Malusi Gigaba's unabridged loss is South Africa's victory

Source: Stephen Grootes – Daily Maverick, 28/10/2015

Last Friday was a day to remember. Students will remember it for their
victory over the government, President Jacob Zuma will remember it as
the day he was forced to cave in, and the African National Congress
for their inability to successfully hijack a march.

But for South Africa's tourism industry it was a red letter day; the
day the industry was saved. And for South Africa's economy it was the
day proper governance won out against massive egos and dark,
impenetrable threats about 'national security'. For Malusi Gigaba, it
was a day of personal humiliation.

There are many beautiful places in the world to visit. South Africa is
indeed a stunningly beautiful country. But not the only one in the
world. And it is on the other side of the world. It does not take a
genius to understand that we don't need to make visitors' lives more
difficult than they already are.

Six months ago we warned Home Affairs Minister Malusi Gigaba he was
going to have a huge battle on his hands around his insistence on new
travel regulations. We said he was going up against not just one
industry but several, and that the combined weight of the airline,
tourism and travel industries would be ranged against him. Later, when
Tourism Minister Derek Hanekom broke Cabinet protocol and went public
with his criticism of the regulations, this writer suggested Gigaba
might win out, not because he was right – and he was catastrophically
wrong – but simply because he appeared to have more power within
African National Congress (ANC) structures.

That was despite the fact it was clearly insane to demand that people
wanting to travel here first travel thousands of miles to the nearest
South African facility to apply for the biometric visa, that it was
virtually unprecedented to declare that children must have their
unabridged birth certificates with them as well as their passports,
and that the damage to our economy was plain and visible for all to see.

But, on Friday, the Cabinet proved both Gigaba, and this writer, very
wrong. In a long and complex statement, it revealed that almost all of
the new regulations were being dropped. In a lengthy release, it was
explained that some changes were being introduced immediately, some
over the next three months, and some over the next year or so.

There are many changes, but at the risk of over-simplification:

The demand for unabridged birth certificates to be brought with
children coming here is being quietly dropped (but people will be
urged to bring them, and will have to use them to apply for visas);
Those needing visas will be able to apply through the postal service
or use an accredited tourism company, depending on where they are; and
Biometric information will be captured at international airports as
visitors arrive.
Crucially, the demand that South African children travelling out of
the country must have their unabridged birth certificates will remain
but the wording around the document will be changed, to make it
slightly easier. And school principals and those running sports teams
will be able to sign consent forms to allow the children out of the
country.

The Department of Home Affairs was quick to rush out a statement,
explaining how it "welcomed" the changes, and agreed with the Cabinet
on the major issues. But it was the reaction of the tourism bodies
that showed how much of a victory this was for them, and the scale of
the defeat for Gigaba. Tourism Business Council chairperson, Mavuso
Msimang, (who had previously been scathing in his criticism of Gigaba
in the way that only a former Home Affairs director-general could be)
congratulated and thanked the Cabinet, explaining that this was pretty
much exactly what they wanted. He said it showed the "patriotism and
maturity" of ministers. Other tourism figures echoed those comments,
saying that now the job of rebuilding had to start. No doubt they
celebrated as the students did on Friday night, just with slightly
more expensive tipples.

Up until Friday's statement, it had appeared that Gigaba had the upper
hand. In public, he had been both bombastic and personal in his
defence of the regulations. He had claimed that the rapid decline in
visitor numbers was due to the tourism industry's "failure to market
the country" correctly. There were claims from his department that the
tourism industry "was putting money above children", with the
implication that they would be happier making money than preventing
children being trafficked. And there was the comment that revealed
that the department was making a complete mistake of governance, by
saying that the regulations, and their financial cost, would all be
justified if it stopped just one child from being trafficked through
the country.

Of course, Gigaba was completely missing the point that governance is
all about quantifying risks, and managing competing interests and
problems. Missing from his rhetoric was any hint of reasonableness, or
link to reality: there was no acceptance of our porous borders, of how
easy it is to move between South Africa and, say, Zimbabwe or
Mozambique, without bothering with a border post.

All in all, this was bad politics. Every time he spoke on this issue,
Gigaba raised the stakes for himself, he painted himself into a corner
by refusing to accept any criticism of the regulations, and he came
across as uncaring and not prepared to listen. It was his way or the
highway. Which makes his humiliation all the greater.

Gigaba has often been seen as someone who could, one day, be
president. There has been talk of a 30-year reign for KwaZulu Natal,
with President Jacob Zuma, then Nkosazana Dlamini-Zuma and then Gigaba
as president. At other times it was claimed that Gigaba would run a
'super-ministry' which would be centred around public enterprises, a
suggestion that he would be next in the line of succession after the
deputy president.
Instead, Hanekom, who has occupied important posts in the party
(including of course chairing its disciplinary committee during the
expulsion of Julius Malema), has emerged the victor. He only went
public with his criticism of the regulations after essentially being
dared to by Radio 702's John Robbie. And when he did so, he came armed
with facts and figures. Then, clearly, he won a huge game of
back-channel politicking. It will be some time before the facts emerge
about what really happened in Deputy President Cyril Ramaphosa's
inter-ministerial committee, but Hanekom has shown he is someone not
to tangle with.

Another possible result of all of this is that it would seem unlikely
at this point that Gigaba will back any bid by Ramaphosa come the
ANC's 2017 conference.

It is not just Gigaba who loses face here. His director-general,
Mkuseli Apleni, was also vociferous in his defence of these
regulations, and he too is now wiping yolk from his face.

And Home Affairs spokesperson, Mayihlome Tshwete, has perhaps been
even more aggressive than Gigaba himself, both in words and in tone.
While it's understandable that tempers will flare under this kind of
pressure, it's important to ensure one does not come across as
aggressive. Tshwete has the kind of background (and surname) that
makes some think he too could enter the Cabinet one day. He is
certainly very professional to deal with, and has a great capacity for
work. However, this episode may be an important lesson for him not to
over-spin the matter.

There are other implications for this about-turn by the Cabinet. It
should not be forgotten that it had approved the original regulations.
The damage to the economy was completely foreseeable, so why did the
same people who reversed their decision make it in the first place?
Did no one pay attention? Did they just go with Gigaba because they
felt he was the coming man and Hanekom was not?

And then there is the criticism that is now being voiced more and more
often that no impact assessment was carried out by the government
before these regulations were brought in. Surely someone neutral
should have been asked to investigate what the impact would be? There
was such a storm of negative reactions from every side of the
political, business and public arenas. Did the Cabinet really have to
wait for the damage to be done before understanding how wrong it all was?

In reality, this episode shows just how badly policy is made in this
country. Facts and figures were thrown out the window because of the
political personalities involved. Unfortunately, the economy, and the
world, rely on facts and figures.
Daily Maverick