VOW: DA's John Steenhuisen
Image: File
LEADER John Steenhuisen has vowed that Democratic Alliance (DA) will fight on in the Government of National Unity (GNU) despite ongoing disputes over VAT increases.
Steenhuisen emphasised that the DA remains engaged in discussions, stressing the importance of approaching the situation with a level head and prioritising the country's best interests.
Steenhuisen was speaking to the media in KZN on Saturday
On the topic of the GNU, Steenhuisen expressed concerns about the challenges of a minority government, describing it as a scenario where every decision could turn into a contentious issue.
He called for a commitment to power-sharing and highlighted the need for the country to prepare for the post-African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) landscape.
Steenhuisen is actively exploring opportunities to expand international markets for South African produce, having recently visited Thailand, the Philippines, Japan, and other countries to promote exports such as apples, grapes, wine, and citrus.
He says: “We try to resolve issues in-house. The DA leaped to join the GNU.
“We have to approach decisions with caution and based on facts. We will consult with the members and voters on our decisions. We have to ensure sound governance where we do not have to pay R500 for a broom.”
Meanwhile, ANC partner, the South African Communist Party (SACP) argued that the DA should be excluded from the coalition, saying they are irrelevant after losing the National Budget vote last Wednesday alongside other dissenting parties.
SACP spokesperson Dr Alex Mashilo told the SABC: “There is a 50% plus one majority in parliament excluding the DA, the Mkhonto Wesizwe (MKP), and others. So South Africa will not stop, and that is one of the discussions we are having here.”
To secure the budget's approval, the African National Congress (ANC) gained support from several smaller parties, including ActionSA, which is not part of the coalition.
However, Mashilo called for the "rollback" of the planned VAT increase, arguing that it would place undue pressure on South African citizens.