Last weekend, President Cyril Ramaphosa hosted leaders of the Government of National Unity (GNU), who gathered for a two-day strategic retreat at the Cradle of Humankind outside of Johannesburg. The delegates reflected on the “progress” made over the past 16 months and reaffirmed their ongoing commitment to the multiparty government.

The meeting was held after several public complaints from various party leaders that the President was unable to find time to meet with them. It was reported that the previous meeting took place on 8 May, about 177 days prior.

By all accounts, the retreat was cordial and free of drama (our first red flag), with leaders discussing various governance-related matters while enjoying some social time like watching the women’s cricket on the telly.

It all seemed a little too cosy, if you ask me.

From the Cradle to the grave

In the wake of the meeting, News24 quoted an anonymous party leader who reflected: "I can't think of anything where I would say that there was massive disagreement, or we were unable to find each other, or that we need to be worried about.”

The report noted that the Democratic Alliance (DA), represented by John Steenhuisen, refrained from addressing its “contentious positions” on matters such as the Basic Education Laws Amendment (BELA) Act, the National Health Insurance (NHI) Act, the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, and other policies of which the DA has been publicly critical or which it is challenging in the courts.

The anonymous source continued:

"This is problematic of the DA that they like to raise these issues outside of the GNU. They raise them in billboards in Johannesburg, media and press statements, but within the GNU, they don't raise them. This is why I said there were no tensions in the room because John [Steenhuisen] didn't bring any into the room. He was collaborative, speaking about the diversification of trade and opportunities that he's now finding in China, and he never thought that he would fall in love with China. He was a very different party leader. He didn't raise any of the issues the DA has around economic policy."

One should always take quotes by anonymous sources from whence they come, and it’s good to remember that the GNU member parties have an incentive to depict each other in a negative light. Nevertheless, this statement reveals a telling dynamic within the government: the absence of substantive policy debate for the sake of consensus.

While in public the DA likes to pretend that they are lions fighting bravely for the liberal cause behind the closed doors of the Cabinet they transform into pussycats. While I’m all for a bit of trade diversification, the export of apples to communist China is not nearly as critical as the existential policy threats facing ordinary South Africans. The “contentious positions” are legitimate and urgent and worth a bit of “tension in the room”.

The DA’s proposed non-racial alternative to BEE, for example, would be a refreshing departure from the rent-seeking patronage bonanza currently in place.

However, if the DA’s Economic Inclusion for All private member’s bill is to have any hope of succeeding, it will need the legislative backing of the African National Congress (ANC). That this was apparently not a topic on the agenda over the weekend was a missed opportunity, to put it mildly. Without the DA leader fighting for it in Cabinet, what chance does the Bill have of passing in Parliament? None.

My criticism is not reserved for the DA.

It is not clear to me how the Freedom Front Plus benefits its constituents by having a Minister of Correctional Services or the Inkatha Freedom Party gains any advantage from having a Minister of Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs.

Arch-nemesis

I recently appeared on The Common Sense’s flagship podcast, Makin’ Sense. The weekly show has quickly become one of my favourites, so I was thrilled to be its first guest.

Its host, the thoughtful and wickedly funny Gabriel Makin, referred to me in his introduction as the “Arch-Nemesis of the GNU,” a label which I suppose describes me rather accurately.

The reason for my sceptical attitude is not because I like to be a fly in the ointment (I do), but rather because the GNU serves to reinforce the prevailing policy orthodoxy that has so damaged South Africa’s economy and wrought havoc on our society. Stagnant economic growth of 0.6%, sky-high unemployment of 33.2%, infrastructure collapse, and other maladies are mere symptoms of the ANC’s highly statist and interventionist policy agenda.

Last month, I wrote in these pages that the government was far too big and bloated, with the size of the state equating to roughly 32% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The national executive, I observed, is made up of no fewer than 32 ministers and 37 deputy ministers, a whopping 69 in total.

As I argued on the podcast, the GNU is big government writ large at a time South Africa can least afford it. It’s hard enough arranging a meeting with all the participants, let alone getting anything done. Even taking a photograph of the entire Cabinet – the members of which constitutes 1/5th of the membership of the National Assembly – requires a super wide camera lens just to accommodate everyone. The image is so crowded it’s hard to make out who is who.

In a recent report, my colleagues at the Free Market Foundation (FMF) argued that the Cabinet should be cut down to ten portfolios. While a leaner executive would obviously improve the efficiency or the state and its overall capacity, our proposed cuts are unlikely to happen given the “inclusive” and “collegial” nature of the GNU.

Some might say that this is a good thing, that there is now a balance of power within the executive and that government paralysis is better than energetically implementing bad laws. My response would be that the bad laws are being implemented anyway – and with renewed vigour. The first case of expropriation without compensation (EWC) occurred on the GNU’s watch, after all.

False binary

In the wake of the historic general elections in May 2024, where the ANC suffered its worst showing at the polls in three decades, South Africans were soon confronted by a choice: support the formation of the GNU or usher in a “Doomsday Coalition” of the ANC, the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and/or the uMkhonto weSizwe (MK) Party.

At the time, my colleagues and I at the FMF saw where this was heading and warned that the formation of a grand coalition would risk co-opting the opposition. Instead, we argued that the DA, as the second-largest party, should reject the offer to join the government and stay in its self-described comfort zone in opposition.

As an alternative to the “Doomsday” scenario, the ANC could have entered into a confidence-and-supply agreement with the DA, enabling it to maintain its watchdog role while still supporting the election of the President and the passage of budgets. Importantly, this “no-alition” option would come with conditions, enabling the DA to exercise leverage over the ANC while staying out of a corrupt and compromised government. But it was not to be.

Alas, our concerns have been vindicated by subsequent events, with many “Doomsday” policies like NHI, BELA, BEE, stricter employment equity, and EWC firmly on the statute books.

Last weekend’s teambuilding function might have been good for the GNU’s morale, but without confronting the fundamental policy questions that are holding South Africa back, it will all be for nought.

Ansara is CEO of the Free Market Foundation.