Impetuous president fails to put SA first

THE sun is about to set on what has been a very turbulent year. Our business-as-usual atmosphere has been shaken up by the mayhem caused by President Jacob Zuma when he changed finance ministers twice in four days. We will never forget that. It was dramatic, outrageous and an epic failure of leadership whose impact continues to be felt. Although the capricious markets have slowly settled, there is no doubt that South Africa bled.

Those in denial have concocted political conspiracy theories, pitting capitalists and the West against our poor nation. Regardless of the stark evidence, they have refused to see the simple truth that we suffered because of our president’s ineptitude. In firing former finance minister Nhlanhla Nene, Zuma indeed used his prerogative — as if that was ever the debate — but he did not use it to put South Africa first.

South Africans all have their own views about the worst moments of that disorderly week. For some the worst was when Nene was fired by a dull president whose communication skills need serious intervention. At that point, Zuma did not think that he owed anyone an explanation for this extraordinary decision. Two days later, three press statements were issued in one day.

The worst for some was the immediate and continued tumbling of the markets and near annihilation of our currency. For others, the appointment of little-known David van Rooyen to this crucial post and his first speech about “demystifying the Treasury’’ were the lowest points.

For me, the nadir came a few hours before Zuma announced the shifting of Pravin Gordhan back to finance from co-operative governance. It confirmed once and for all that our president simply does not understand what is going on. It would be slightly comforting if he had grasped the unfolding events, but he had chosen to ignore them in pursuit of his ambitions.

But the situation is worse because it is a combination of ambition, impetuousness and lack of ability.

On that Sunday, before announcing Gordhan’s reappointment to the Treasury, a smug president addressed a gathering in Mpumalanga where he told people to ignore those who “talk too much on television”. This complicates the argument of Lindiwe Zulu, minister of small business development, that business does not communicate.

Business, civil society and academia amplified their voice — but Zuma was not listening. Instead, he told his audience to also switch off. And there are many business leaders who have been roasted for daring to criticise the government, but that is a conversation for another day.

Instead of listening to the four days of discontent, Zuma idiotically stuck to his guns and said ministers were never removed or appointed for no reason. He missed the fact that his reasons had been costly and Nene’s yet-to-be-defined role at a Brics bank counted for less than the market stability and economic growth for which South Africa is desperate. As the tremors were still being felt, he was the only one who still did not get it. That is depressing.

A lot has happened since — the governing party intervened, denied intervening, admitted intervening, blamed business for Zuma’s tardy management of the country and criticised the media — but failed to put the spotlight on the main protagonist.

We are entering a crucial year of local government elections. This tier of government is closest to the people and is the coal face of service delivery. And we know that service delivery is the bedrock of any nation’s development. It requires skills, expertise, compassion and adroitness.

In South Africa, protests about delivery have been explosive and persistent. Everyone seemed to breathe a sigh of relief that Van Rooyen was removed from the Treasury, but is anyone asking what makes him suitable for the critical cooperative governance and traditional affairs portfolio?

I do not know much about him, except what those who have worked with him in Merafong and parliament have had to say. At best they merely acknowledge him. Many can barely remember him. No one has said he is a trailblazer.

I am deeply concerned that the ANC and the government seem to be suggesting that if Van Rooyen is not suitable for the Treasury, he will automatically be suitable for local government. Maybe, but dare we experiment at such a critical time? I think not. Comment on this: write to tellus@sundaytimes.co.za or SMS us at 33971 www.sundaytimes.co.za