South Africa


How fast will the ANC fall, part five: When Ramaphosa goes

How fast will the ANC fall, part five: When Ramaphosa goes
Ilustrative image | Sources: President Cyril Ramaphosa addresses the ANC’s 2021 local government elections thank you event in Soweto on 8 November 2021. (Photo: Gallo Images / Sharon Seretlo) | Gallo Images / Daily Maverick / Felix Dlangamandla | Gallo Images / Luba Lesolle | EPA / Nic Bothma | Gallo Images / Fani Mahuntsi | Lehlomelo Toyane

There is no visible political leadership ready to succeed President Cyril Ramaphosa. Perhaps the next effective government after Ramaphosa will consist of people who are not currently politicians at all. This is the final part of a series of articles this week in which John Matisonn assesses the crisis in SA politics and the reforms needed to turn it around.

All over South Africa there are talented people who want nothing to do with the government, and the ANC government has willingly discarded some of its best. 

At the start of Ramaphoria, when the new president announced a “New Dawn”, he encouraged us to make the mental link to former US President Franklin Roosevelt’s inspiring New Deal, which relentlessly pursued economic and social reform in the 1930s. 

Ramaphosa took well-intentioned steps, but the pace is too slow and hesitant to show visible results. The New Dawn is not the New Deal. The ANC continues to lose the support of the cities and seems to be losing the universities and intellectual innovators too.

The party’s vaunted capacity to self-correct has been hard to find. The ANC has a policy that “no cadre be deployed without proper training, qualifications and preparation for the role”. That is not evident on the ground. 

In his first three years, Ramaphosa has had three communications ministers. Anyone who has worked in government knows that such rapid change ensures stagnation — or worse. Each new minister takes time to learn the rudiments, change staff and decide on priorities. Meanwhile, the requirement to make speeches, attend Luthuli House meetings and do other political work does not abate. 

The current minister has repeated her predecessors’ promises to complete the job-creating digital migration process that is now seven years behind the 2015 International Telecommunications Union deadline — and behind most of Africa. Perhaps it will be completed this year.

We have lost valuable time. 

The problems of digitisation increasingly require the input of multiple departments, yet the Cabinet operates in strict silos. Increasingly, we need policy that cross-cuts between departments that currently guard their autonomy jealously.

Even an expert, stable government will find South Africa a hard country to govern. Bloody hard. It’s not a job for the greedy or the lazy or the incompetent or the uncommitted.

The best political leaders know they will fail, at least in part, because solving 300 years of colonialism and apartheid cannot be done in a single term of office or career. 

And yet we allow much of our best talent to leave government service prematurely. A few insiders criticised my recommendation in my book, Cyril’s Choices, An Agenda for Reform, that we bring back Thuli Madonsela into prosecuting and Prof Jonathan Jansen back into administering education. I was told they were too controversial. 

But does anyone doubt that Madonsela knows how to prosecute South Africa’s biggest crooks? Or that Jansen knows how to fix a school system? If Jansen was too controversial to be education minister or even director-general, why not empower him to fix the Eastern Cape education department?

Since then, new waste has occurred. Athol Williams, whose CV includes one of the most sensational educational records I have ever seen (a Wits degree in engineering followed by five master’s degrees — from Harvard, Oxford, MIT, London Business School and the London School of Economics), is in exile. Of course he’s controversial, now.

Institutional knowledge should be welcomed, yet Ivan Pillay, Johann van Loggerenberg, Pete Richer and Yolisa Pikie are some of the dedicated former civil servants from SARS struggling to find work.

Constitutional court justices appointed in their early 40s retire in their prime. Is there no senior job for them in the justice ministry or law enforcement? The same applies to some ambassadors and university professors who retire on age mandates.

South Africa needs a pipeline of expertise.

Some are discarded because they are controversial; others because they are considered to have got their share. It’s another cadre’s turn. That is the insidious damage of cadre deployment — even when the system intends to be “fair”, it is not applying appropriate skills criteria. 

To succeed in the modern world, South Africa needs to build pipelines of excellence — but deployment often leaves you out in the cold after a plum job. 

By contrast to the loss of skills and institutional memory, in political jobs you can go on forever. Chairs of parliamentary committees have been ministers in multiple ministries. The skills they may have acquired are not specialised. Perhaps that explains why, two years after beginning to repair Eskom, a statement said the government had thought the problem was just “governance”, only to realise it was also “operational”.

Failure to build a pipeline of institutional expertise is a major reason why the ANC is on life support. It could die.

It was controversial people who brought the ANC back from near death before. The long-buried diary of Ralph Bunche, a brilliant African-American and later Nobel Peace Prize winner who attended the ANC’s silver jubilee congress in Bloemfontein in 1937, reveals how far the ANC fell in the 25 years since its inspirational founding in 1912.

Pixley ka Isaka Seme, probably the most important founder of the ANC, was party president in 1937, but both Seme and the ANC had fallen on hard times.  

A graduate of the universities of Oxford and Columbia and winner of Columbia University’s highest award for oratory in 1906, Seme cut a sad figure to Bunche. The damage from land dispossession under the 1913 Land Act, followed by the depression, was pervasive. By 1932, the turn-of-the-century renaissance of black newspapers, black politics and black business had been snuffed out. 

Presiding in a top hat, white spats, frock coat and morning trousers, Bunche said Seme’s renowned oratorical skills were reduced to “a hesitant style of speech without force or personality”. The first day of congress was “entirely devoid of any serious considerations” and, on the second, organisers “fiddled around trying to cook up a program” until Bloemfontein’s white mayor and several other white officials spoke.  

Bunche’s respect was reserved for the women. “On the whole, they make a better appearance and speak more intelligently than the men at the congress,” Bunche noted.

The achievements of the Mandela generation needs to be seen in this context. This was the ANC inherited by Walter Sisulu, Anton Lembede, Mandela, Oliver Tambo and others. Current Mandela critics would do well to contemplate the heights that generation brought the ANC to in 1994, in light of where they started.

Today’s ANC is sustained by the patronage of power, not dynamic policy debate.  

If the ANC’s mistake was to be found in the revolving door of cadre deployment, the DA’s was to try to move too fast. DA leaders deserve credit for willingly giving up leadership, but it may be that it too failed to adequately build a pipeline.

Fast-tracking leaders would be better served in jobs at local and provincial levels before taking the hot seat of Leader of the Opposition or, perhaps, Johannesburg mayor. Mmusi Maimane might have been better prepared had he spent five years as a Western Cape MEC, even if that bruised some provincial egos, and saved him from a rash decision that could keep a talented man out of government for life.

Between now and the next election, the DA’s best chance to prove itself outside the Western Cape may be in Tshwane, the only metro where it does not depend on the whims of the EFF. It’s worth pouring in resources to help to show a city that can work outside the Western Cape. If it provides improved service delivery, its vote will consolidate.

The ANC is on the back foot, but remains the heavyweight of South African politics. It is likely to poll close to the 50% threshold in 2024 — enough to take a party or two into coalition, if necessary, without significantly changing its modus operandi.

But to truly turn South Africa around, whoever wants to govern needs to show they know how to create jobs.

Of all the crises facing South Africa, I start with jobs. Not because education or health or basic grants or crime are less important, but because jobs are the shortest route to taking care of the others.

Without more jobs, we can’t increase social grants. We can’t pay for more healthcare. And, since our education crisis is not primarily a problem of underfunding, more jobs and growth and specialisation are the next best thing to force the system to improve, even if it has to be piecemeal. 

Even law enforcement will come under more pressure — people with jobs don’t have the incentive to steal, and exert pressure for better protection.

The three relevant global economic sector trends of the past 30 years remain some of the lowest-hanging fruit. It would have been much better if we had acted in time with each, but they still contain substantial job opportunities that we can’t afford to ignore. 

The Information Economy of the 1990s lost ground because of a set of errors that continue to the present, with digital migration urgently needed to free up spectrum for faster, cheaper broadband, including 5G. 

But the government has again latched on to a fad that is not what it seems — the Fourth Industrial Revolution. In his inaugural address, Ramaphosa said: “We must embrace and use the Fourth Industrial Revolution to develop Africa and create jobs for the youth and empower the women of our continent.” 

However, Prof Tshilidzi Marwala, who chaired the president’s 4IR commission, told me in an interview that it’s the opposite. “4IR is going to worsen the job market. Paying attention to it will allow us to contain the job bloodbath.”

South Africa’s potential for mining and green energy are increasingly linked. Like the booms in Information and Resources, South Africa has mishandled, even squandered, the green energy opportunity. 

It requires political will to implement a just transition — which won’t be easy — but there is no other option. The green energy boom is coming, whatever anyone or any political party thinks about the causes of climate change. 

Our mining potential will be increasingly limited by new restrictions on carbon emissions. Pressure to stop mining coal will increase. But South Africa has minerals needed for the green economy, including manganese and rare earths. China has already locked up Zimbabwe’s lithium supply. 

South Africans need to see short-term wins; to see a state-owned enterprise fixed, for example, or significant job creation. But for the longer term, South Africa needs major reform. 

It needs economic reform because the government has developed two kinds of relationships with business — cronyism and contempt. Both are unhealthy, even dangerous.

It needs political reform because when you look at politics, you don’t see a Cabinet leading the South Africa of the 21st century, an age where mistakes are more costly than in the past.

It needs some form of legal or constitutional reform because its accountability system is ineffective. The case is staring us in the face — we have more than 10,000 service delivery protests a year, yet elected representatives are invisible. 

Every citizen with a service delivery problem should know the names of their MP, MPC and ward councillor, people who should be deeply engaged in solving those problems. That is the most basic element in the way democracies are supposed to work. A protest march is a sign that elected leaders have failed — not something to gloss over just because it’s a credit to our culture of free speech.

And South Africa needs to reform its civil service. 

Obviously, cadre deployment must go. But this must lead to bigger reforms. Nedlac — where business, government, labour and civil society are meant to work out their problems — is being criticised by many who attend it. It’s a legacy of the 1990s that may no longer be fit for purpose.

Does our foreign policy represent our interests? Is our relationship with China helping us as much as it helps China? If not, it’s our fault, not China’s. Do we set the agenda or receive the agenda? You can’t blame other countries for setting theirs.

When politicians fail to meet the moment, civil society must assert itself. That is a South African strength. Government is too important to be left to politicians. Parties can fail. So can governments.

I spent 19 months in Afghanistan in senior positions in the United Nations working for a better future there. Six months ago, I saw the country I had come to love disintegrate. Ninety percent of Afghans are now hungry. These things can happen. We can stop them from happening here. DM

Read Part One here

Read Part Two here

Read Part Three here

Read Part Four here

John Matisonn is a former senior United Nations elections official, Independent Broadcasting Authority councillor, and long-time political and foreign correspondent. He is the author of Cyril’s Choices, An Agenda for Reform; and God, Spies and Lies, Finding South Africa’s Future Through its Past.

[hearken id=”daily-maverick/8976″]


Comments - Please in order to comment.

  • Trevor Pope says:

    Very insightful, thank you.

  • Dain Peters says:

    What a fascinating set of articles, broad ranging and integrated. The interview with Prof Tshilidzi Marwala also provided much food for thought, clarity and optimism. Thank you for your efforts John Matisonn and DM.

  • Hermann Funk says:

    Dear John, thank you very much for sharing your insights. This country has so much gong for it. It could set an example for the rest of the continent. Your serious of articles confirmed, for me, that the challenges SA faces are not insurmountable. However, it requires less reliance on government and a much stronger engagement by “ordinary” citizens. Unfortunately, many of those who could make a difference rather pack for Perth. Something that already applied prior to 1994. How to engender that engagement and how to make people understand that if a system, in this case SA, is not working we all have an obligation to engage and up and make it work? After all, whether we like it or not, we are all part of this dysfunctional systems which means that our lack of engagement is part of the problem.

  • Dennis Bailey says:

    Seems to me that SA politicians are the bottlenecks to all progress and that is the problem. How do we get rid of incompetent SA politicians? They’re all supposed to be on performance contracts – how come no one is ever fired? Civil society is co-opted (ie: recent youth council with Mantashe re coal) when it raises its head or is disempowered/ preoccupied by bureaucratic legislation.


    As interesting as these articles might be, the people who should be reading them.. are not. So excuse my cynicism.

    • Pat Collett says:

      Agreed John, the complection of readers of Daily Maverick unfortunately need to change. The names on this page says it all. How to change that is DM’s first problem.

  • Kanu Sukha says:

    Authoritarianism … whether of the XI or Putin variety (or even the Modhi variant) is the only ethos the current ANC understands and embraces . Madiba was somewhat different in that respect.
    The marriage to the mantra of ‘cadreship’ is the only “pipeline of expertise” that exists ! If you do not swear allegiance to it, like they do in the mafia, you have no expertise !

  • Merle Favis says:

    Rather disappointing, actually. The question posed in the title: “How fast will the ANC fall” is never really addressed. The series of articles, initially quite suggestive of interesting conclusions, became weaker and weaker analytically as they went on and culminating is a long, boring list of things we all know are problems. Interesting observations first made were never picked up later on. So, Mr Matisonn, how fast WILL the ANC fall?

  • Coen Gous says:

    Great series of articles John. But I have 2 questions for you:
    1. With the deregulation of media in the nineties, and when the SABC sold of 6 regional radio stations, like highveld, KFM etc, you were one of the foremost media lawyers in the country, if not the very best. But what made you decide to switch focus.
    2. Why did you resign in 2018, I think, from the SABC Board, after only serving a few months?

  • Karsten Döpke says:

    As we can no longer wait for government to introduce the reforms needed, it seems once again that civil society needs to step in. I think a good start would be increasing support of organisations like OUTA to assist the NPA in its prosecutions of state capture cases, as an example.

  • Carsten Rasch says:

    An excellent analyses – and read – falls a bit flat in Part 5. I’m tired of reading what the government must do to save the country. They are patently uninterested in doing that, or even in governing for that matter. A quick look at how the various municipal council meetings are being disrupted more than proves that. I am more interested in reading how WE can save the country, which in the first place must mean getting rid of the incumbents. I want to read about a plan and an opposition party that black South Africans feel safe with, and me too.

    • Glyn Morgan says:

      Carsten, you want a plan, same as most people. Maybe a start to this plan would be for the media to stop trashing the DA AT EVERY TURN FOR TINY, IMAGINED REASONS. Just think how many voters did not vote Democratic Party because of the De Lille saga in Cape Town? That was stirred by the media to some sort of crescendo! Turns out, De Lille was/is as useless as the DA said she was! Those votes only made the ANC stronger.

      We need a democratic solution and a democratic future.

  • Andrew McWalter says:

    Learning from our past history, it seems that we are always passengers on a train that is doomed to derail sitting in idle contemplation of that fact. And how we always recover from the wreck is just as much of an astonishment. Can we move I wonder, from always being world-inspiring “rainbow warriors” always defying belief and rising zombie-like from the ashes of destruction, only to endure another wild ride, to those who, recognising the certainty of our fate are willing to set about changing toward a more comforting destination?

  • Rod H MacLeod says:

    I have loved reading all 5 parts. There is one small thing that annoys me, though and it is this: “… because solving 300 years of colonialism and apartheid cannot be done in a single term of office or career.”
    Apartheid did not exist 300 years ago – the early Cape governors Simon and Willem v d Stel were men of colour who did much to develop the core of what is the Western Cape today. Free Burghers, Simon’s creation, were mostly black and coloured people who were active in agriculture and responsible for establishing many wine and grain farms still operating today.
    By 1750 there were only around 5,500 Europeans and 7,000 slaves in the Cape settlement.
    The British took control of the Cape settlement in 1806 – when the Cape (the Transvaal and Free State Republics were not colonised until the end of the second war of independence in 1901) effectively became a colony. In 1809 the British invoked pass and vagrancy laws, but these were revoked in 1829. In 1834 slavery was abolished.
    The Cape Colony actually had a qualified universal vote for all men irrespective of race. In 1892 the Franchise and Ballot Act introduced by Rhodes was effectively the first race based voting restriction, although not an important one.
    The first serious piece of physical segregation was introduced in 1913 in The Natives Land Act, under British rule.
    Please do not flaunt your ignorance of history by talking about 300 years of colonisation and apartheid – it makes you sound silly and foppish.

    • Geoff Krige says:

      An interesting understanding of history! Colonialism was not the sole prerogative of the British. Colonialism started in concept with the early Portuguese explorers and in earnest when the first VOC settlers landed in the Cape and started displacing the Khoi people. The Transvaal and Free State Republics were colonised long before the “wars of independence” – unless you understand the Voortrekkers and other adventurers as being indigenous Africans. “In 1750 there were 5 500 Europeans and 7 000 slaves in the Cape settlement” is by its very nature a statement colonisation and racial segregation. Unless the only book read about South Africa’s history is one written by British colonialists, segregation and colonialism has existed for 350 years.

  • Colleen Oxtoby says:

    From a naïve political position, I say ‘[Ivan] Pillay for President’ and ‘bring back Mbeki’.

  • Glyn Morgan says:

    For a start vote the ANC out, without allowing the EFF in. And for **** **** do not support the party of P. De Lille!

  • Glyn Morgan says:

    Great articles, hope the general public read them.

  • Geoff Krige says:

    Excellent articles, but the last was a little disappointing. Was it intended as a summary of the preceding 4? Coming into this last one I had hoped for more incisive statements of what a new government/government-private partnership might look like and how, and in what kinds or enterprises, small enterprise and big corporates might co-operate. So much analysis seems to me to fall short here – it seems to be so much easier to dissect what is wrong, than to conceive, propose and promote a solution.

  • Chandu Kashiram says:

    My take on the articles is that is does make quite a few suggestions regarding what needs to be done.
    1. Create jobs, specifically by paying attention to / reviving the Information, Mining and Green Energy Sectors
    2. Economic reform by repairing relations with business.
    3. Political reform by addressing cadre employment – bring back people like Thuli Madonsela, Prof Jansen etc.
    4. Legal and Constitutional Reform – need some ideas here. My personal views are that judges should stop their personal / political agendas when doing their jobs. Simplify the justice process and do not allow smart lawyers using technical arguments to get away with it.
    5. Reform Civil Service – Get to know your local government officials and hold them accountable. Separate jobs in civil service with jobs for votes at the ANC Conference. We should be building career civil servants who work their way up the ranks to be appointed as MECs or Mayors.
    6. Replace Nedlac with something that works or simply remove it.
    7. Foreign Policy – deal with countries / big business that can demonstrate the creation of local jobs.
    8. Private Business – large businesses to support the growth of SMEs to be part of their supply chain.
    9. Create incentives to bring back skills from Perth or wherever.
    SA is still a great country and many people would rather choose to live here then in London or NY.

    Thank you for the articles Mr Matisonn. You have given us much to think about.

Please peer review 3 community comments before your comment can be posted

We would like our readers to start paying for Daily Maverick...

…but we are not going to force you to. Over 10 million users come to us each month for the news. We have not put it behind a paywall because the truth should not be a luxury.

Instead we ask our readers who can afford to contribute, even a small amount each month, to do so.

If you appreciate it and want to see us keep going then please consider contributing whatever you can.

Support Daily Maverick→
Payment options