On an almost daily basis the press is now touting the possibility of yet another Cabinet reshuffle by President Jacob Zuma.
Were it to happen, it would be the 11th time the president has altered the make-up of the executive, since the announcement of his first Cabinet in May 2009.
Thus, it is worth setting out the history of Zuma’s Cabinet reshuffles both as a context to any possible upcoming change and to better identify the trends and patterns that have defined changes in the past.
What follows is a full diagnostic of all the president’s reshuffles since 2009. It is based on the following graphic, which tracks all the changes, the length of each cabinet and the changing size and structure of the national executive.
From it, the following facts can be drawn:
• Zuma is currently overseeing his 10th different Cabinet and national executive.
• The current national executive (all ministers and deputy ministers), last restructured on December 13 2015, stands at 74 people. It includes the president, the deputy president, 35 ministers and 37 deputy ministers.
• The Cabinet alone (just the president, deputy president and ministers) has 37 people.
• By comparison, Zuma’s first national executive, in 2009, consisted of 64 people — the president, deputy president, 33 ministers and 29 deputy ministers.
• Of Zuma’s first national executive, only 12 people (highlighted by a green bar in the graphic) have retained the position they occupied in 2009, including the president, without any change over that period.
• Seven of those 12 are ministers. They are Basic Education Minister Angie Motshekga, Economic Development Minister Ebrahim Patel, Health Minister Aaron Motsoaledi, Higher Education and Training Minister Blade Nzimande, International Relations Minister Maite Nkoana-Mashabane, Rural Development and Land Reform Minister Gugile Nkwinti, and Trade and industry Minister Rob Davies.
• Using the original total of 33 ministers in the national executive, that is a retention rate of 21% for ministers. If one uses the current number of ministers (35), the retention rate drops to 20%.
• By comparison, 11 of the 28 ministers former president Thabo Mbeki appointed at the beginning of his first administration were in the same position at the end of his second administration. That is a retention rate for ministers of just under 40%.
• Those 12 do not include Finance Minister Pravin Gordhan, and Science and Technology Minister Naledi Pandor, who are in the same positions today they occupied in 2009, but who have been reshuffled in the interim.
• Of the 64 people in Zuma’s original national executive, 52 (or 81%) have been reshuffled.
• Of those 52 people reshuffled, 35 are no longer part of the current national executive. Sixteen people who were part of the original national executive currently still serve on it, only in different positions.
• Only one department, Basic Education, has retained the same minister and deputy minister since 2009.
• Three departments — Co-operative Governance and Traditional Affairs, Public Service and Administration, and Communications — have each had five different ministers since 2009 (see column highlighted in yellow).
• Twelve departments have had three different ministers.
• The period each of the 10 Cabinets lasted before being reshuffled is as follows:
1. 13 months
2. 12 months
3. Eight months
4. Five months
5. 10 months
6. 11 months
7. 18 months
8. Two months
9. Five days
10. 13 months
• Thus, the average length of a Cabinet under Zuma, before it is reshuffled, is just under 9.5 months.
• The longest a Cabinet has remained unchanged was the seventh, just after the 2014 elections, which lasted 18 months. The shortest was just five days, when the decision to remove Finance Minister Nhlanhla Nene caused massive volatility and damage to local markets.
• In total, since 2009, Zuma has made 106 changes to the national executive: 52 changes to ministerial positions, 53 changes to deputy ministerial positions and one change to the deputy presidency.
• The number of changes for each cabinet reshuffle is as follows:
Second Cabinet: 26 changes
Third Cabinet: nine changes
Fourth Cabinet: eight changes
Fifth Cabinet: two changes
Sixth Cabinet: nine changes
Seventh Cabinet: 47 changes
Eighth Cabinet: two changes
Ninth Cabinet: one change
Tenth Cabinet: two changes
• Zuma’s first five-year term was marked by much turbulence. During that period, up to but not including his new national executive after the 2014 elections, he oversaw six different executives and made 54 changes. It is true, since 2014, he has made an additional 52 changes but the vast majority of those (47) were in establishing an executive for his second term, after the 2014 elections. Since then, he has constituted only three other Cabinets, and made only five additional changes to its composition. Thus, up to this point, Zuma’s second five-year term has been far more stable.
There are a number of important trends and patterns one can discern from this analysis.
Of them all, the most obvious is the turmoil in the national administration under Zuma. Not every change to the executive was a result of Zuma’s will; a very small number were forced through death, resignation or appointment to another position. However, the overwhelming majority were at his behest and in line with his wishes.
This kind of regular upheaval has a detrimental effect on service delivery. One must remember that it is mirrored at departmental level too. A full analysis of the reshuffling of directors-general was not possible for this analysis but as of August 2013, 114 different directors-general had served in either permanent or acting capacities since Zuma first came to office. Their average life span is just 15 months or 450 days. There is no reason to believe that pattern has changed.
All of which has a profound effect on a department’s ability to deliver services effectively. Each one relies on the consistent leadership and vision of its principal. If that person is regularly changed, it makes it incredibly hard for a department to cohere. One need look no further than the Department of Communications, which has had five ministers since 2009, for evidence of extreme confusion and disorder.
Finally, the chaos is augmented by the constant reshuffling of ministries and departments as well. The creation of new departments (the National Planning Commission, Small Business Development), of new ministries (Women in the Presidency, Telecommunications), the dissolution of others (Justice and Constitutional Development), and the reintegration of some departments and ministries into others, all leads to a general sense of disarray.
The explanation for it all can only be one of two options. First, Zuma has extremely poor judgment, and his ability to choose ministers and create departments and ministries able to deliver on a mandate is woeful. The evidence for this is the game of musical chairs that is the national executive.
The second is that the President repeatedly puts his own, private political concerns ahead of service delivery, creating a constant state of chaos in which no one is secure in their job and, as a result, everyone is increasingly beholden to the president. In this way, the threat of constant change helps ensure political loyalty.
Of course, it could be both explanations: bad judgment and political expediency, working hand in hand to undermine delivery.
If another round of changes is imminent the depth and breath of them will be telling. The president has found out the hard way, with his ninth Cabinet and the removal of Nene, that just one change can have a profound impact. The public’s appetite for these kinds of changes is wearing very thin.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.