One thing the ANC got right and Cyril Ramaphosa gets wrong

While in power, ANC Presidents have historically provided strong political cover and support for their ministers, enabling them to make tough decisions. 

This type of political cover enabled individuals such as former Finance Minister Trevor Manuel to open up the South African economy to competition, cut government spending, and implement market-friendly policies that drove economic growth. 

South Africa benefited immensely from this, with the country requiring tough decisions to be made, particularly in the immediate aftermath of 1994, to avoid bankruptcy and flourish economically. 

Now, it appears as though South Africa is at a similarly important period of its history, without the political coverage to allow hard decisions to be taken. 

Manuel, who now serves as Old Mutual’s chairman, recently explained how he was lucky to benefit from such political coverage during his tenure in the government. 

Speaking at the Africa In the World Festival, Manuel recalled how former President Nelson Mandela called on him to be Finance Minister in 1996 when it seemed as though the country was heading towards bankruptcy. 

Manuel had to make tough decisions that were politically unpopular, such as slashing government spending, cutting the public sector wage bill, and pursuing market-friendly policies to drive growth. 

He faced intense criticism from within the ANC and trade unions, with many accusing him of being a neoliberal who was opening South African workers up to exploitation. 

Manuel told attendees at the festival that he was offered significant political protection by Mandela and, later, Thabo Mbeki, to take these difficult decisions, even if they were unpopular. 

“For the period that I was Finance Minister, which was up until 2009, I had magnificent air cover,” Manuel said. Crucially, those who provided the cover were also open-minded and willing to be persuaded. 

“I had heads of state who were prepared to be persuaded and who put their personal and political capital behind the project.” 

Manuel said this is crucial for any government to serve the needs of the people, as you need individuals to be able to take tough decisions in the best interest of the country. 

While some might say that this should be done regardless of the protection offered by leaders, it is critical for high-ranking government officials to feel as though they can stick their head out and be able to see through those decisions until the benefits can be enjoyed. 

“You can’t just have people sitting in fancy chairs. The government needs to be able to make decisions that improve the quality of life of people,” Manuel said. 

“You have got to make those decisions. You have to take the risk that goes with it, and you have to persuade the people that those risks are actually worthwhile and necessary.” 

Ramaphosa’s rule by consensus

In contrast to Mandela and Mbeki, President Cyril Ramaphosa appears unwilling to provide the necessary cover for his ministers to make tough decisions for the benefit of South Africa. 

Ramaphosa, instead, prefers a constant search for consensus, in which there is near-complete agreement on any decision taken by the executive. 

This prevents Ramaphosa and his executive from taking decisive actions to address the multiple crises that have plagued South Africa. 

Even when the solutions appear relatively simple and obvious, the president prefers to find consensus before taking action. 

Political analyst Dr Frans Cronje said that, in this regard, Ramaphosa has things the wrong way around, with positive change in South Africa historically coming from an individual taking decisive action – even if it is unpopular at the time. 

Cronje pointed to FW de Klerk and Mandela taking decisive action in the 1990s to have a democratic election in South Africa as an example. 

These two individuals made the decision knowing it was in South Africa’s best interest, without waiting for confirmation of widespread support or consensus to appear. 

Cronje argued that in South Africa’s current situation, after a decade of little to no economic growth, the President cannot afford to try to build consensus. 

“To form a movement, a movement to do it is almost the wrong way around. It is more often the case that great political leaps are taken by individuals who pull things with them,” Cronje said. 

“It is my understanding that FW, at the time of the transition, simply told his colleagues that this is what we will do and pulled them with him.” 

Cronje pointed to Mandela’s speech outlining the ANC’s economic policy for the country after it had ascended to power as another example. 

“Mandela’s first economic policy speech after being released from prison was delivered before his party had its policy conference,” Cronje said. 

“He needed to preempt the conference and dictate policy because if the conference dictated the policy, then the ANC would have been in the position it now finds itself in thirty years ago.” 

Cronje said Ramaphosa’s approach, based on finding consensus before taking any action, is the exact opposite of De Klerk’s and Mandela’s strategy.

“Ramaphosa’s approach, the complete opposite, is to try to find consensus and unity to build some movement to move ahead,” Cronje said. 

“I mean, the results speak for themselves. So, I think it is a matter of key individuals, they don’t all have to be politicians, saying these are the things we are going to do.”