Election ’24: Navigating the era of coalition politics in SA

In the wake of the ANC’s diminished dominance, coalition politics loom large, ushering South Africa into an era of perpetual negotiation and delicate balance. With the spectre of unstable alliances and contentious power dynamics, the nation grapples with the implications of its proportional representation system. As the ANC weighs its options amidst factional tensions, the DA seeks to forge a transformative path, leveraging potential coalitions to enact substantial change and stave off the looming threat of a “doomsday coalition.”

Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.

By Jonathan Katzenellenbogen*

Now that the one-party dominant rule of the ANC has ended, we are likely to see attempts at coalition building as a routine process after our elections. And even between elections, coalitions may fall apart and have to be replaced by new ones.

It places our politics on a permanent knife edge. That is the outcome of a voting system based on proportional representation.

The lesson we will quickly learn is that most coalitions are similar to bad marriages where both partners regard each other as second-best solutions.

In the past, the big divide in our politics was between the ANC and the EFF, with their commitment to state ownership, expropriation without compensation, and empowerment on the one hand, and on the other the more liberal and market-minded Democratic Alliance (DA).

Today, on one side lie the parties that say they respect the Constitution and the rule of law. On the other side are those who threaten violence and show disregard for the constitutional processes. These are the two Comrade ANC breakaway parties, uMkhonto we Sizwe (MK) and the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF), who see disruption and threats of violence as part of their strategies.

Former President Jacob Zuma, the figurehead of MK, warned of “trouble” if the election results were declared on Sunday evening. By casting doubt on the elections, Zuma can build on his image that he has been persecuted by the ANC, and he may solidify his support, and have a possible bargaining tool.

If either MK or the EFF came close to power, there would be an existential threat to our democracy and our economy.

The ANC National Executive Committee (NEC) met yesterday (Tuesday), to consider the party’s options. It must make a decision on what coalition partner it wants within 14 days of the declaration of the election results – that is by Sunday, 16 June.

What both the DA and now the ANC seem to want is to block the breakaway Comrade parties from entering government. That means a Grand Coalition which brings together the two largest parties in the country and possibly a few smaller ones.

Both know that they have no better means of stopping the Comrade breakaway parties from entering government than through this sort of coalition. So at the least, a confidence and supply arrangement is required. Under this sort of deal the DA would support the ANC should there be a vote of confidence in the government, and it would make a commitment to voting for the passage of the government’s budget.

What does the ANC want?

ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula says he wants national stability and respect for the Constitution.

The higher echelons of the ANC must have taken in the dire warnings from organised business and market opinion about bringing in either or both of the breakaway Comrade parties into government. The top cadres in the ANC know that if a coalition is formed with the breakaways, it would face endless demands and threats.

The ANC wants a secure coalition over the next five years, but it wants to give away as little as possible to its partners. It needs to maintain much of its power and patronage for its cadres. The ANC also wants to increase the chance that it can do better at the next election, if necessary through big giveaways.

These are all reasons why the ANC would prefer a “confidence and supply” coalition, and nothing more. It would be very reluctant to lose control over policy by appointing DA ministers.

What does the DA want?

Above all, the DA wants to stop the “doomsday coalition” of all three Comrade parties. It also wants to show its supporters that it can make a difference if it’s in a coalition and can halt the ANC’s damaging policies.

And it wants a clean, accountable government with zero tolerance for corruption. DA Leader John Steenhuisen has said the party wants to see headway on its seven top manifesto points. These include the creation of two million new jobs, an end to load-shedding and water-shedding, halving the rate of violent crime, abolishing cadre deployment, lifting six million people out of poverty, tripling the number of grade four learners who can read for meaning, and ensuring quality healthcare for all.

Implementing these would require a lot more than a confidence and supply agreement with the ANC. Would the party want to leave this up to an ANC Cabinet, while it gets the Speaker position in Parliament and the Committee Chairs?

On the whole, Parliamentary Committees have proved themselves powerless in the face of secretive and evasive government departments.

Implementing DA priorities would require Cabinet posts. The DA is aware that ANC-aligned directors general and other civil servants might try to thwart its plans. So unless the DA can make fresh staff appointments in the departments it runs, it would be able to do little. Otherwise, come the election in 2029, the ANC would point out that even the DA was unable to solve power cuts and our railway and port bottlenecks.

In reaching a coalition agreement, there still might be the possibility of trading a lot else to secure other deals. Provincial coalitions could be exchanged for deals on policies and Cabinet positions.

What are the sorts of deals to which both might be open?

As part of a deal which would see DA confidence and supply support for the ANC over the five-year term of Parliament, the DA might be able to obtain “carve outs”. These would be positions and special areas in which the DA could make a difference.

In exchange for its support of the ANC in Parliament, the DA might demand that the provincial government in the Western Cape be put in charge of the national police force in the province. As part of a wider deal, it could also demand to run all the ports and railways in the Western Cape. And at national level it might ask to run Public Enterprises, Trade and Industry, and Mining with its full authority to bring in new staff and repeal ANC regulations.

If the DA was given the Minerals and Energy Cabinet portfolio, it could repeal the Mining Charter on empowerment participation, as it is a regulation rather than an Act. That alone could spark new global interest in South Africa as a mining destination.

Rather than stay on the sidelines with a narrow confidence and supply arrangement, the DA had best use this chance to demand a wider arrangement in which it can push for real change. It is duty-bound to its supporters to demonstrate that it can do more than stop the comrades. It must show that it can achieve change in areas that are important to the country’s future.