Democratic Alliance (DA) leader Geordin Hill-Lewis’s decision to seek sweeping changes to the party’s representation in the government of national unity (GNU) has ruffled feathers and triggered anger and confusion among senior party leaders.
Insiders describe the move as a breach of internal processes and a betrayal of understandings reached during its leadership election.
At the centre of the controversy is the proposed removal of former DA leader John Steenhuisen as minister of agriculture and his redeployment to the position of deputy minister of trade, industry and competition.
The move forms part of a broader reshuffle Hill-Lewis proposed and submitted to President Cyril Ramaphosa this week. The proposed changes would see Willie Aucamp moved from minister of forestry, fisheries and the environment to minister of agriculture and David Maynier take over the forestry, fisheries and environment portfolio.
Alexandra Abrahams is earmarked for deputy minister of electricity and energy, Yusuf Cassim for deputy minister of higher education and training and Jack Bloom for deputy minister of water and sanitation.
But party insiders say the manner in which the changes were handled has caused resentment among members of the DA federal executive (FedEx), the party’s highest decision-making structure between congresses.
Multiple sources say senior party leaders were blindsided by the proposed reshuffle and became aware of the details only after information begun circulating in the media.
“The issue is not only about John. It is about the process. Before any reshufflings occur, FedEx is well informed,” said a senior DA insider.
“Normally when there are movements involving ministers and deputy ministers, FedEx is consulted. Discussions happen internally before anything is announced publicly.
“This time people woke up to media reports. This … has never happened before … Now we sit here wondering who could be next to be told to vacate their positions to make way for new people who are not in the caucus,” the insider added.
The anger is compounded by concerns about the appointment of new faces to deputy ministerial positions.
Sources said several of those being elevated into government do not serve as MPS, meaning positions will need to be created.
“When people are parachuted into executive positions, somebody else has to move,” another source said.
“There are MPs who do not know whether they are being removed or affected. That uncertainty has created anxiety.”
The developments have also reopened tension linked to the DA leadership contest earlier this year. Party insiders point to an understanding that existed before Hill-Lewis succeeded Steenhuisen as federal leader.
Sources familiar with the discussions say Steenhuisen agreed not to contest the leadership race amid concerns that a bruising contest could divide the party. The understanding, was that he would remain a senior leader in government and retain his position as the agricultural minister.
While some discussions had reportedly taken place around moving Steenhuisen out of agriculture because of tension arising from the handling of the foot-and-mouth disease (FMD) outbreak, sources say the expectation was that any transition would involve a lateral move rather than a demotion.
“The understanding was that Willie Aucump and John would swop positions instead of demotion because we understood that he had fallen out of favour with the farmers. The best thing was to bring Aucump who we know has a great relationship with them to resolve the issue. What we did not expect was a deputy position, which is seen as betrayal at its best,” a senior DA leader said.
An option discussed internally involved a portfolio swop with then-forestry, fisheries and environment minister Aucamp, allowing both men to retain ministerial rank while addressing dissatisfaction among agricultural stakeholders.
Instead, Steenhuisen faces a move from Cabinet to a deputy ministerial position. On Wednesday, Hill-Lewis requested Ramaphosa to demote Steenhuisen from agriculture minister, a move widely interpreted as a significant reduction in influence for the former DA leader.
Hill-Lewis said the proposed changes followed a careful assessment of the party’s GNU team and were intended to strengthen the DA’s contribution to government. DA MP Karabo Khakhau said the party would not comment above the statement released on Wednesday. “The statement answers all the questions you have,” she said.
He credited Steenhuisen with expanding market access for agricultural exports and making progress in securing vaccines to combat FMD but said Aucamp’s immediate task would be to resolve legal disputes linked to the outbreak and restore confidence in the sector.
The FMD crisis has become a political headache for the DA, in which senior leaders agree that it had caused a loss of support from the farming communities to Freedom Front Plus and Patriotic Alliance.
Francois Rossouw, the chief executive of the Southern African Agri Initiative said the organisation’s criticism of Steenhuisen had centred on what it regarded as a flawed response to the FMD outbreak.
“We never targeted John because he is John. We were critical of the policy decisions he made. The man surrounded himself with the wrong people in the department who did not have the necessary experience to guide him and he did not provide the necessary leadership.”
Rossouw said the minister persisted with a centralised approach despite warnings from industry and veterinary experts.
“For us, the main issue was policy, he had the wrong plan for a crisis like this,” he said.
“And even though he appointed the best experts on his advisor panel from a veterinary perspective and from a farming perspective, he did not listen to them.”
Agricultural stakeholders have welcomed the prospect of Aucamp taking over the portfolio.
Aucamp, a farmer, is viewed by sections of the industry as someone with stronger credibility among producers and farming organisations. Supporters say his appointment could help rebuild trust between government and the sector.
However, the political fallout inside the DA might prove more difficult to contain.
Some insiders view the reshuffle as an assertion of authority by Hill-Lewis as he seeks to stamp his leadership on the party after his election earlier this year. Others fear it risks deepening divisions between supporters of the new leadership and those aligned with Steenhuisen.
The controversy has also drawn criticism from political opponents.
Acting ANC spokesperson Nonceba Mhlauli said the DA’s announcement exposed an “uncomfortable contradiction” in the party’s politics.
“The appointment and removal of members of the executive is a constitutional prerogative of the president. It is not subject to the directives of coalition partners, lobby groups or opposition parties” Mhlauli said.
The DA appeared to be treating proposed changes to the executive as a foregone conclusion despite the fact that Ramaphosa had not yet exercised his constitutional authority.