To appreciate the depth of the mess SA is in today it’s worth travelling back in time to 15 years ago. When you get there you realise, among other things, how oblivious successive ANC administrations have been to the country’s socioeconomic crisis.
In 2007 — the year of the first recurring power cuts — the SA economy notched up a growth rate of 5.1%, slightly lower than 2006’s 5.4% but still above the 5% the economy had achieved for four of the previous eight years of sustained growth.
Those high growth rates meant government revenue collection was buoyant and the fiscus could comfortably carry social programmes such as education, health and social grants. And, of course, the comrades could eat too. And boy, did they feast.
At its May 2022 meeting the SA Reserve Bank’s monetary policy committee forecast growth of 1.7% this year, and 1.9% for both 2023 and 2024. The main culprit: recurring power cuts, poor infrastructure and policy constraints.
If it had just a bit of sensation left in its thick political hide the governing party would have moved with a greater sense of urgency in addressing the crisis. The contradiction is that this behaviour is by a party that is losing support, in a country where more citizens are turning to increasingly violent street protests.
SA has had recurring power cuts for 14-and-a-half years, including five years under Jacob Zuma and his then deputy, Kgalema Motlanthe, and four under the duo of Zuma and Cyril Ramaphosa. So you would have expected Ramaphosa to have a sense of urgency in dealing with the energy crisis. After all, he was, as Zuma’s deputy, in charge of Eskom’s war room.
But what we have had from Ramaphosa is a numbed response to the energy crisis despite the fact that the recurring electricity cuts have, by his own admission, held the economy back, which means fewer jobs, less tax revenue and an inconvenience to citizens.
In his state of the nation address in June 2019 Ramaphosa said the Reserve Bank had pencilled in economic growth at a lower rate than the finance minister forecast in the 2019/2020 budget. “One reason for the lacklustre economic performance has been load-shedding early this year, together with the continued uncertainty in the supply of electricity and the state of Eskom. The lesson is clear: for growth we need reliable and sustainable supply of electricity,” Ramaphosa said.
He came back in February 2020: “The load-shedding of the last few months has had a debilitating effect on our country. It has severely set back our efforts to rebuild the economy and to create jobs. Every time it occurs it disrupts people’s lives, causing frustration, inconvenience, hardship.”
He then promised “measures that will fundamentally change the trajectory of energy generation” in SA. These included a section 34 ministerial determination, “enabling the development of additional grid capacity from renewable energy, natural gas, hydro power, battery storage and coal”. The determination empowers the mineral resources & energy minister, a fellow called Gwede Mantashe, to decide that new generation capacity is needed and, with the concurrence of the energy regulator, simply make it happen.
Now, in July 2022 Ramaphosa tells us again that “the bottom line is that we need to add more capacity to the grid”. He is, we are now told, going to announce emergency energy measures.
Contrast this dilly-dallying with the speedy response of the French government to the energy crisis that hit Europe after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. France has decided to buy the remaining 16% shareholding in Électricité de France that it doesn’t own already. “We must have full control of our energy system and its performance. We must assure our sovereignty faced with the consequences of the war,” French Prime Minister Élisabeth Borne told parliament.
The Wall Street Journal described France’s move as “a measure of how European governments are taking increasingly assertive steps to control their energy markets as prices soar and Russian energy supplies dwindle”. It also cited Germany’s move to bail out gas utilities facing a cash flow crisis. The EU has also revised the list of investments deemed sustainable to include nuclear and natural gas, a decision that unlocks funding for these two sectors.
These are steps taken by governments that are sensitive to the needs of their voters. They understand that failure to confront the energy crisis — with its attendant effect on the economy and people’s living standards — will result in a change of government. The European governments understand all too well that ideas and speeches don’t move mountains, bulldozers do (with a nod to the late management consultant Peter Drucker).
• Sikhakhane, a former spokesperson for the finance minister, National Treasury and SA Reserve Bank, is editor of The Conversation Africa. He writes in his personal capacity.
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.