On 18 May, Yoliswa Makhasi, Head of Public Service Reform at the New South Institute, published an op-ed in City Press. In the piece, Makhasi argues that the incoming Government of National Unity (GNU) must prioritise the implementation of the Public Service Act amendments to advance professionalisation and clarify the division between political and administrative roles in government. She highlights NSI’s role in supporting the amendment process, particularly through engagement in the National Council of Provinces’ public hearings. The full article, as published in City Press on 18 May, is available below:

GNU must prioritise implementing Public Service Act amendments
By YOLISWA MAKHASI
Makhasi is Head of the Public Service Reform Programme at the New South Institute
City Press – 18 May 2025

In February 2025, after almost thirty years of being a public servant working across the system (national and provincial government, and public entities), I joined the New South Institute (NSI) as the Head of the Public Service Reform Programme. The NSI is a policy institute that provides evidence-based policy recommendations and conducts applied research on complex government problems, particularly state capture, public service reform, migration and welfare state reforms. What attracted me to the NSI is the opportunity to influence public service reforms supported by several applicable theories, empirical evidence and lessons from practice in public administration, without the limitations and constraints imposed when operating within the system.  

One of my first tasks was to lead and coordinate the NSI’s participation in the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) process of provincial public hearings on the Public Service Amendment (PSA) Bill (B13-2023). This process started in February 2025. Eight provinces have hosted their public hearings thus far. The NSI has made various contributions in this process since its inception in the 6th administration and fully supports the amendments as proposed. Our submission focuses primarily on the devolution of administrative powers from executive authority (president, ministers, premiers and MECs) to heads of departments (HODs) (Section 2) and the limitation of the rights of HODs and those reporting to them to occupy political office (Section 16).  

Historical context 

In 1994, the ANC-led government inherited a deeply unequal, racially exclusive and inefficient civil service, prompting policymakers at the time to design a system that gave the political executive broad discretion in public administration. This was done against the established public administration principle of separating roles between politicians and public administrators, considering the situation at the time. This broad discretion extended to the administrative and operational functions that must be fully residing with HODs, including recruitment, appointments and managing the exit of employees, human resource planning and performance management of employees. 

The National Development Plan 2030 (NDP) was adopted in 2012 as a strategic framework to eliminate and reduce poverty by 2030. Chapter 13 of the NDP emphasises the development of a capable and developmental state, the professionalisation of the public service, and the stabilisation of the political-administrative interface. In appreciation of the challenged interface between political executives and administrative heads characterised by instability, interference in administrative matters and ambiguity of roles, the NDP instructs several actions to be undertaken. These include separation of political and administrative roles; devolution of administrative powers to HODs; establishment of an administrative head of the public service to manage career development and career incidents of HODs. These actions are carried forward into the amendments as adopted by the National Assembly in February 2024.  

In taking forward the NDP actions, the Cabinet approved the delegation principles as proposed by the Forum of South African Directors General (FOSAD) in 2013. In 2014, the Minister for Public Service and Administration (MPSA) issued the Directive on Public Administration and Management Delegations, giving administrative heads greater delegations in line with Cabinet decisions above. However, these remained discretionary under the Public Service Act, 13 of 1996 as amended. 

Despite these efforts, challenges persisted, including inconsistent delegation practices contributing to instability, high turnover of HODs and instances where political executives withdraw delegations without providing substantive and justifiable reasons. 

Mandatory delegation 

The mandatory delegations proposed in the Bill should promote more effective, efficient and professional decision-making, while maintaining accountability and stability within the system. Use of resources would be optimised by closer alignment between public administration and financial management, with greater alignment between the administrative heads’ dual roles as accounting officers and administrative leaders. The speed of decision-making and quality of decisions should be enhanced, as decisions will be made by those closest to the work. Layers of the hierarchy in decision-making will be reduced as the amendments further require DGs to delegate to members of senior management. Once political executives are relieved of day-to-day administrative duties, they should be able to focus on the strategic and policy matters in line with their constitutionally mandated roles. The consistent and clear delegation envisaged by the NDP will clarify HODs’ accountability and responsibility for administrative outputs and departmental performance. Furthermore, the amendments (Clause 2) empower the executive authority to hold the HOD accountable for the delegated duties and the department’s performance and prescribe several checks and balances.  

Limitation of the right to hold political office 

Clause 1 of the amendment bill defines political office, in relation to a political party or structure thereof, means: 1) the position of chairperson, deputy chairperson, secretary, deputy secretary or treasurer of the party nationally or in a province, region or other area in which the party operates; or 2) any position in the party equivalent to a position referred to in paragraph (a), irrespective of the title designated to the position. Prohibiting HoDs and those directly reporting to them from occupying political office (as defined above) is a proactive measure to promote impartiality, professionalism and effective governance within the public service. These officials exercise powers in managing departmental affairs, therefore restricting their ability to hold political office is significant to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest and to limit partiality in decision-making. 

The limitation also supports the development of a professional public service that is autonomous and insulated from political patronage, where HODs and senior officials can also concentrate on their administrative responsibilities, without the influence or distraction of political office-holding. 

The NDP is a progressive policy instrument that embraces values, policies and goals with a single aim to transform South Africa to be more equitable, inclusive and sustainable. Therefore, it is expected that political principals, legislators and other role players will put the interests of our Constitution, the NDP, and the people of South Africa above any other interests in processing this legislation to its conclusion.  

Yoliswa Makhasi is the Head of Public Service Reform at the New South Institute, a public policy think tank headquartered in Johannesburg, South Africa