Unstable government coalitions put local service delivery at risk
Bureaucracy must be shielded from political interference
South Africa’s entry into political governing coalitions is proving to be a high risk for service delivery, and the stabilisation of the public service and administration. The immediate task is not so much the preoccupation with the instability of the political coalitions, but to devise mechanisms to cushion citizens from the harmful effects of the fragile coalition governments.
The collapse of both the ANCled, and the Da-led coalitions in the Nelson Mandela Bay and City of Johannesburg metros, respectively, is a manifestation of political leadership instability of local government coalitions.
This instability is also prevalent in the cities of Ekurhuleni and Tshwane, with the possibility of power changing hands.
Local government coalitions, therefore, are a high risk to the residents of local communities.
Also, given the propensity that coalition governments are a likely future feature of provincial and national governments, South Africans are at risk of further marginalisation from political leadership, and service delivery. It is, therefore, imperative that both the framework, and the system through which government delivers public goods and services, be cushioned from political leadership instability both from the parties, and political individual leadership.
The irony though, is that the growth of both local and national economic development is primarily dependent on an astute political leadership, both at strategic and policy levels. Unfortunately, South Africa’s political parties are mainly inward looking. In the absence of a private sector job creating economy, political participation has become a major individual vehicle of economic activity.
Hence, the most vicious political contestations in South Africa’s body politic, is not across political parties but within political parties.
The proliferation of ANC individuals lobbying to be voted into the NEC is one case in point. In other instances, several municipal councillors have been murdered allegedly for municipal positions. Thus, at a collective level, the formation of coalition governments, address the same individual question – what’s in it for me!
The danger here lies when this political contestation happens within state institutions such as municipal councils; provincial and national governments; and democracy oversight bodies. The critical risk in this regard, is informed by the very thin line between that which ought to be the preserve of the political sphere, and that which ought to be the preserve of the bureaucratic and administrative sphere.
Under normal circumstances, there should be a bold line between politics and bureaucracy.
In the main, political leadership within the state apparatus should concern itself with policy development and direction, whilst bureaucratic leadership and management should be concerned with efficient and effecparty tive delivery of public goods, and services.
Cushioning the bureaucracy from politics is an intricate necessity. The intricacy in this regard, lies in the fact that in South Africa’s multi-party democracy, the bureaucracy has to deliver on the manifesto of the ruling party – whatever that
may be. Yet, in its execution of bureaucratic functions, it has to put at the centre of work, the essential well-being of the citizens.
The draft Framework for the Professionalisation of the Public Sector refers to the above, as a “depoliticised public sector”, and it is being developed by the National School of Government, led by Busani Ngcaweni, and discussed by the national cabinet. The draft framework states:
“The professionalisation of the public sector requires a non-partisan approach, which embraces the merit principles in all staffing practices in the public sector. For this to be realised, the public sector must be depoliticised by insulating it from the politics of political parties. This is important for the bureaucracy to continue to implement its political mandate loyally and diligently, as set by voters and the governing party or parties yet refrain from being a political actor itself.”
In a matured multiparty political democracy, political parties would appreciate a bureaucracy that operates loyally, and diligently in fulling the political electoral mandate of the ruling party, delivering services efficiently to citizenry, whilst refraining from participating in body politics.
In other work in this regard, led by the department of public services and administration, led by director-general, Yoliswa Makhasi, there is legislative proposals that senior bureaucratic leaders and managers such as head of departments, “…may not hold political office in a political party, whether in a permanent, temporary, or acting capacity”. As law, this has already taken effect at local government level. Linked to this, is the proposal contained in Professionalisation Framework that delinks the tenure of the head of administration from that of the political executive, with proposals that directors-general should be given a ten-year contract.
These discussions have been an essential element in initiatives of building state capacity to perform. However, the instability of coalition governments and the risk they pose to municipal infrastructure, service delivery, and local economic development, necessitate for urgency in dealing with the issue of cushioning bureaucracy from political interference, compromise, and the risk of destabilisation.
•
Government coalitions are a high risk to residents of local communities