The motion hopes to cross partisan borders and work with National Government to bring into effect programmes that protect and defend the lives of these minority groups. Pretty much all of Parliament agreed with an enormous amount of enthusiasm.
However, the African Christian Democratic Party (ACDP) was having none of that. In an unsurprising (and what they no doubt thought of as gallant) display of Christian humanity, the ACDP rejected the motion. Then, in a weak attempt to veil the bigotry, ACDP MP Cheryllyn Verdon Dudley explained in a Facebook post that the ACDP felt the motion was controversial and therefore in breach of the rule of motion without notice.
The premise of her point here already starts looking shaky especially when Mr Redelinghuys pointed out: what could be controversial about protecting the rights of humans?
In particular, the St Joan-esq crusader, said they “want to know what the DA means by ‘intensify such efforts and programmes to combat intolerance … particularily toward … the LGBTQI community’” (Note she specifically singles out LGBQTI here from the DA motion), so it is clear first off that their issue is in fact LGBTQI related, and not really rules related.
The lovely lady then goes on to say that since a motion is carried unanimously in the National Assembly, that the stalwart of the National Assembly’s intregrity, the ACDP, decided to ‘err on the side of caution’, as it is ‘not possible for MP’s to get clarity during this process’.
source: The South African.com