If words were actions, South Africa would have the sleekest, most efficient government on the planet.
Budget speeches and reform proposals promise leaner administration, cost-cutting, and a “capable state.” Yet, year after year, we remain burdened with an overstuffed executive and a civil service bloated with inefficiency. And yet every year the government promises that this year it will be different. The 2025 Budget Speech, delivered by Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana, contains all the right noises, all the right prompts—fiscal prudence, efficiency, debt stabilisation—but when it comes to actually implementing meaningful cuts, the state remains an insatiable beast..
Free SA’s proposal to trim the cabinet from 77 members to 26 offers a blueprint for real savings, real efficiency, and real governance reform. It is pragmatic and by international standards hardly radical. Smaller cabinets have a proven track record internationally of success and efficiency. Yet, despite such reasoned calls, it remains improbable that the self-serving political class will willingly cut itself down to size because it would most certainly be to their own detriment. The state, as it stands, is not designed for efficiency. It is a patronage machine, a vehicle for political survival, and a cushioned refuge for the well-connected.
So, should we hold our breath for reform? Or should we assume, as history suggests, that the political elite will do what it does best: defend its perks and protect its fiefdoms at the expense of ordinary South Africans, who will have to fund the bloated government through increased taxes and extra costs for consumers, such as the latest increase in VAT.
For a country with an economy projected to grow at a dismal 1.8% over the next few years, South Africa has an executive branch that rivals that of superpowers, yet is hardly effective in driving any policy of substance. The 2025 Budget confirmed what we already knew—our debt-service costs alone amount to R389.6 billion this year, gobbling up 22 cents of every rand in revenue. Meanwhile, government spending climbs from R2.4 trillion to R2.83 trillion by 2027.
What do we get for this outlay? A cumbersome, multi-layered bureaucracy that seems more preoccupied with its own existence than with delivering basic services and implementing fundamental, long-lasting change which ordinary South-Africans so desperately crave. South Africans often forget that the ministerial portfolios read like a surrealist novel: a Ministry for Women, Youth and Persons with Disabilities; a Ministry for Small Business Development; a Ministry for Planning, Monitoring and Evaluation. No doubt, all of these are politically convenient—handy tools for distributing jobs and titles—but are they necessary?
For context, consider that Brazil, with a population of 214 million, operates with 37 ministers. India, with its 1.4 billion people, has 30. China, the world’s second-largest economy, also has just 37 ministers. South Africa, with a population of 60 million, has 34 ministers and 43 deputy ministers, costing taxpayers over R1 billion a year just in salaries and perks, not to mention millions of rands a year that is spent on VIP protection for our ministers. Stated plainly, one wouldn’t think that an Executive branch and Ministers that are truly serving the interests of the people would need to spend such preposterous amounts on VIP protection from its own people.
South Africa’s government has not grown fat by accident. It has grown fat by design. The ruling ANC’s internal factionalism has long necessitated a bloated executive, where ministerial positions serve as political bargaining chips for ANC executives rather than vehicles of governance and change. And, with the Government of National Unity (GNU) in place, this problem has remained…
Where once the ANC could contain its patronage machine within the party, it now has to accommodate coalition partners, expanding the already engorged executive structure. Each additional minister represents not just another salary but an entire bureaucratic ecosystem of directors-general, consultants, administrative staff, and, of course, VIP protection squads. Cutting these posts would mean not just financial savings, but a fundamental restructuring of political power: a step that few in government are eager to take. But a step that would enable efficiency and ensure greater clarity and role clarification, since uncertainty looms large across many ministries as a result of duplicated functions and responsibilities. Most importantly, this would put money back in the pockets of ordinary South Africans.
The Free SA proposal, then, is not just about trimming budgets. It is about dismantling a culture of political self-preservation disguised as public service. That is why it will be resisted.
The Illusion of Fiscal Discipline
Despite the rhetoric of fiscal restraint, the 2025 Budget Speech fails to take the bold steps necessary for genuine efficiency. Instead, it opts for the old, predictable formula: more taxation, particularly through VAT increases, and a mild commitment to debt stabilisation. The government is asking more from taxpayers while showing no proof that the increased demand on taxpayers is justified by the output of the government. Additionally, the government is doing very little to reform its own spending habits. Instead it is rather just adding to the expenditure.
This is the equivalent of a household deep in debt choosing to take on a second mortgage while refusing to cut unnecessary expenses. If the government were serious about fiscal discipline, it would start by cutting unnecessary ministries, streamlining administrative costs, and decentralising governance functions to the provincial level. Yet none of these moves are prioritised.
Instead, we are treated to an increase in spending on public-sector wages, a further increase in social grants, and vague commitments to “improving state capability.” There is no doubt that certain forms of public spending—such as infrastructure and education—are necessary investments. But when a government spends more on debt-servicing than on health, education, policing, or infrastructure, it is clear that something is deeply wrong.
Decentralisation Is The Sensible Alternative
It is absolutely necessary to devolve key government functions—such as education, policing, and healthcare—to provincial control. This would not only cut bureaucratic duplication, but also increase accountability by bringing governance closer to the people. This would further empower provincial governments, give them relevance and ensure that problems can be localized and dealt with in a closer proximity to the people of the specific province.
Consider the police: crime is a regional issue, with vastly different challenges in Gauteng, the Eastern Cape, and the Northern Cape. Why should a national police ministry dictate crime-fighting strategies for all provinces? A decentralised model, where provinces take the lead in law enforcement, would allow for more targeted and effective policing.
Similarly, education should be primarily a provincial concern. Provinces, with their unique linguistic and cultural differences, are better positioned to handle education policy than a distant national department. School governing bodies should also be empowered to make decisions independently, without waiting for direction from Pretoria.
Decentralisation is not a silver bullet, but it is a logical step toward reducing the excesses of a centralised bureaucracy. That it remains off the table speaks volumes about the government’s reluctance to relinquish control.
If these proposals are to have any traction, this will require more than just think-tank advocacy. It will require sustained public pressure. South Africans must demand not just accountability but a fundamental restructuring of government. The 2025 Budget Speech, despite its lip-service to efficiency, is yet another reminder that the state has no real intention of reforming itself. In the past, ordinary citizens have been comfortable with allowing the government to dictate and increasingly burden ordinary South-Africans and their pockets to our detriment. As citizens of this country, we must be willing to stand up and be counted. We must speak out for the country that we believe in and the government we see as best serving our interest. Now is not the time to sit idly and take it in our stride. Instead, it is time to speak up, and to advocate for government to be the servant of the people.
That means that the fight for a leaner, more effective government will have to come from outside the halls of power. Civil society, business leaders, and opposition parties must make it politically costly for the government to continue down its current path. Citizens must ask themselves: are we comfortable with a political class that insists on belt-tightening for everyone but itself?
For now, the ruling elite has successfully shielded itself from the austerity it imposes on others. The question is whether South Africans will continue to tolerate this status quo.
The GNU has positioned itself as a government of compromise, a necessary coalition in a fragmented political landscape. But compromise should not mean perpetuating the very inefficiencies that have hampered South Africa’s progress for decades. The time for half-measures and superficial reforms has passed. If the state will not cut its own excesses, then the electorate must eventually do it for them.
The 2025 Budget Speech, despite its carefully-crafted language, signals business as usual. But as South Africa inches closer to a fiscal reckoning (which is beckoning and will surely come), the window for real reform is shrinking rapidly. The government may choose to ignore the calls for efficiency today, but it cannot outrun economic reality forever.
The question is not if South Africa will be forced to downsize its bloated state—but when, and at what cost to South Africans.
[Image: https://pixabay.com/photos/piggy-bank-red-white-save-up-pig-1399265/]]
The views of the writer are not necessarily the views of the Daily Friend or the IRR.
If you like what you have just read, support the Daily Friend