Business leaders appear to be responding, after several months of hesitancy, to the style and content of the administration of President Jacob Zuma. The most significant signal was the recent announcement by Business Leadership SA (BLSA) chairman Bobby Godsell that representatives of business need to change the way they articulate the interests of this vital constituency. He made it clear that organised business needs to raise its public profile, and also to focus on selected key themes of national importance, such as health, skills and energy.
It was inevitable that there would be a period of wait-and-see. Under President Thabo Mbeki, the relationship between business and government was somewhat schizophrenic.
On the one hand, Mbeki made it clear that he understood the importance of business, and of business confidence, and many of his policies reflected this. He at least gained credibility for his consistency. He set up formal channels for interaction and there were regular meetings between ministers and senior executives.
On the other hand, business soon learnt what would displease Mbeki and modified its behaviour accordingly. He did not appreciate being criticised in the media, and was acutely sensitive to real and perceived attacks on the national racial transformation project. The result was regular but discreet engagement, but with some delicate areas - Zimbabwe, the fight against crime, Aids - often placed out of bounds from genuine discussion. The risk for business was that it would sacrifice its independent voice but get nothing in return - and so irritate and alienate its own constituency.
Zuma's administration is less prickly and more approachable, but also much less coherent; it is more open, but also more diffuse. Business was waiting for the new government to coalesce. Now it has evidently decided, probably rightly, that this government is not likely to coalesce further. The country is getting used to rule by cabinet ministers rather than by cabinet. In party and government, there seems to be little consensus and much debate. Zuma is reluctant to take sides when factions compete, and so the initiative is taken by those who manoeuvre most cunningly and who shout the loudest - a recipe for confusion at best, warlordism at worst.
One catalyst for the new approach by BLSA was the realisation that Zuma, unlike Mbeki, clearly does not have an appetite for formal, structured engagement with business. The big business working group that met regularly with Mbeki's government has not had even one meeting since Zuma took office. Therefore new ways of communicating must be found.
Another spark must have been Zuma's clumsy handling of the Eskom board's decision to accept the resignation of CEO Jacob Maroga. The resignation of Godsell as chairman, after he had been asked to go back and work out something with Maroga, surprised Zuma. The Eskom debacle also reminded the country that, when it comes to leadership of major enterprises like Eskom, the stakes are high. All of this should give BLSA new confidence to add its voice to what has become a busy political and economic public discourse. While it would be refreshing to see business get out of the habit of keeping its collective head down at the slightest hint of hostility from government, we should not expect BLSA to be a proxy for an opposition party, or to pronounce on every issue of the day. It needs to keep its powder dry for the occasional big battle, while reassuring government of continuing institutional support where appropriate and when requested (as with Business Against Crime). Though the emphasis will change, BLSA's core role will remain, and there is no other business organisation with the necessary resources, intellectual firepower and legitimacy.
BLSA now has to robustly occupy some of the space that is there to be taken in a democracy. Others - political parties, unionists, NGOs, academics, media commentators, rabble rousers - have not been shy to do so. History will not be kind to business if it is not seen to take the field.
