The Steenhuisen tenure at the agriculture ministry turned into a nearly unbelievable era of ineptitude and failure for that sector, the broader economy, the unity government, and the Democratic Alliance (DA). Its end could not have come soon enough.

You can read our editorial calling for Steenhuisen’s firing here.

The list of failures seems almost surreal coming from the man who had been the leader of the DA.

1. He delayed action on the foot-and-mouth-disease crisis, despite expert warnings throughout 2025, and so allowed the disease to spread nationally, through weak and slow leadership. By this measure of ineptitude, his efforts rivalled those of the worst Cabinet members of the past 30 years.
2. All along the way, he insulted, belittled, and threatened farmers when they challenged him in public meetings and online. The leaks that had begun to emerge about his behaviour and that of his chief of staff were only the tip of the iceberg. It beggared belief that any member of the executive could treat the public and the sector for which they were responsible with such contempt.
3. He pushed a state-centric vaccine procurement and administration policy, in direct conflict with the DA’s supposed support for private-sector-led solutions to South Africa’s economic problems.
4. By his actions and behaviour, he did vast damage both to the idea that the unity government could reform South Africa and to the idea that the DA could do better in governing the country than the African National Congress (ANC) had done.

As a wandering albatross with DA sympathies confided to this newspaper, “Until I saw Steenhuisen in government, I had never understood why so many young people and ANC supporters refused to turn out to vote, but now I know exactly why they felt that way.”

As the walls closed in around him, Steenhuisen pressed two arguments in an effort to survive. The first was that vaccinations were going smoothly and the second was that the agricultural economy was doing well under his watch.

The first was false and the second misleading.

It is false to argue that the government was making pleasing progress on foot-and-mouth-disease vaccination. To stop the virus, 80% of South Africa’s cattle need to be vaccinated and receive boosters within a very narrow time window. The progress to date is nowhere near that, meaning it will not end the epidemic.

It is also misleading to argue that, under his leadership, the agricultural economy has done very well. Year-on-year, the data may show that, but only because the previous year’s data were very poor as a result of erratic rainfall, low prices, and dysfunctional ports. The agricultural economy has chiefly for external reasons simply got back in line with its longer-term (and fairly positive) moving average.

Geordin Hill-Lewis has therefore done the right thing by taking steps to remove Steenhuisen from agriculture and by asking President Cyril Ramaphosa to replace him with Willie Aucamp. Aucamp has been instructed to immediately reverse Steenhuisen’s ruinous policies and repair the relationships he destroyed.

There is just one twist in the tail of that decision, which sits uncomfortably. This is that Steenhuisen may still be recycled as a deputy minister of something or other, to make sure he has a job and perhaps one day a pension. That sounds awfully like what the ANC has done to protect its cadres, and it is a pity, as it dilutes the message the DA leader might otherwise have sent to the country: that his party is fundamentally different in government from the ANC.