John Steenhuisen’s ‘roadkill joke’ ignites war of words and debate about his leadership among DA loyalists

9 Sep 2022

The leader of the Democratic Alliance brushed off his controversial comments against his ex-wife three weeks ago, but the controversy continues.

The DA Women’s Network may be forgiving of their leader John Steenhuisen for his ‘roadkill’ comment, but the debate and controversy continue two weeks later.

Writing about the DA’s leadership problems, historian RW Johnson wrote described them as ‘obvious’.

In a Politicsweb column, he wrote: “I realised that I couldn’t vote for a man who behaves so despicably and then refuses even to apologise. The last thing I want is to have such a person representing me.”

Johnson added, “I can’t vote for a list headed by [John] Steenhuisen though I’d happily vote for the DA’s provincial list. I’m not interested in giving my national vote to another party, though I’d give it to Steenhuisen’s ex-wife if I could.”

Johnson, a longtime party supporter with ties to previous reiterations of the DA, such as the Progressives and Democratic Party, called for Steenhuisen to quit as party leader.

But what did Steenhuisen actually say?

Johnson’s statement is the latest in an uproar over Steenhuisen’s comments on the controversial Podcast and Chill podcast. Steenhuisen was asked what he understood roadkill to be, and replied: “It sounds a lot like my ex-wife.”

The comment left gender activists fuming. Steenhuisen, however, told Daily Maverick: “I fully understand that the joke may have been in bad taste to some, but it is important to note that the podcast is a lighthearted and comedic take on current affairs and politics in South Africa where politicians are encouraged to show a lighter side of themselves.”

Read in Daily Maverick: ‘Roadkill’ rage: Steenhuisen says his remark was just a ‘bad joke’, but activists accuse him of ‘misogyny’ and ‘hypocrisy’

Johnson stated: “It wasn’t a joke at all but an ugly insult at the expense of a woman in no position to defend herself. Steenhuisen showed no concern for how his children would feel about hearing their mother thus held up to public scorn and ridicule. Or how his former parents-in-law would feel about seeing their daughter so despicably mistreated.”

Visit Daily Maverick's home page for more news, analysis and investigations

The party has not issued any formal apologies or comments for Steenhuisen’s remarks — including its DA Women’s Network (Dawn).

However, Dawn’s Gauteng chair Stefanie Ueckermann was forgiving of Steenhuisen. Defending him, she said: “If you are standing about any braai where the men are talking and women are constantly objecting to how men talk to us, then we will never get that foot in the door, because we want to be seen as equal so that we can compete with men,”

Ueckermann was named ‘Mampara of the Week’ by the Sunday Times.

In response to Johnson’s column, former DA chief whip and former ambassador to Thailand Douglas Gibson said Johnson, like Steenhuisen, sometimes said “silly things”. He added that Steenhuisen was “doing his best to promote our country” and create a better future for all South Africans.

“Surely, it is time to back Steenhuisen and the DA as the best hope of South Africa for the rejection and replacement of the looting, the bad policies, and hopelessly poor government by President Ramaphosa's band of incompetents?”.

Johnson responded on Thursday evening to Gibson by saying that in his view, “a gentleman should never make rude and unpleasant (and public) remarks about a lady who is unable to answer back”. A gentleman, Johnson argued should never do so in the case of someone he was married to and had children with.

Johnson said he found such behaviour despicable “and if I am to be a gentleman I have to stand up against such behaviour”.

Johnson added: “so I made it clear that I will not vote for an electoral list headed by John Steenhuisen. I did not call for others to do the same. In a democracy, I have the perfect right to make my own choices about such things and make no apology for that.”

‘For go, he clearly must’

In his original piece, Johnson said the DA had summarily got rid of former leader Mmusi Maimane and may have to get rid of Steenhuisen equally quickly, “for go, he clearly must”.

On Thursday, the DA confirmed it was working on a rebuttal to Johnson’s piece, but Steenhuisen’s Chief of Staff Ryan Smith told Daily Maverick there would be a congress next year where elected members of the party would decide who leads it. Smith said DA leaders could elect leaders during elections, “not commentators on Politicsweb”.

“We don’t take to heart the views of opinionistas such as RW Johnson. I would hardly regard him as a credible or reliable political commentator,” said Smith. “Ultimately, it is the delegates of the DA’s federal congress who decide who leads the party, and not commentators on Politicsweb. I would also add that John Steenhuisen was elected with an 80% majority in the previous congress in spite of Mr Johnson’s uninformed predictions,” said Smith. DM

Categories:

Tags:

DM is much better if you are signed in...

Politics

But what did Steenhuisen actually say?

‘For go, he clearly must’