Last weekend South Africans got a taste of how a weekend parole for one serving a prison sentence might feel like. We did not have loadshedding for the first time in goodness knows how long.
One thing that has not changed is the conversation as to whether Eskom has the right people for this challenge to the nation’s economic and jobs future.
If you were to ask the average South African what is wrong with Eskom and how it can be fixed, you are likely to have an ideologically layered response.
That does not mean that the ideological responses are necessarily wrong. The over-politicisation of what is at its heart a technical matter has made it difficult to get into helpful conversations.
It is quite possible that if you asked 10 people what they think of the newly appointed Eskom board, you might get 10 different names of someone who is not but should be there, and 10 of who should not.
This is because the government prefers to keep the average South African in the dark, as it were, with regards to what the government thinks is the real problem or why it thinks that the individuals in the various positions are the best persons to solve it.
We are kept guessing. Once in a while the state will throw a line about sabotage here and there, but they hardly ever tell you who they think is involved and why they are doing it.
Now and then, the state tells us that the problems at Eskom are because of the grand larceny taking place but we never get to know who is stealing and what is being done to keep them from further looting the till.
Hardly a day passes without pundits, political parties and the public alike demanding the immediate resignation or firing of CEO Andre de Ruyter, minister of state enterprises Pravin Gordhan or his minerals and energy counterpart, Gwede Mantashe.
It would not kill President Cyril Ramaphosa if he were to open up and tell the rest of us what he sees as the problem, and why he believes that De Ruyter is best suited for the task at hand.
It would help if the president were to read the diagnosis of the problem for all to hear and see, and be honest about how long and what it woill take to correct what is wrong.
Without knowing this, wanting De Ruyter or the board to stay or go, is just guess work. It is more about announcing our political positions than it is about coming up with solutions worth considering.
This is not asking for the impossible. During Covid, president Ramaphosa was a regular on our TV screens giving updates and sometimes hope to a nation gripped by fear of the then little-known about but deadly virus.
He could do this again. I suppose this time he would have to check with Eskom at what time all of SA would have power to listen to the broadcast.
Being without power is frustrating enough. Not knowing why and what exactly is being done to correct it, adds insult to our collective injury.
Loadshedding might have started under former president Thabo Mbeki’s tenure but how it is handled will define Ramaphosa’s presidency.
To come up with fence-sitting statements like “we are paying close attention to the skills and experience of the Eskom leadership” tells us nothing.
It is to be expected that the shareholders of any business “pay close attention to the skills and experience” of those they task with running their business.
The impact of Eskom’s problems are too specific and material to be responded to with abstract concepts and vagueness. That’s why Eskom hires artisans and not artists, engineers and not philosophers and political scientists.
It must go without saying that Eskom should have the best possible people at every level, from the lowest menial task to the ultimate person responsible for Eskom fulfilling its strategic purpose.
By all means, De Ruyter must account for his performance. The scorecard should, however, be held against certain known expectations and what it was he said he could do, and by when.
The same applies to the political principals, including the president, the already mentioned ministers and any other person (for example, the minister of finance). They should be clear as to what they see their role being and by when they expect to have executed what needs to be done.
It would at least give us something to measure the president, his ministers, De Ruyter and his board against.
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.