GNU Extravagance Making a Mockery of Austerity Measures

Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu

When Deputy President Paul Mashatile appeared before Parliament to answer questions as is required in terms of the Constitution, he found himself having to respond to questions which went beyond his political work but touched on issues related to the current state of the country’s finances. 

Dr Teboko Letlape from ActionSA asked for a complete updated breakdown of all official travels by Mashatile since he assumed office on 3 July 2024. This included information about the purpose of each visit and whether it was justified or not; details about the countries visited; costs involved on each trip; the names and roles of each member of the delegation; and any additional costs on each trip.

While this appeared to be a normal question-and-answer session which both the President and Deputy President must honour, the questions triggered a debate which has caught the attention of many South Africans.

   For the past few days, there has been a war of words among different constituencies regarding Mashatile’s expenses on international trips. The bone of contention is about the amounts involved in these international trips which include countries such as Botswana, France, Ireland, Japan, United Kingdom, and Zimbabwe.

For the Japan trip, one source placed the figure at a staggering R580 582. Responding to this figure, Mashatile’s office released a statement on 10 June 2025 arguing that most of the figures (including this one) were blown out of proportion. The statement said that the cost for the Japan trip was less than R66 000.

Among other things, the statement reminded the country that South Africa must strengthen relations with other countries. It also indicated that some of Mashatile’s trips were undertaken following President Ramaphosa’s decision to delegate him (Mashatile) while he was busy with other assignments. To take the nation into confidence, Mashatile’s office provided what it called ‘correct’ figures and other related information.

While the question from ActionSA was fair, and while the response from Mashatile’s office was justifiable and necessary, the main question becomes: what should South Africans focus on beyond being fixated on the debatable numbers that have been presented by different stakeholders?

In addressing this question, we should not lose sight of the need for the executive members to execute their mandate. We should also not ignore the fact that it is important for our country to forge new relations while strengthening preexisting ones. Importantly, as part of multilateral institutions like G20 and others, South Africa must remain visible in the global arena.

But, having said all that, there are many critical questions which have been invoked by the ongoing debate about Mashatile’s international trips. The first question can be phrased as follows: given the country’s economic situation, is it advisable for the executive to embark on too many trips which eat on the country’s thin budget? A logical answer is an emphatic no! Any argument against too many trips should not be misconstrued to mean that there should be no international trip at all.

Secondly, given the reasons provided by Mashatile’s office, what is the role of South Africa’s foreign missions or embassies? If our embassies have properly trained staff, can’t they do some of the work which is done by the executive? 

In the same vein, given that most of the countries our executive visits have embassies with staff, is it not possible to use some of the staff members already stationed in those countries to assist our executive so that the delegation from South Africa could be trimmed to cut costs? In short, is there a return on investment when each member of the executive is accompanied by a big delegation? Is it wise for the South African government to equate itself with First World countries like America that can afford huge delegations? If the answer is in the negative, then we should cut the cloth according to our size.

Another very critical question is about the political parties which were very critical of the ANC during their campaigns for the 2024 general election. What has become of their criticism? Have they suddenly lost voices? If they were critical of the ANC because they were listening to the cries of many South Africans, did they miraculously become ‘deaf-mute’ as soon as they signed the historic statement of intent which produced the multiparty coalition which is touted as the Government of National Unity (GNU)?

The reality is that poverty is rife in South Africa. The high unemployment rate of 32.9 per cent is unacceptable. The high crime rate does not encourage foreign investment and tourism. Even continued inequality in the country is not something we can be proud of. To what extent has the coalition government assisted in changing this situation for the better? 

One glaring irony is that many of the ten political parties that are in a coalition were vocal about our bloated cabinet during their campaigns. Even the ANC was in favour of a reduced cabinet. Intriguingly, after the 2024 election, all of that changed. The seventh administration witnessed a bigger cabinet compared to that of the sixth administration. The mundane argument is that this was necessitated by the coalition government. But were politicians more concerned about cabinet positions than being MPs to serve the people?

Surely, a reduced cabinet and a reduced parliament would not be a panacea to all the challenges South Africa faces. However, such a gesture would revive hope among the electorate that our government is trying to reduce costs. Instead, we have just borrowed R26.5 billion from the World Bank for infrastructure. Only time will tell if all that money will go to where it is targeted.

What makes the Mashatile matter more important is that it goes beyond the national government. The executive in provinces and municipalities is equally guilty of extravagance while service delivery is either limping or non-existent. When that happens, voters feel betrayed.

Against this backdrop, the Mashatile matter implores us to look beyond the numbers and ask critical questions.

* Prof. Bheki Mngomezulu is Director of the Centre for the Advancement of Non-Racialism and Democracy at Nelson Mandela University.

** The views expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of IOL, Independent Media or The African.