Why Hanekom and Gigaba are fighting

Source: Chris Williams _ Rand Daily Mail, 03/08/2015

Spat over visa regulations between ministers of tourism and of home
affairs raises an important question: Why is government not on the
same page regarding a key policy?
The fallout over South African`s new visa regulations has taken a
public turn, with two government ministers clashing on the airwaves.
The regulations have been criticised by many as sabotaging the
country`s vital tourism industry. The industry is the third largest
contributor to the country`s GDP. Last year South Africa received more
than nine million international visitors.
Last week Tourism Minister Derek Hanekom vented his frustration at the
recent visa regulations imposed by his Home Affairs counterpart Malusi
Gigaba. Both ministers are prominent members of the governing ANC.
Conflicting interests collide
Hanekom told popular talk station Radio 702 that the new regulations
had caused a "worrying drop" in tourism to the country. The new rules
require visitors to appear in person to apply for visas and submit
digital photographs and fingerprints. Further regulations implemented
from June require parents to produce unabridged birth certificates for
children they are travelling with, who are under 18. This is in
addition to passports.
A few hours later, Gigaba hit back, saying the new regulations were
designed to combat child trafficking and that tourism profits should
not come at the expense of protection for children. He also suggested
the tourism industry and ministry were looking for others to blame for
their inability to effectively market the country and grow tourism.
The seemingly strange conflict pits two government ministers, who
ostensibly should be allies, against one another as adversaries. It
raises the important question of why South Africa`s government isn`t
on the same page regarding the new visa regulations.
The controversy is indicative of the banal demands of governing. A key
source of the disagreement is summed up in the famous insight about
policy making by Rufus Miles, the former American official, who stated:
Where you stand [on an issue] depends on where you sit [in government].
Gigaba`s mission at Home Affairs is to regulate migration to ensure
security, promote development and fulfil the country`s international
obligations. According to its website , the department controls,
regulates the movement of people through ports of entry.
From the department`s perspective, the new regulations assist in
monitoring who comes in and out of the country more accurately. In
addition, South Africa is a signatory to the United Nations Protocol
to prevent and punish trafficking of people, especially women and
children. This international protocol calls on state parties to combat
child trafficking.
The new regulations apparently allow Home Affairs to abide by the
protocol more effectively. They therefore make sense from Gigaba`s
perspective.
Hanekom`s Department of Tourism, on the other hand, has a different
mandate. Its purpose, according to its website is to create conditions
for the sustainable growth and development of tourism in South Africa.
One of the crucial aspects of developing tourism in the country is
ensuring procedures to enter the country are manageable and the rules
transparent. From the tourism ministry`s perspective, perception
matters as much as reality.
And Hanekon`s view is that the new entry regulations are opaque and
onerous and have seriously impeded his ministry`s ability to
accomplish its objective of promoting tourism.
Ministerial myopia
In sum, where the ministers stand on the new regulations depends on
where they sit in government. The inter-ministerial conflict has
erupted precisely because Ministers Gigaba and Hanekom both want to
carry out the objectives of their departments.
That this argument has now gone public is "unfortunate", according
Gigaba, but not unsurprising. Hanekom`s constituency has vocally
criticised the new visa regulations for months, creating growing
pressure on him to defend the interests of tourism.
A tried and tested method of winning bureaucratic battles is to
harness the power of the public. Hanekom`s disagreement with Home
Affairs may provide him with the valuable political leverage afforded
by public opinion when the issue of visa regulations is next discussed
in cabinet.
Because the objectives of various governmental ministries and agencies
sometimes compete, inter-departmental tensions are not rare.
Nonetheless, when these tensions burst into public view they are
fodder for media scrutiny because they provide a window into the often
untidy process of policy formulation.
The American General Stanley McChrystal`s public and harsh criticism
of the Obama administration`s strategy to stabilise Afghanistan in
2010 is a dramatic example of intra-governmental disputes going
public. McChrystal was subsequently relieved of duty.
Finding common ground
While ministers pay close attention to their departmental interests,
President Jacob Zuma must pay attention to the broader interests of
South Africa. What is now needed is firm and clear guidance by the
Presidency to resolve this conflict in the cabinet.
During interviews both ministers said the an inter-ministerial
committee was now addressing the issue of the new regulations. The
committee will hopefully assist Zuma in weighing the competing
concerns of his two ministers. The President should forge a solution
that satisfies both cabinet members and is best for South Africa`s
national interest.
Such a solution would ease and clarify the process by which potential
travellers can obtain the proper documentation to visit South Africa.
It would also need to effectively keep South African borders secure
and prevent the scourge of child trafficking.