By Michael Andisile Mayalo
The recent appointment of Roman Cabanac as Chief of Staff to John Steenhuisen in the Department of Agriculture has ignited a firestorm of controversy, casting a glaring spotlight on the Democratic Alliance's (DA) ethical credibility and commitment to its purported principles. Cabanac, a staunch climate change denier with connections to the alt-right, has sparked intense debate about the DA’s adherence to its core values and its stance on meritocracy versus cronyism.
Historically, the DA has championed itself as a bastion of merit-based appointments, positioning itself in stark contrast to the cadre deployment practices of its rivals, which often prioritise political loyalty over competence. The party has built its reputation on promises of transparency and capability in governance. However, Cabanac's appointment undermines these principles directly.
Cabanac’s denial of climate change is particularly troubling given the agricultural sector’s vulnerability to environmental shifts. Effective agricultural policy requires a nuanced and proactive approach to climate challenges, an area where Cabanac’s views are outdated and actively obstructive. His appointment raises serious concerns about the DA’s commitment to evidence-based policy and sustainable practices, crucial for addressing the sector's pressing climate-related issues.
Moreover, Cabanac’s affiliations with the unprogressive (alt-right movement) notorious for its extreme rhetoric and divisive ideologies present a direct challenge to the DA’s commitment to inclusivity and democratic values. By appointing someone lauded by such controversial circles, the DA risks alienating its more moderate and progressive supporters, thereby jeopardising its broader appeal and credibility.
This appointment represents a critical inflexion point for the DA. The party must confront these challenges head-on and address how Cabanac’s appointment aligns with its professed values and governance standards. The DA needs to reaffirm its commitment to evidence-based policy and inclusivity, particularly in the face of growing public scrutiny.
The handling of this issue will be a litmus test for the DA’s ability to maintain its reputation as a principled and effective political alternative. The party’s response to this controversy will be closely watched, and its ability to navigate this ethical dilemma will determine its standing as a credible force in South African politics.
Mayalo is an independent writer, analyst and commentator.
Click here to edit this text.