seen as beneficial to blacks, I don't see how they can expect blacks to support them. Conversely, I don't think BEE is sufficiently important for white voters to make it worthwhile.

Your entire position is predicated on this statement, when nobody said anything about "attacking" policies.
It's all about framing the DA's position for or against any policy correctly and concisely and being able to communicate that position to the voters, in among all the noise generated by social and traditional media.
Not all of their positions are going to be popular, they need to be okay with that, and find a way to frame their position that polls better.

If they engage with the ANC and EFF trolls and try their luck at being populist demagogues, they will lose the game and their voters.
As with most things deciding what NOT to do is just as important as deciding what you are going to do.

No, it's not my entire position.

I have repeatedly said that the DA needs to concentrate on their record for 'good governance'.

However, they are undermined by Zille. If they could remove her from the party or even muzzle her to some extent, they may have a chance.

Make no mistake, they need to attract votes from the other race groups if they are to remain in contention for Government. Or even for the designated opposition.

[Big Nipper]

Zille has cost the DA my vote, and i am pretty damn sure there are a lot of millenial white folk who feel the same. So they are leaking white and black votes, but yet Blake and Os are convinced they will gain votes in the next election? From where?

[assfly]

Zille has cost the DA my vote, and i am pretty damn sure there are a lot of millenial white folk who feel the same. So they are leaking white and black votes, but yet Blake and Os are convinced they will gain votes in the next election? From where?

If you won't vote for DA, who would you vote for? I'm a little bit out of touch with local politics in SA so I'm genuinely interested.

[Big Nipper]

Zille has cost the DA my vote, and i am pretty damn sure there are a lot of millenial white folk who feel the same. So they are leaking white and black votes, but yet Blake and Os are convinced they will gain votes in the next election? From where?

If you won't vote for DA, who would you vote for? I'm a little bit out of touch with local politics in SA so I'm genuinely interested.

It is municipal elections, and with Independent candidates running now I am going to look for options from that list

[OomStruisbaai]

A no DA vote is a vote for this
IOL

Juju sounds warning for Cyril, targets Johann Rupert
The verbals didn’t end there, either. Juju gladly accused Ramaphosa of letting Johann Rupert run the country on his behalf, accusing the Stellenbosch magnate of dictating his preferred policy to the ANC. And yet, there was still more to come.
Julius Malema threatened to ‘declare war’ on Cyril Ramaphosa, claiming that he is now ‘completely compromised’. The CIC of the Red Berets didn’t mince his words, and continued to ramp up the rhetoric on Sunday evening:
“I stood up to give him advice before. One bit of advice was that he must listen to his party – the collective, he must stick to the resolutions of his party’s conference, and he should not have a separate kitchen cabinet where matters are discussed with Johann Rupert… because then, Rupert’s input overrules both the NEC and the cabinet.”
“We are talking to someone who is completely compromised, and we think that it is a matter of time before we declare war against [Ramaphosa]. We have seen how he has treated our people, we have seen how he has reacted in the recent activities – and the reaction is of a person who is not interested to change and be on the side of the weak.”

[assfly]

Replace "Ramaphosa" with "Zuma" and "Rupert" with "Gupta" and it's very accurate.

[Calculon]

Zille has cost the DA my vote, and i am pretty damn sure there are a lot of millenial white folk who feel the same. So they are leaking white and black votes, but yet Blake and Os are convinced they will gain votes in the next election? From where?

What specifically has she said or done?

[Big Nipper]

Zille has cost the DA my vote, and i am pretty damn sure there are a lot of millenial white folk who feel the same. So they are leaking white and black votes, but yet Blake and Os are convinced they will gain votes in the next election? From where?

What specifically has she said or done?

Have you seen her on Twitter? Constantly attacking any person not in line with her as woke, any person who disagrees is "virtue signalling". She has constantly tried to be edgy in her resolute defense of colonialism, and is constantly fawning over the right wing pod bros (Renaldo Gouws, Willem Petzer etc etc).

She admits to being "redpilled", and is now just a shock jock in the same breath as Gareth Cliff.

[Calculon]

Zille has cost the DA my vote, and i am pretty damn sure there are a lot of millenial white folk who feel the same. So they are leaking white and black votes, but yet Blake and Os are convinced they will gain votes in the next election? From where?

What specifically has she said or done?

Have you seen her on Twitter? Constantly attacking any person not in line with her as woke, any person who disagrees is "virtue signalling". She has constantly tried to be edgy in her resolute defense of colonialism, and is constantly fawning over the right wing pod bros (Renaldo Gouws, Willem Petzer etc etc).

She admits to being "redpilled", and is now just a shock jock in the same breath as Gareth Cliff.

I rarely go on twitter and don't follow her on it. However, I am aware of her comments on colonialism, and her response to criticism of those comments. It is a gross mischaracterization to claim she resolutely defends colonialism.

[Blake]

I have repeatedly said that the DA needs to concentrate on their record for 'good governance'.

For local elections, sure. For national elections that doesn't poll well. Not here or any other country.
National elections are not about track records, they are about vision and explaining how your plan/policy to tackle major problems are better than the next guys.
You can only really use track record as weapon to show how your opponent has failed time and time again to implement anything of substance. That's about it.

However, they are undermined by Zille. If they could remove her from the party or even muzzle her to some extent, they may have a chance.

Make no mistake, they need to attract votes from the other race groups if they are to remain in contention for Government. Or even for the designated opposition.

I don't care about Zille or attracting other race groups to the party. I don't want the DA to play that game. The fact that Zille is for some reason "the face of the party" is part of the problem and a symptom of the backslide.
If they have to lose voters in the short term to correct course, I'm happy with that. As long as they remain in power in the Western Cape, I'm happy.
I don't want to the DA to play identity politics with the ANC and EFF, nor do I want become another party driven by personalities like the ANC and the EFF.
I want them to be a bureaucratic machine; rooted in good governance and a solid ideological foundation. Whenever Zille (or any other member) says or does something stupid on Twitter, it should be completely inconsequential because the DA has a fixed set of policy positions and a track record of implementing them and governing cleanly; and that is all anybody should care about. All the rest is just noise.

Do I wish Zille would get off Twitter? Absolutely, but then again, everybody should. It's a toxic cesspool that adds little to no value to society.

[average joe]

The DA is seen as a white party by the black voters. Even when they had a black leader they were seen as a white party. Mazibuko and Maimane was called puppet's, clever black's, coconut's. All the ANC and the EFF does is tell the constituents that if the DA win they'll lose their grants and everyone from the young voter who has children to old Gogo's will make sure they don't draw that cross on the DA's box.

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

[Sandstorm]

The DA is seen as a white party by the black voters. Even when they had a black leader they were seen as a white party. Mazibuko and Maimane was called puppet's, clever black's, coconut's. All the ANC and the EFF does is tell the constituents that if the DA win they'll lose their grants and everyone from the young voter who has children to old Gogo's will make sure they don't draw that cross on the DA's box.

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

You just said people vote ANC for cash, not nationalism.

[average joe]

The DA is seen as a white party by the black voters. Even when they had a black leader they were seen as a white party. Mazibuko and Maimane was called puppet's, clever black's, coconut's. All the ANC and the EFF does is tell the constituents that if the DA win they'll lose their grants and everyone from the young voter who has children to old Gogo's will make sure they don't draw that cross on the DA's box.

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

You just said people vote ANC for cash, not nationalism.

The majority in this country are poor black people. If you want to win you need their vote. Unfortunately they are mostly uneducated and easily manipulated. They don't care for corrupt politics and party policies as long as it seems to benefit them in some way. Even though they are drawing on the short end, R350 a month is still better than nothing. It's the difference of having a bag of pap and not having any. But they would also rather trust one of their own to lead them even if he's obviously corrupt. They will never trust some "evil white colonist" or someone they consider a lackey.

[Blake]

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

Agree on this.

I'd be astonished if the DA ever grows beyond 35%. That in itself will be amazing and only likely if they get a once in a generation black leader that is able to deflect any accusations that he/she is just window dressing pushed to the front of the queue by white DA leadership to woo black voters. It will have to be somebody that is there on merit and can credibly articulate the DA policy positions. But for that to be possible, those positions have to be consistent first, even if some of those positions are unpopular.

We as a country desperately need for the ANC to fracture down the middle. For the Ramaphosa-faction and the Zuma/Ace-faction to tear the ANC in half.
The DA will be able to work with the Ramaphosa guys on some issues and along with the other parties in parliament hold the Zuma/Ace faction and EFF to account, at least theoretically.
But al long as the ANC keeps all the matters "in house" for the sake of "the alliance" and maintaining a super majority, there is really no hope of ever holding anybody to account politically. You have to do everything legally, and that is very slow and very expensive.

[Sards]

Silver in women's surfing for Bianca....unbelievable.
Knocked out a 7 world title Aussie to get to the final.
The Gilmores are Aussie legends in surfing

[Chilli]

https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article ... mmunities/

[_Os_]

Fuck me, Ox, that is deluded!

"didn't have someone as strong as Zille to boss the coalition"

It's common knowledge Mashaba got steamrollered by the EFF in Joburg, Mashaba ended up doing what he was told by the EFF. The EFF ended up dictating appointments. The EFF was much smaller than the DA in Joburg.

Zille successfully led a coalition of eight parties, that implemented almost the entire DA programme in CT after 2006. She even immediately starting removing ANC cadres from the city administration going to court to do it.

Of course Joburg would've been better off with someone like Zille. Instead they got an EFF lackey.

Absolutely deluded.

Zille would have polarised the coalition to the point where it would have ground to a halt. What do you think happened to Trollip in PE?

Zille was only able to control Cape Town because she had the numbers to do it and the cooperation of de Lille.

Your comparisons don't make any sense.

This is nonsense.

The DA had 41% in CT in 2006, with the ID there was a majority. But if Zille is unable to make coalitions and just immediately polarises everyone, then how come she made a coalition with De Lille and other parties? And look what happened to De Lille once Zille had no power, she was forced out just like there was an effort to force Zille out at the time.

I don't rate Trollip, but what happened to him in NMB was very clearly the ANC/EFF/UDM were only interested in spoiling so the DA couldn't do anything. The best move was to try and make it work regardless, and walk away once it was clearly a mess. Then just let the ANC/EFF/UDM make an even bigger mess. Which is more or less what happened in the end. For goodness sake, a DA councillor was physically assaulted by an EFF councillor in the actual legislative building live on TV (he had a water jug smashed onto his head and was hospitalised), and the EFF councillor did jail time. There's nothing you can do with that. Mashaba was worse, he started taking instructions from the EFF. The lesson in all that is never go into coalitions with the EFF, some in the DA said this at the time, but had no power then. Yet another thing where the outcome was obvious beforehand, but years had to be wasted on it to prove it wasn't a good move.

When people try to move their criticism of Zille away from willfully misrepresenting tweets, to actual matters of substance, it never works. Clearly out of everyone in the DA she hasn't failed at coalitions.

[Blake]

The DA had 41% in CT in 2006, with the ID there was a majority. But if Zille is unable to make coalitions and just immediately polarises everyone, then how come she made a coalition with De Lille and other parties? And look what happened to De Lille once Zille had no power, she was forced out just like there was an effort to force Zille out at the time.

I don't rate Trollip, but what happened to him in NMB was very clearly the ANC/EFF/UDM were only interested in spoiling so the DA couldn't do anything. The best move was to try and make it work regardless, and walk away once it was clearly a mess. Then just let the ANC/EFF/UDM make an even bigger mess. Which is more or less what happened in the end. For goodness sake, a DA councillor was physically assaulted by an EFF councillor in the actual legislative building live on TV (he had a water jug smashed onto his head and was hospitalised), and the EFF councillor did jail time. There's nothing you can do with that. Mashaba was worse, he started taking instructions from the EFF. The lesson in all that is never go into coalitions with the EFF, some in the DA said this at the time, but had no power then. Yet another thing where the outcome was obvious beforehand, but years had to be wasted on it to prove it wasn't a good move.

When people try to move their criticism of Zille away from willfully misrepresenting tweets, to actual matters of substance, it never works. Clearly out of everyone in the DA she hasn't failed at coalitions.

Coalitions in SA politics have been very messy because most of the political parties are so immature and their foundations are so shaky that they have no real guiding principles.
For the DA they are a necessary evil, just to get their foot in the door, and most importantly, get the ANC's hands out of the cookie jar. Once they can get their hands on the books and the contacts and start cancelling the dodgy tenders, then they can turn off the taps of patronage and start competing on even footing.

Their coalition "partners" are often seduced by the ANC to jump ship like the turncoats they are, but more often that not, the damage was already done, and in subsequent elections the DA (usually) gets a little stronger and takes the town back in a more decisive way after the voters have had a small taste of proper governance and the some voters that had previously stopped voting because unseating the ANC seemed impossible come crawling out of the woodwork.

It says a lot that the DA has were able to absorb and kill the ID off after their "merger".

[_Os_]

Yes: they should keep quiet about BEE, if they can. It's an area that, primarily because of Zille's comments in the past (and some of the leadership) , the DA can be easily attacked.

I say again, in case you missed it: whites generally don't care about BEE, so even if the DA were to commit to abolishing it, I doubt they would pick up a single vote.

On the other hand, blacks would leave in droves (if they haven't already left).

If the DA's purpose is to just harvest the white vote, then they are going to have a hard time competing with parties like FF+ et al who are a lot more vocal on racial issues and protecting white minorities.

The DA needs to attract a bigger portion of the black vote (ignoring your contention that it doesn't exist) to remain relevant, and attacking BEE is not going to do it.

I say again that BEE i not a perfect system, and, if the DA could propose a workable replacement that could be seen as valuable for the black communities, they may have a chance, but opening the system up to market forces won't cut it, I'm afraid.

The DA are committed to abolishing BEE, that is their position on it.

Your problem is you're committed to seeing things only in terms of groups. Like the "black vote" is one of those old school massive charity cheques you have strap to a roof rack to take home, and are now only used for man of the match awards in SA rugby. And that's it, that's the single "black vote". But that's not how it works, there is no "black vote", same as everyone chatting here doesn't agree. By-elections haven't shown DA losing black voters, they've shown some decline in coloured and Indian support in Gauteng and the Western Cape for different reasons.

The DA is never going to win every black voter, the ANC can't even do that. In the electoral system that SA has the norm is the largest parties having 20%-30%. That's where SA is heading.

I think you don't really appreciate the extent of BEE's failure. If you lie now and pretend that it benefits anyone other than a tiny ANC elite, no one will thank you in the future. If the DA supports BEE, it'll destroy itself and in its place there will be people who don't vote and an FF+ larger than it is now but smaller than the DA is now supported mostly by Afrikaans speakers (both white and coloured). Then not long after that a version of the same old DA/DP/PFP just comes back again.

Long ago the United Party ran a slogan called "apartheid with justice", it lied to try and win Afrikaner voters. Of course the two things were total opposites, it was a stupid slogan that summed up where that party was well. That quickly destroyed the United Party. Everyone voting then were not the intended victims of apartheid, but down the United Party went anyway, it's own voters stopped voting for it and those who supported apartheid just kept voting Nat. It's not wise to think that people will vote for a party supporting policies they know to be a failure and immoral.

[_Os_]

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

How SA politics has worked so far, is every generation there's a dominant party, and that party implements its full programme. It's then replaced by a party with a similar but also completely different programme.

The first lot were Smuts and the SAP then the United Party, when you boil it all down their main policy was to be pro-British Empire in the hope it would benefit SA, it was mostly a failure. The second lot were the Afrikaner nationalists and the Nat's apartheid, a giant failure. The third lot were the African nationalists and the ANC's BEE and other policies, again it's turning out to be mostly a failure.

So far history says if a party is in second place when the switch happens to a new governing party, then that party ends up leading for a generation. So far the history also says always the governing party ends up mostly a failure.

The ANC is clearly not interested in applying the brakes as it drives over the cliff. Ramphosa got talked up, still lost the ANC votes in 2019 and still no reform either. So if no party ever challenges the DA, then one way or another (probably in a coalition) the DA it is.

[Blake]

The DA are committed to abolishing BEE, that is their position on it.

Are they though? Admittedly I haven't read their policy documents in a couple of years, and maybe what they are proposing is so radically different from what the current BEE legislation is that it can't really be called BEE, but from what I recall they are not opposed to it, just apposed to it being employed using racial metrics, correct.
Their position is that race is a lazy proxy for being "disadvantaged" and that data and systems have improved to such an extent that more reliable and detailed metrics should be used, such as tax records, direct employment (to prevent fronting) etc. and that black elites and family members are exploiting that loophole.

So their policy position is still for government tenders to way weighted to smaller (likely black owned) businesses, but that:
a.) There may be no familial relationships between those awarding the tenders and those winning it.
b.) Relationship to anybody in government needs to be declared.
c.) Race is shouldn't be the sole or most important metric, but there should still be a weighted value placed on being disadvantaged.
d.) Some track record of a running concern in the industry the bid relates to.

Do you also have it as something like that? Or are they scrapping it altogether and just going for lowest bidder with a track record?

[average joe]

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

How SA politics has worked so far, is every generation there's a dominant party, and that party implements its full programme. It's then replaced by a party with a similar but also completely different programme.

The first lot were Smuts and the SAP then the United Party, when you boil it all down their main policy was to be pro-British Empire in the hope it would benefit SA, it was mostly a failure. The second lot were the Afrikaner nationalists and the Nat's apartheid, a giant failure. The third lot were the African nationalists and the ANC's BEE and other policies, again it's turning out to be mostly a failure.

So far history says if a party is in second place when the switch happens to a new governing party, then that party ends up leading for a generation. So far the history also says always the governing party ends up mostly a failure.

The ANC is clearly not interested in applying the brakes as it drives over the cliff. Ramphosa got talked up, still lost the ANC votes in 2019 and still no reform either. So if no party ever challenges the DA, then one way or another (probably in a coalition) the DA it is.

Bringing up ancient history were black people had no say won't help you now. Fact is the largest demographic in this country is impoverished blacks. You are going nowhere with out them and they will never vote DA. I wont be surprised if the DA loses ground in the next few elections. Especially after Steenhuisen outings about the DA joining the ANC if Ramaphosa sticks around.

[_Os_]

The DA is a peepee party, always have been always will be. They are doomed to be the opposition and will never lead this country. They have never won an election, not in the apartheid years and not now because they are a liberal party and this is a country with a nationalist identity.

How SA politics has worked so far, is every generation there's a dominant party, and that party implements its full programme. It's then replaced by a party with a similar but also completely different programme.

The first lot were Smuts and the SAP then the United Party, when you boil it all down their main policy was to be pro-British Empire in the hope it would benefit SA, it was mostly a failure. The second lot were the Afrikaner nationalists and the Nat's apartheid, a giant failure. The third lot were the African nationalists and the ANC's BEE and other policies, again it's turning out to be mostly a failure.

So far history says if a party is in second place when the switch happens to a new governing party, then that party ends up leading for a generation. So far the history also says always the governing party ends up mostly a failure.

The ANC is clearly not interested in applying the brakes as it drives over the cliff. Ramphosa got talked up, still lost the ANC votes in 2019 and still no reform either. So if no party ever challenges the DA, then one way or another (probably in a coalition) the DA it is.

Bringing up ancient history were black people had no say won't help you now. Fact is the largest demographic in this country is impoverished blacks. You are going nowhere with out them and they will never vote DA. I wont be surprised if the DA loses ground in the next few elections. Especially after Steenhuisen outings about the DA joining the ANC if Ramaphosa sticks around.

But you said nationalists always win, the history doesn't only say that.

The most simple analysis tends to hold up best. In a democracy when things get bad for people, they use their vote to remove what is making their life bad, that's how democracy works. It's taking longer in SA because as you say half the population lives in total poverty (it takes a lot for them to get even worse off, because they're at the bottom already). In ANC voting areas, when things get worse for them they don't keep voting ANC they either stop voting, vote for an opposition party, or if they're older and remember apartheid keep voting for the ANC out of loyalty.

You've bought into the "giant charity cheque sized ballot paper that's the single vote shared by all black people" logic. Most South Africans eligible to vote didn't vote in 2019, the ANC total was 10 million out of 37 million. The DA doesn't need to win the vote of every single black person, something which is impossible anyway, even just 1 or 2 million would massively change things. And the DA can only grow and do that if it's totally honest about what the situation is sugarcoating nothing, and clearly says how it'll fix what it can. That's the only way to win people's trust.

If I got into a time machine and went back to the 1980s or 1970s. You would be telling me Afrikaners are hardcore nationalists and will never vote DA/DP/PFP, but plenty of people in the DA/DP/PFP never believed that back then and always kept the door open. Eventually enough people will understand good outcomes are possible without some crazy identity project.

Steenhuisen didn't say the DA would join the ANC. He said the DA would vote with Ramaphosa/whoever if there was a credible reform package put to parliament, so even if ANC MPs tried to rebel there was a strong chance it wouldn't matter. But Ramaphosa will not do that because he puts the ANC above the country, and doing that means splitting the ANC.

[average joe]

But you said nationalists always win, the history doesn't only say that.

The most simple analysis tends to hold up best. In a democracy when things get bad for people, they use their vote to remove what is making their life bad, that's how democracy works. It's taking longer in SA because as you say half the population lives in total poverty (it takes a lot for them to get even worse off, because they're at the bottom already). In ANC voting areas, when things get worse for them they don't keep voting ANC they either stop voting, vote for an opposition party, or if they're older and remember apartheid keep voting for the ANC out of loyalty.

You've bought into the "giant charity cheque sized ballot paper that's the single vote shared by all black people" logic. Most South Africans eligible to vote didn't vote in 2019, the ANC total was 10 million out of 37 million. The DA doesn't need to win the vote of every single black person, something which is impossible anyway, even just 1 or 2 million would massively change things. And the DA can only grow and do that if it's totally honest about what the situation is sugarcoating nothing, and clearly says how it'll fix what it can. That's the only way to win people's trust.

If I got into a time machine and went back to the 1980s or 1970s. You would be telling me Afrikaners are hardcore nationalists and will never vote DA/DP/PFP, but plenty of people in the DA/DP/PFP never believed that back then and always kept the door open. Eventually enough people will understand good outcomes are possible without some crazy identity project.

Steenhuisen didn't say the DA would join the ANC. He said the DA would vote with Ramaphosa/whoever if there was a credible reform package put to parliament, so even if ANC MPs tried to rebel there was a strong chance it wouldn't matter. But Ramaphosa will not do that because he puts the ANC above the country, and doing that means splitting the ANC.

Don't pull a Rinkydinky on me Ox. I mean what I say and not what you think is implied. I never said the Nats always won, I said this country has a nationalist identity. As in the recent present time that I live in, not a hundred years ago. And I've not bought into your stupid "giant charity cheque" analogy ether. I'm saying that if you want to win you need poor black people to vote for you. The DA wont get any of those votes.

The older loyalty voters have all but died out, there's not many of them left. What is left only knows apartheid from what they are told "evil white men oppressed and murdered your grandparents" Those younger voters tend to listen to more radical ideals, free education, redistribution without compensation, a white man should never hit a black man, Africa belongs to Africans, white history should be eradicated, education should be decolonized, white monopoly capitol, and the list goes on.

As long as the impression is there that the DA is a white party they wont get any of those votes, and yes they are seen as a white party, even when they had black leaders they were seen as a white party.

[_Os_]

The DA are committed to abolishing BEE, that is their position on it.

Are they though? Admittedly I haven't read their policy documents in a couple of years, and maybe what they are proposing is so radically different from what the current BEE legislation is that it can't really be called BEE, but from what I recall they are not opposed to it, just apposed to it being employed using racial metrics, correct.
Their position is that race is a lazy proxy for being "disadvantaged" and that data and systems have improved to such an extent that more reliable and detailed metrics should be used, such as tax records, direct employment (to prevent fronting) etc. and that black elites and family members are exploiting that loophole.

So their policy position is still for government tenders to way weighted to smaller (likely black owned) businesses, but that:
a.) There may be no familial relationships between those awarding the tenders and those winning it.
b.) Relationship to anybody in government needs to be declared.
c.) Race is shouldn't be the sole or most important metric, but there should still be a weighted value placed on being disadvantaged.
d.) Some track record of a running concern in the industry the bid relates to.

Do you also have it as something like that? Or are they scrapping it altogether and just going for lowest bidder with a track record?

BEE is supposedly about uplifting the poor, but it's really scheme that shifts resources from one elite to another, it's legalised corruption. Everyone knows this. It's a very dangerous policy because it's incapable of improving anything, and over time it's making things more unstable. That's what needs to be scrapped.

The DA don't support using race as a criteria for redress schemes, and favour using socioeconomic indicators, you are correct. The new policy is that the BEE scorecard is replaced by the UN's sustainable development goals (for example when a corporate is bidding for tenders presumably), so it would be a scorecard purely geared towards what was being done for the vast majority of South Africans with elite concerns like ownership not featuring, the point (literally) would be to uplift poor people. This stops the situations like Ramaphosa's son, the son of a BEE billionaire who went to HIlton one of the most expensive private schools in the country, benefiting from BEE schemes himself (unless presumably he is able to show he's significantly benefiting people under a new sustainable development goals scorecard, but that would be the same rules applied to everyone). I think one of the reasons the DA chose this option (it's not stated, this is me guessing) rather than a total free market option, is because they know the state is fucked and even if they formed a majority government it wouldn't be fixed overnight, so the state doesn't have much capacity to do any development and one way or another the private sector will have to help.

The new DA policy also returns the focus to the solutions from the Tony Leon era and before. That means, social policy that focuses on eliminating inequalities in opportunities as much as possible especially in education (input side) but also in things like making bad neighborhoods safer, and putting growth first in economic policy (output side). Someone cannot better themselves if they have no skills, live in a crime ridden area, and the economy isn't growing. So in a sense the entire policy platform becomes about eliminating the legacy of apartheid. To have real impact it'll take much longer than one election cycle, but it's the only real solution.

This is why the DA focus so much on things like scrapping SAA. Money pit, doesn't eliminate any inequalities of opportunity, does nothing for economic growth. It's also why the ANC are obsessed with keeping SAA, like BEE it's about benefiting the ANC elite who get free travel on SAA.

[Blake]

Bringing up ancient history were black people had no say won't help you now. Fact is the largest demographic in this country is impoverished blacks. You are going nowhere with out them and they will never vote DA.

I'm probably naive, but I take issue with statements like these. Anything is possible, and a lot of things in life are cyclical.
Young people are sick and tired of the same old boogeyman tropes that were used by those that govern us. Die rooi gevaar, die swart gevaar...
Gen Z is a very pragmatic generation. They want real solutions to real problems and are tired of leaders pussyfooting around issues.
If the DA can provide frameworks for these solutions, and actually implement them and show results....the stories of their success will ripple through the rest of the country eventually.
It will be most challenging in rural areas, sure, but as those ANC municipalities continue to collapse under mismanagement, and DA influence spreads further and further from Cape Town...I think some (not all) black voters will have a change of heart.

I wont be surprised if the DA loses ground in the next few elections. Especially after Steenhuisen outings about the DA joining the ANC if Ramaphosa sticks around.

It's interpretations like these that make it so difficult for the DA to communicate their positions. Surely voting with the ANC on issues where there is alignment is not a bad thing to get things done?
But because it is so hard to communicate in the modern word, you have the right wingers saying "See, I told you the DA was just the ANC Lite. I'm voting FF+" and on the other hand you have the Zuma faction of the ANC shouting how "Ramaphosa has sold out to the racist DA and white monopoly capital, and is working with them".

The only way to for the DA to get out of this cycle is to stay clean, govern well, and avoid stupid comments in the press...which Zille is admittedly making very difficult with her incessant Tweeting.

[Blake]

The DA are committed to abolishing BEE, that is their position on it.

Are they though? Admittedly I haven't read their policy documents in a couple of years, and maybe what they are proposing is so radically different from what the current BEE legislation is that it can't really be called BEE, but from what I recall they are not opposed to it, just apposed to it being employed using racial metrics, correct.
Their position is that race is a lazy proxy for being "disadvantaged" and that data and systems have improved to such an extent that more reliable and detailed metrics should be used, such as tax records, direct employment (to prevent fronting) etc. and that black elites and family members are exploiting that loophole.

So their policy position is still for government tenders to way weighted to smaller (likely black owned) businesses, but that:
a.) There may be no familial relationships between those awarding the tenders and those winning it.
b.) Relationship to anybody in government needs to be declared.
c.) Race is shouldn't be the sole or most important metric, but there should still be a weighted value placed on being disadvantaged.
d.) Some track record of a running concern in the industry the bid relates to.

Do you also have it as something like that? Or are they scrapping it altogether and just going for lowest bidder with a track record?

BEE is supposedly about uplifting the poor, but it's really scheme that shifts resources from one elite to another, it's legalised corruption. Everyone knows this. It's a very dangerous policy because it's incapable of improving anything, and over time it's making things more unstable. That's what needs to be scrapped.

The DA don't support using race as a criteria for redress schemes, and favour using socioeconomic indicators, you are correct. The new policy is that the BEE scorecard is replaced by the UN's sustainable development goals (for example when a corporate is bidding for tenders presumably), so it would be a scorecard purely geared towards what was being done for the vast majority of South Africans with elite concerns like ownership not featuring, the point (literally) would be to uplift poor people. This stops the situations like Ramaphosa's son, the son of a BEE billionaire who went to HIlton one of the most expensive private schools in the country, benefiting from BEE schemes himself (unless presumably he is able to show he's significantly benefiting people under a new sustainable development goals scorecard, but that would be the same rules applied to everyone). I think one of the reasons the DA chose this option (it's not stated, this is me guessing) rather than a total free market option, is because they know the state is fucked and even if they formed a majority government it wouldn't be fixed overnight, so the state doesn't have much capacity to do any development and one way or another the private sector will have to help.

The new DA policy also returns the focus to the solutions from the Tony Leon era and before. That means, social policy that focuses on eliminating inequalities in opportunities as much as possible especially in education (input side) but also in things like making bad neighborhoods safer, and putting growth first in economic policy (output side). Someone cannot better themselves if they have no skills, live in a crime ridden area, and the economy isn't growing. So in a sense the entire policy platform becomes about eliminating the legacy of apartheid. To have real impact it'll take much longer than one election cycle, but it's the only real solution.

This is why the DA focus so much on things like scrapping SAA. Money pit, doesn't eliminate any inequalities of opportunity, does nothing for economic growth. It's also why the ANC are obsessed with keeping SAA, like BEE it's about benefiting the ANC elite who get free travel on SAA.

Shot. Yep, that's pretty much how I understood it as well and why I'm actually a little optimistic about the DA again. I just don't know how they are going to communicate such a nuanced position to the masses. It's a tricky proposition and they have been quite hamfisted in their comms over the last decade, if not more, starting with "Stop Zuma!"

I've been pretty apathetic over the last 6-8 years ever since the Mazibuko (although I actually rate her) and Mmaimane (don't rate him at all) eras, but I'm seeing some light again. They might not grow the party, but this party and that stands for this, is actually something I can get behind again.

[_Os_]

Don't pull a Rinkydinky on me Ox. I mean what I say and not what you think is implied. I never said the Nats always won, I said this country has a nationalist identity. As in the recent present time that I live in, not a hundred years ago. And I've not bought into your stupid "giant charity cheque" analogy ether. I'm saying that if you want to win you need poor black people to vote for you. The DA wont get any of those votes.

The older loyalty voters have all but died out, there's not many of them left. What is left only knows apartheid from what they are told "evil white men oppressed and murdered your grandparents" Those younger voters tend to listen to more radical ideals, free education, redistribution without compensation, a white man should never hit a black man, Africa belongs to Africans, white history should be eradicated, education should be decolonized, white monopoly capitol, and the list goes on.

As long as the impression is there that the DA is a white party they wont get any of those votes, and yes they are seen as a white party, even when they had black leaders they were seen as a white party.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes most people have a nationalist outlook, but that's the same anywhere. It doesn't mean a nationalist party will always win, the basic rules/conventions of democracy apply to SA just like they do anywhere else people are freely voting. People will vote in their own self interest, once they understand the ANC has failed them they ditch it.

There's still people 50+ years old that remember apartheid well enough. Fuck I'm probably one of the youngest chatting here, and even I remember bits. Polling shows it's this demographic that's the core of ANC support. Polling of younger people puts ANC support well below 50%.

I've accepted your clarification that I got the wrong end of the stick. Now you need to listen again on this next bit, in a PR electoral system like SA has it's extremely unusual for one party to win more than 50%, the 2017 German election result was CDU 26.8%, CSU 6.2%, SPD 20.5%, AfD 12.6%, FDP 10.7%, Linke 9.2%, Grune 8.9%. The ANC winning over 50% is purely a result of apartheid which will not last forever. Once the ANC goes below 50% that's it and no party is getting a majority again. The point of the "stupid giant charity cheque analogy" is that you're talking about "if you want to win", I'm saying that's not possible, only the ANC can get a majority and that'll probably be gone by the end of the 2020s. The other point of the "stupid giant charity cheque analogy" is that the DA is already the third largest black (narrow definition not including coloureds and indians) party in terms of votes, and the second largest in terms of membership and branches. This general idea that a party needs to convince absolutely every black person to vote for them and to do that such a party needs to support crazy shit, is nonsense.

[average joe]

Don't pull a Rinkydinky on me Ox. I mean what I say and not what you think is implied. I never said the Nats always won, I said this country has a nationalist identity. As in the recent present time that I live in, not a hundred years ago. And I've not bought into your stupid "giant charity cheque" analogy ether. I'm saying that if you want to win you need poor black people to vote for you. The DA wont get any of those votes.

The older loyalty voters have all but died out, there's not many of them left. What is left only knows apartheid from what they are told "evil white men oppressed and murdered your grandparents" Those younger voters tend to listen to more radical ideals, free education, redistribution without compensation, a white man should never hit a black man, Africa belongs to Africans, white history should be eradicated, education should be decolonized, white monopoly capitol, and the list goes on.

As long as the impression is there that the DA is a white party they wont get any of those votes, and yes they are seen as a white party, even when they had black leaders they were seen as a white party.

Thanks for the clarification. Yes most people have a nationalist outlook, but that's the same anywhere. It doesn't mean a nationalist party will always win, the basic rules/conventions of democracy apply to SA just like they do anywhere else people are freely voting. People will vote in their own self interest, once they understand the ANC has failed them they ditch it.

There's still people 50+ years old that remember apartheid well enough. Fuck I'm probably one of the youngest chatting here, and even I remember bits. Polling shows it's this demographic that's the core of ANC support. Polling of younger people puts ANC support well below 50%.

I've accepted your clarification that I got the wrong end of the stick. Now you need to listen again on this next bit, in a PR electoral system like SA has it's extremely unusual for one party to win more than 50%, the last German election result was CDU 26.8%, CSU 6.2%, SPD 20.5%, AfD 12.6%, FDP 10.7%, Linke 9.2%, Grune 8.9%. The ANC winning over 50% is purely a result of apartheid which will not last forever. Once the ANC goes below 50% that's it and no party is getting a majority again. The point of the "stupid giant charity cheque analogy" is that you're talking about "if you want to win", I'm saying that's not possible, only the ANC can get a majority and that'll probably be gone by the end of the 2020s. The other point of the "stupid giant charity cheque analogy" is that the DA is already the third largest black (narrow definition not including coloureds and indians) party in terms of votes, and the second largest in terms of membership and branches. This general idea that a party needs to convince absolutely every black person to vote for them and to do that such a party needs to support crazy shit, is nonsense.

How many 50+ voters are there compared to 20, 30, 40 year olds? They're a drop in a very large ocean. I also remember apartheid but I only lived through the very last bits. Hardly the bit's that counted. Apartheid will never be forgoten as long as it's taught in schools and politicians use it as an excuse. Comparing Germany to SA is a laugh. Who has the second largest black vote? The black support the DA has is largely from middle and rich classes. The middle class is shrinking and covid has made it shrink even faster. 37% of people in this country is unemployed but the poor is not only the unemployed. Poor people are desperate people, the more desperate they get the more stupid ideals they are willing to believe and the more radical they will become.

So we agree that the DA will never win. The only thing is you think all they need to do is get the ANC below 50% and form alliances. Who will they form alliances with? And what makes you think other parties won't form alliances with the ANC? The EFF was the third biggest party at 10% in the last election. The next party after that is the IFP at 3.5% and then the FF+ at 2.3% Anything below that is minute.

[Lemoentjie]

The problem is the way that the ANC are able to frame opposition to BEE. They just have to convince the voters that it's an attack on them, rather than the people who hold the true power (i.e. the ANC cartel). You can see the same in the USA - wealthy Republican grandees telling a 35 year old guy in Alabama flipping burgers in McDonalds to not support 'communist' tax rises because one day he'll have worked his way to the top and they'll be taxing him instead.

[Rinkals]

Yes: they should keep quiet about BEE, if they can. It's an area that, primarily because of Zille's comments in the past (and some of the leadership) , the DA can be easily attacked.

I say again, in case you missed it: whites generally don't care about BEE, so even if the DA were to commit to abolishing it, I doubt they would pick up a single vote.

On the other hand, blacks would leave in droves (if they haven't already left).

If the DA's purpose is to just harvest the white vote, then they are going to have a hard time competing with parties like FF+ et al who are a lot more vocal on racial issues and protecting white minorities.

The DA needs to attract a bigger portion of the black vote (ignoring your contention that it doesn't exist) to remain relevant, and attacking BEE is not going to do it.

I say again that BEE i not a perfect system, and, if the DA could propose a workable replacement that could be seen as valuable for the black communities, they may have a chance, but opening the system up to market forces won't cut it, I'm afraid.

The DA are committed to abolishing BEE, that is their position on it.

Your problem is you're committed to seeing things only in terms of groups. Like the "black vote" is one of those old school massive charity cheques you have strap to a roof rack to take home, and are now only used for man of the match awards in SA rugby. And that's it, that's the single "black vote". But that's not how it works, there is no "black vote", same as everyone chatting here doesn't agree. By-elections haven't shown DA losing black voters, they've shown some decline in coloured and Indian support in Gauteng and the Western Cape for different reasons.

The DA is never going to win every black voter, the ANC can't even do that. In the electoral system that SA has the norm is the largest parties having 20%-30%. That's where SA is heading.

I think you don't really appreciate the extent of BEE's failure. If you lie now and pretend that it benefits anyone other than a tiny ANC elite, no one will thank you in the future. If the DA supports BEE, it'll destroy itself and in its place there will be people who don't vote and an FF+ larger than it is now but smaller than the DA is now supported mostly by Afrikaans speakers (both white and coloured). Then not long after that a version of the same old DA/DP/PFP just comes back again.

Long ago the United Party ran a slogan called "apartheid with justice", it lied to try and win Afrikaner voters. Of course the two things were total opposites, it was a stupid slogan that summed up where that party was well. That quickly destroyed the United Party. Everyone voting then were not the intended victims of apartheid, but down the United Party went anyway, it's own voters stopped voting for it and those who supported apartheid just kept voting Nat. It's not wise to think that people will vote for a party supporting policies they know to be a failure and immoral.

Great.

If the limit of their ambition is to appeal solely to the small portion of whites who don't understand that uplifting the black population is key to the stability of the country, then they are going the best way about it.

I would hazard a guess that, for most whites, BEE is not an important issue.

[Blake]

Great.

If the limit of their ambition is to appeal solely to the small portion of whites who don't understand that uplifting the black population is key to the stability of the country, then they are going the best way about it.

I would hazard a guess that, for most whites, BEE is not an important issue.

I think you and many others conflate the intent of BEE with the actual policy of BEE in South Africa.
Unfortunately they are thought to be the same thing, but they are not.
The policy of BEE is a disaster. The intent of BEE is admirable, and the DA are committed to achieving the goals, but through different means and different branding.
This is the kind of nuance that is unfortunately lost in political discourse at the moment.

[_Os_]

How many 50+ voters are there compared to 20, 30, 40 year olds? They're a drop in a very large ocean.

We're going around in circles here. Lets cut to the chase.

In 2004 the ANC had 11m votes out of 20.5m registered voters and 27m eligible voters. So the ANC had 53% of registered voters and 40% of eligible voters. By 2019 the ANC had 10m votes out of 27m registered voters and 37m eligible voters. So the ANC had 37% of registered voters and 27% of eligible voters.

For the ANC to have maintained its position from 2004 it would've needed 15 million votes in 2019. 5 million votes that didn't happen for them. In other words it's fucked.

If you're disagreeing with my general argument, you need to come up with another reason for these numbers. It's a party disproportionately sustained by an older demographic (the problem with that is they die sooner), in a young country that mostly doesn't vote.

Comparing Germany to SA is a laugh.

No it's not. Because they're using a similar electoral system, the rule set you're using isn't irrelevant. The USA's electoral rule set means there'll never be 5 parties roughly the same size and coalition governments, there'll always be two parties and often an outright majority for the governing party. Any country with the same electoral rule set ends up with a similar looking outcome, one party winning majorities isn't what SA is moving towards.

The problem here is the external reference points of most South African's interested in this stuff and with enough education to understand it (ie people chatting here) are the USA and UK. Those places don't have electoral systems anything like SA's. But SA's electoral system is much more like Germany/Netherlands.

Rugby Union, Sevens, League, they're all rugby, the rule set you use makes a massive difference. If SA was using the UK's electoral rule set the ANC would have crushing majorities even with just 40% of the vote.

The black support the DA has is largely from middle and rich classes. The middle class is shrinking and covid has made it shrink even faster. 37% of people in this country is unemployed but the poor is not only the unemployed. Poor people are desperate people, the more desperate they get the more stupid ideals they are willing to believe and the more radical they will become.

Tut tut, you're making stuff up here. Most DA black support is from the townships, most DA activists are from that background also. The other thing you're making up is that people are convinced by absolute crazy nonsense, when most people that could vote didn't even vote in 2019.

So we agree that the DA will never win. The only thing is you think all they need to do is get the ANC below 50% and form alliances. Who will they form alliances with? And what makes you think other parties won't form alliances with the ANC? The EFF was the third biggest party at 10% in the last election. The next party after that is the IFP at 3.5% and then the FF+ at 2.3% Anything below that is minute.

Once the ANC goes below 50% the ANC's disintegration that's already happening will speed up. That will be a massive political change, everything I'm explaining here will manifest as reality, most will have to see it in reality to understand it. Hard to say what happens then. I would be more confident if the DA was on 30% now, the existing parties that can form a stable coalition on most of the economics are DA/IFP/FF+/ACDP/Cope.

[Blake]

Once the ANC goes below 50% the ANC's disintegration that's already happening will speed up. That will be a massive political change, everything I'm explaining here will manifest as reality, most will have to see it in reality to understand it. Hard to say what happens then. I would be more confident if the DA was on 30% now, the existing parties that can form a stable coalition on most of the economics are DA/IFP/FF+/ACDP/Cope.

One only has to look at the Western Cape to see how quickly the ANC deteriorates into infighting and irrelevance when their access to the treasury is cut off.
That is why I've been so frustrated at how long it has taken for the ANC to fracture post-Zuma. The ANC knows the end-game if that happens, so they resist it, but as an organisation they are crumbling.
Luthuli House is crumbling because the ANC is incompetent, but also because "leadership" is too busy trying to figure out which faction gets to keep the ANC brand and which faction is going to be the breakaway.

[average joe]

Where did the votes that the ANC lost in the last election go to?
Comparing SA to any other country, even if they have the same rule set is futile. SA is unique because of it's past.
Please point out the informal settlements that falls under DA control.
You are going on a hunch that the ANC will continue to shrink until there's nothing left of it? The only time the ANC lost ground is when factions of it broke away. Pulling those factions back in is easier for the ANC than it is for the DA to win them over.

[_Os_]

Where did the votes that the ANC lost in the last election go to?

Difficult question to answer without going through all the ward level data. The ANC lost 1.4m votes, the EFF grew by 700k. So you could say half quit voting and half voted EFF, but it could also be that 1.4m quit voting and the EFF activated people that didn't vote the time before. Throw in the IFP adding 150k and it gets a bit more complicated, the IFP probably took those votes from the NFP which collapsed, but maybe not and they took some from the ANC too.

Comparing SA to any other country, even if they have the same rule set is futile. SA is unique because of it's past.

Yes, Germany obviously hasn't had a terrible past at all. If we're talking about votes and elections, which we are, the rules that are being used are critical. I'm not going to guide you through the differences in different types of electoral system. But the outcome with proportional system's like that used in SA, is multiple parties none with a majority and coalition governments, anything else is the exception. You're correct that the history means SA is in the exception category for now, but as time passes SA is moving towards the norm for the electoral system.

Please point out the informal settlements that falls under DA control.

I posted black DA supporters come mostly from townships, which isn't the same thing as an informal settlement. Nor did I say he DA were dominating any townships. At municipal level there's ward councillors and proportional representation councillors. Which means a proportional representation councillor can be from a DA branch (which means they're living there) in ward the DA hasn't won. This complicates answering your question. But off the top of my head, there's been DA branches in Khayelitsha since way back, there's definitely been councillors from there also. The DA vote has doubled in KZN since the 2000s, there's definitely been DA councillors from Durban's townships (almost certainly proportional representation), the person who wrote the current DA policy rejecting BEE is from KwaMashu. When I looked closely at by elections last there were a lot places in Gauteng with high DA numbers getting the DA into 2nd and 3rd places, which means those wards have active DA branches.

The key to getting a big vote is having branches and members, it takes a lot of support for it to translate into actual members that will campaign and then full branches.

You are going on a hunch that the ANC will continue to shrink until there's nothing left of it? The only time the ANC lost ground is when factions of it broke away. Pulling those factions back in is easier for the ANC than it is for the DA to win them over.

Like Blake posted, when the ANC loses its ability to steal money it shrinks to a shadow of what it was. As Blake also posted they seem to all want to keep the ANC brand, there'll be a rural rump that always exists and always has terrible policies that's between 5% and 30% of the vote (if it's the one that ends up with the ANC brand or not who knows). Besides like I posted already they've got a huge problem with actually getting people to vote for them, they've lost plenty of ground from their own supporters just giving up.

[Rinkals]

Great.

If the limit of their ambition is to appeal solely to the small portion of whites who don't understand that uplifting the black population is key to the stability of the country, then they are going the best way about it.

I would hazard a guess that, for most whites, BEE is not an important issue.

I think you and many others conflate the intent of BEE with the actual policy of BEE in South Africa.
Unfortunately they are thought to be the same thing, but they are not.
The policy of BEE is a disaster. The intent of BEE is admirable, and the DA are committed to achieving the goals, but through different means and different branding.
This is the kind of nuance that is unfortunately lost in political discourse at the moment.

The problem is that BEE is important for black people. It may be a disaster, as you suggest, but its removal is seen as anti-black.

Furthermore, I don't believe that it's much of a big deal for most whites.

So it's lose-lose.

If you don't care about your position as the official opposition and are prepared to lose popularity in pursuit of blind ideology, then great.

Some of us would like to have a party to vote for who can offer a plan for the country as a whole, not just the white elite.

[Chilli]

Great.

If the limit of their ambition is to appeal solely to the small portion of whites who don't understand that uplifting the black population is key to the stability of the country, then they are going the best way about it.

I would hazard a guess that, for most whites, BEE is not an important issue.

I think you and many others conflate the intent of BEE with the actual policy of BEE in South Africa.
Unfortunately they are thought to be the same thing, but they are not.
The policy of BEE is a disaster. The intent of BEE is admirable, and the DA are committed to achieving the goals, but through different means and different branding.
This is the kind of nuance that is unfortunately lost in political discourse at the moment.

The problem is that BEE is important for black people. It may be a disaster, as you suggest, but its removal is seen as anti-black.

Furthermore, I don't believe that it's much of a big deal for most whites.

So it's lose-lose.

If you don't care about your position as the official opposition and are prepared to lose popularity in pursuit of blind ideology, then great.

Some of us would like to have a party to vote for who can offer a plan for the country as a whole, not just the white elite.

25 years into Democracy should BEE not be winding down? Sadly it won't while the Kenny Kunene's of this world make billions from tenders, meanwhile pupils die after falling into pit latrines.

I see it at work. BEE tenders are a farce