The leader of South Africa’s Official Opposition has been given an especially rough ride since his party helped form the Government of National Unity. Latest is manufactured outrage about a fictional “multi-million rand blue light luxury SUV fleet”. In this interview, John Steenhuisen, Agriculture Minister in South Africa’s Government of National Unity, provides full details about his official (and private) vehicles. He confirms that Action SA, which engineered the ‘exposé’, was given all these facts before launching its tirade. Steenhuisen spoke to BizNews editor Alec Hogg.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
The seventh BizNews Conference, BNC#7, is to be held in Hermanus from March 11 to 13, 2025. The 2025 BizNews Conference is designed to provide an excellent opportunity for members of the BizNews community to interact directly with the keynote speakers, old (and new) friends from previous BNC events – and to interact with members of the BizNews team. Register for BNC#7 here.
Watch here
Listen here
Highlights from the interview ___STEADY_PAYWALL___
In this interview, Alec Hogg speaks with John Steenhuisen, leader of the Democratic Alliance (DA), about recent political developments, his role as Minister of Agriculture, and international engagements. The discussion begins with a controversy surrounding Steenhuisen’s vehicle purchases, which Action SA has criticised. Steenhuisen defends himself, stating that the vehicles were bought according to official guidelines and without any departmental funds. He emphasises that such attacks are petty politics and that his focus is on South Africa’s larger issues, including job creation, economic recovery, and investment.
Steenhuisen also discusses his recent trip to China, where South Africa’s agricultural interests, including beef, dairy, and wool exports, were advanced. He explains how these international trips are carefully considered to ensure they benefit South African farmers and the economy. Looking ahead, Steenhuisen shares his upcoming trip to Kampala for agricultural discussions with African counterparts, aimed at boosting trade and regional cooperation.
On the topic of global forums, Steenhuisen reflects on his upcoming participation in the World Economic Forum in Davos, where he plans to focus on agricultural investment, AI in farming, and opportunities for small-scale farmers. He emphasizes the importance of strategic international relationships in promoting South Africa’s agricultural exports.
The interview ends on a somber note as Steenhuisen remembers the late Peter Mansfield, a former political figure and Durban city councillor, whose legacy of leadership and innovation is still remembered in South Africa. Steenhuisen also criticises media coverage that fails to adhere to journalistic ethics, particularly regarding the vehicle controversy.
Edited transcript of the interview
Alec Hogg (00:10.114):
Well, kicking off the new year on BizNews TV for me, at least, is a conversation with the leader of the opposition and a senior member of the government of national unity, John Steenhuisen. John, I guess you could have hoped for a better start to the new year than getting attacked by Action SA. It’s becoming clearer and clearer now that Action SA is, well, having a go at the DA—almost like an EFF alternative to the ANC, that Action SA is now becoming an alternative to the DA. We can talk about that in a moment and your thoughts on that. Let’s start with the allegations of you having a “multi-million Rand blue-light luxury SUV fleet.”
John Steenhuisen (00:55.728):
Let me start off by saying, happy new year to you, Alec, and of course, to the BizNews viewers. It’s great to be back as we start this year. I think, as a famous British politician once said, being attacked by Action SA is rather like being savaged by a dead sheep, particularly when it exposes their own hypocrisy and skirt-throwing. But let me set out the facts, because I’ve noticed that other news outlets, like the Daily Maverick, Victoria Regan, and others, have chosen to…
Alec Hogg (00:58.649):
Yeah.
John Steenhuisen (01:25.402):
…jump on the bandwagon rather than actually examine the facts. So what are the facts, Alec? Let me set them out. Firstly, all ministers—not only in South Africa, but worldwide—are provided with official vehicles to conduct their official duties. These vehicles are not for personal use; they are for the execution of executive functions. In the South African context, ministers are provided with a vehicle in Cape Town to attend to their parliamentary responsibilities, and one in Pretoria to attend to their executive responsibilities as they relate to that province.
When I assumed office as the Minister of Agriculture, I inherited an Audi A7 in Cape Town that had been purchased in 2019 and was long paid off by the Department of Agriculture. It had been used by Toko de Diza in the past and had 136,000 kilometers on the clock. Of course, I resisted the temptation—as new ministers often do—to purchase new vehicles. That has been the standard approach in the past. Instead, I said clearly that I was happy to use the existing vehicle, mindful of the fact that the country’s economy is not in a good state. I think it’s a good example to show that we don’t need to purchase new vehicles.
The situation was slightly more complex when it came to the official vehicle for Pretoria. That vehicle was owned by the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform. Therefore, the Audi A7, which had been used by Minister de Diza, also purchased in 2019 and with similar mileage, had to be transferred to Minister Nyhontso. The department then came to me and said, “We now need to buy you a new vehicle for your use in Pretoria because we had to give the official vehicle to the Minister of Land Reform and Rural Development.”
I insisted that no new vehicle be purchased. Instead, I asked them to bring me a schedule of all vehicles currently in the Agriculture Department’s fleet. That’s when I found a Toyota Prado that had been purchased in 2019 for former Minister Zokwana, who had been Minister of Agriculture at the time. The car had around 230,000 kilometers on the clock. There was some concern expressed by the department, as vehicles are supposed to be swapped out at 150,000 kilometers, according to the handbook. I insisted that I was quite happy to use the Toyota Prado—it’s seven years old, it has high mileage, but given the current need to save costs, I was fine with that.
John Steenhuisen (03:52.646):
So, no new vehicles were purchased for me. Minister John Steenhuisen uses two vehicles inherited from former ministers—both over seven years old, with high mileage—and no new expenditure has been incurred by the department. These vehicles were paid off seven years ago when originally purchased. Now, because these are official vehicles, I want to make it clear that when I drive for private use, I use my 1979 Mercedes-Benz 280 SEL, which I really enjoy driving around. Those in Cape Town will be familiar with that vehicle, or I use my wife’s Land Rover Discovery 4 for transit. These are not private vehicles; they are official vehicles.
Since these are inherited vehicles, the existing security features are in place. I’m not sure if Action SA expects me to attend my official duties on a bicycle, but sadly, the distances, terrain, and requirements would preclude that. Or, if they want me to remove these security systems from the cars, I’d be happy to do so, but that would incur additional costs. Like all DA ministers, we’ve instructed those responsible for driving these vehicles that blue lights and security features are only to be used in a life-or-death situation, where there is no alternative.
The hypocrisy here that needs to be exposed is that Action SA currently has a mayor in Tshwane who utilizes two luxury BMW vehicles—both fitted with security features—for the execution of her official duties. Their speaker in the City of Johannesburg also has two luxury German sedans, fitted with blue lights and security features, which she uses for her official duties. So, what you have here is Action SA trying to manufacture a storm in a teacup. Instead of complimenting a minister for not purchasing new vehicles and using older vehicles to save costs, they are trying to create a scandal, aided and abetted by the Daily Maverick.
John Steenhuisen (06:20.28):
There’s no scandal here. No new expenditure has been incurred by the Department of Agriculture for me. These are vehicles that were part of the existing fleet and using them has actually saved money. Additionally, when ministers are not in Gauteng or the Western Cape, they are entitled to hire vehicles for official duties. I’m not sure how Action SA expects people to execute their official functions if they can’t use vehicles to get to the communities that need them. In the case of agriculture, many of these communities are far-flung and difficult to reach.
Like all ministers, we’ve made a commitment to use the most cost-effective options when hiring vehicles. For instance, when I was in Limpopo for the presidential event in Bezo, I insisted that we hire a Corolla Cross, as we weren’t going into tricky terrain. It was the most cost-effective option for that day. I’m proud to say that I and other DA ministers have done everything we can to cut costs—on offices, cars, and other expenses—and instead focus that expenditure on service delivery.
So, I really don’t understand why Action SA is trying to twist this into something it’s not. This should be an example to the country of how to save costs. But of course, when a party has no solutions to the big issues facing the country, they resort to these petty attacks. I would also point out that, had this been a genuine concern, Action SA could have started by stripping their own executive office bearers of these so-called perks.
Alec Hogg (07:59.876):
Hmm.
John Steenhuisen (08:17.028):
…instead, the mayor of Tshwane and the speaker of the Johannesburg City Council continue to swan around in their vehicles, which are equipped with blue lights and security features, despite their protestations. This is typical of the playground politics they’ve descended into. No one has pointed out the obvious connection here: when Herman Mashaba was the mayor of Johannesburg, he used a BMW X5 convoy, which was clearly outfitted with blue lights to ensure his security. This is standard practice for executives around the world.
I think people should be judged not by these allegations, but by the facts. And in this case, the facts expose the fantasy being spread by Action SA.
Alec Hogg (08:59.716):
You’ve obviously done a lot of thinking about this. It’s not often that I have someone go on so long and so fascinatingly unpacking all the details of what you’ve just explained. But I need to get back to their statement. They say, first of all, including the perception that there’s now a big fleet—including the Prado, which you’ve explained, the Audi Q7, which you’ve also mentioned—and they also said a BMW X5. Now, where does that fit into the story?
John Steenhuisen (09:45.222):
The BMW X5 is a mystery to me, but it’s been solved in recent days. The BMW X5, which I think is a 2017 or 2018 model, has never been used by me. It is apparently a backup vehicle for the executive—both the minister and deputy minister’s offices—so if one vehicle goes in for servicing, rather than hire a car at huge expense, this vehicle is on standby as a replacement.
I’ve never had the opportunity to use that vehicle. The vehicles I’ve used are my seven-year-old Audi A7 and the Prado, both inherited from the previous ministers—and in the case of the Prado, from two ministers ago.
Alec Hogg (10:30.724):
And the other part of the statement that surprised us—but I guess you guys in politics are used to being able to say what you like because you have parliamentary privileges, and maybe that extends into the public domain as well—is that each of these vehicles has a purchase price exceeding a million rand. So maybe they did cost a million rand back then, but today, based on what you’ve told us, the value would obviously be a lot less.
John Steenhuisen (10:56.111):
Well, the value is negligible on those vehicles because they were purchased seven years ago by the department for the former ministers. Had there been a situation where I assumed office and decided to purchase new vehicles—which I consciously decided not to do—then there would have been an expenditure. But there has been no new expenditure in the current budget for vehicles for the Minister of Agriculture. It is completely disingenuous to say that this is a price tag that I’ve imposed on the people of South Africa. That price tag was paid many years ago, and those vehicles have long since been written down in the department.
Alec Hogg (12:43.534):
Something interesting in all of this is that the press statement was published on PoliticsWeb today, and yet it says that you have responded. You’ve had a written reply. In your written reply, did you outline the facts that you’ve given us?
John Steenhuisen (13:01.73):
Absolutely, it’s there for everybody to see. The vehicle ages, the vehicle costs, etc., are all set out there in that parliamentary response.
Alec Hogg (13:10.82):
So it’s just politics, in other words. They’re making up a story to make you look bad by using some of the facts. Okay.
John Steenhuisen (13:14.214):
It’s pure politics—pure oil politics. It’s playground politics. Look, Alec, we’ve got big issues facing our country. We have to, this year, turn the economy around. We have to create jobs. We have to attract investment, and we’ve got to get more South Africans into work than ever before. These are the big issues of our time. But, of course, because Action South Africa has no solutions to these big issues, they choose to play petty politics and twist fantasy, suggesting that somehow I’ve gone and spent 2.8 million Rand on vehicles that were long paid off and which are well within the bounds of the ministerial handbook and are well within the bounds of my own party’s ethical use of executive benefits handbook that we have for DA ministers.
It would be very nice if Action SA, if they’re serious about this matter, set about removing these perks from their own executive members. Then, perhaps they could come with some credibility on this matter. Their slip is sadly showing, as always, with a party that draws its grassroots from a pool of individuals who have no solutions for the big issues facing South Africa. We’re getting on with resolving those big issues. And I’m proud of the fact that I haven’t spent a cent of departmental money on purchasing vehicles during my tenure as minister.
Alec Hogg (14:42.702):
I know we’ve spent quite a lot of time on this, but it is important, given that you have stated previously that you are driving a second-hand Toyota Prado. And it seems that for those who might believe the story that’s been put out, you have no credibility. I think that’s one of the reasons I wanted to test this with you. But onto more important issues from a broader perspective—how is the government of national unity doing?
There were quite a lot of photographs of you circulating on social media when you went to China and met with President Xi. And only in the last couple of weeks, we’ve heard that Chinese electric vehicle manufacturers are being encouraged to set up shop in South Africa, much like many European manufacturers have done in the past. Does this tell us that these overseas jamborees, as many describe them, actually do have some kind of positive benefit?
John Steenhuisen (15:48.454):
Absolutely, Alec. And I think, certainly, when I get invited to any overseas event or conference, I always filter it through a number of considerations before accepting invitations. And believe you me, as Minister of Agriculture, I receive invitations weekly from a variety of countries, wanting meetings and to discuss trade. I filter these invitations through the lens of: Is this trip going to have a net benefit for South Africa? Will South Africans benefit from the outcomes of this trip? And how do we make this work for South Africa? Those are the trips I prioritise.
I’ve turned down many overseas trips because I didn’t feel that those criteria were present. As it pertains to China, I didn’t have anything to do with the electric vehicle discussions—those were led by Minister Patel. However, I think we should welcome the manufacturing of electric vehicles, regardless of whether they come from Europe or China. China, in particular, appears to have cutting-edge technology. I was really impressed in Beijing with how quiet and clean downtown Beijing was, largely due to the fact that a significant percentage of vehicles on Beijing’s roads are electric. This can only be good for the environment. It can also be beneficial for making cheaper electric vehicles accessible to more people in South Africa.
Regarding my trip to China, a big part of my reason for being there was to open up beef and dairy trade for South African farmers, lift the outright ban on South African beef due to foot-and-mouth disease, and move to a compartmentalized approach, which we very successfully navigated. We also worked on getting dairy products access to China, and we were able to establish a greasy wool protocol, which would allow us to circumvent the outright ban on South African greasy wool as a result of a foot-and-mouth outbreak. So, there are clear benefits.
This week, I’m heading to Kampala. I’m leaving today. We’re negotiating the new African Agriculture and Agro-Processing Development Plan, which is an integrated approach to solving some of the problems facing agriculture in Africa. This is critically important for South Africa. There’s an opportunity for bilaterals with our SACU counterparts, where we have significant integration. We’ll also have interesting discussions on corridor developments, which will allow African agricultural products better access to the rest of the world.
John Steenhuisen (18:13.136):
We’re looking at harmonising some biotechnology and other innovations, and developing a 10-year plan to integrate African agricultural interactions across the continent. Africa is a very important market for South African agricultural products. If you speak to anyone in key agricultural sectors, notably wine, they see Africa as the largest growth market for us. So, it’s crucial that we position South African agriculture and products at the heart of the African Union’s agricultural agenda over the next decade. I’m looking forward to the next three days of discussions in Kampala and ensuring that South Africa’s positions and strategies are heard loud and clear in those corridors.
Alec Hogg (19:26.72):
Is it a bit like CEOs of listed companies having to decide where and when they invest their time and allocate resources? In other words, there’s this perception among the public that, once you become a senior member of government, you can flit around the world from conference to conference without really having much responsibility to deliver anything. The way you’ve described it sounds to me like the way a CEO of a major company would approach this.
John Steenhuisen (20:02.63):
Absolutely. You’ve got to look at where your strategic advantages lie. As a department, we’ve sat down with the agricultural sector and asked them, “Where do you see opportunities for growth? Where would you like government to start opening doors?” The fruit, beef, red meat, and horticulture industries have all given us their suggestions for where they want us to push.
I take my lead from the agricultural sector in terms of where we focus our efforts as the Department of Agriculture to open new trading opportunities across the globe, but also to deepen and expand existing trade relationships. This is not a decision made on the back of a cigarette box in the minister’s office—it’s the result of a very strong collaboration with South African agriculture, particularly through organised agriculture. They are the ones who say, “We see opportunities in Saudi Arabia for red meat, in the Middle East for South African fruit, in Thailand for blueberries, and opportunities for South African wine in several markets.”
It’s then my job, as Minister of Agriculture, to go and start discussions on how we can get protocols in place for these agricultural goods to be exchanged. This can only happen at a minister-to-minister level. Otherwise, these remain dreams on paper. But I never leave the country unless I have a clearly set, predetermined set of outcomes I want to achieve. My directive to the department is always: “What does a win look like for us when we leave this conference?” And that then becomes our focus during these engagements.
Alec Hogg (22:14.693):
I’m off to Davos in a couple of weeks, and I can’t wait to get an injection of global wisdom there. I know a lot of people criticise it as a globalist forum, but I think it’s going to be interesting this year. Are you going to attend this year as a government minister?
John Steenhuisen (22:29.348):
I will be there. The president has asked me to form part of the delegation to Davos. I’ve never been before, so I’m obviously going with an open mind, not an empty one, and I’m looking forward to those engagements. Again, I’m on the hunt for agricultural investment, looking for assistance from big financial organisations on blended finance schemes for small-scale farmers.
I’m also seeking support for the rapid advancement of technology. There’s a big AI focus at Davos this year, and I’m eager to connect with people working on AI in agriculture. If we can use AI to bring extension services to farmers through cell phone technology, identifying plant and animal diseases, offering real-time advice, and enhancing productivity, I think that could be transformative for South African agriculture. This is one of my key focuses at Davos.
Alec Hogg (23:48.248):
I think you’re really in for a treat. I’ve seen people in your position not get much sleep, though, with all the meetings. But I suppose that’s the nature of it. To close, John, a very sad note—the passing of Peter Mansfield. He was from KwaZulu-Natal. R.W. Johnson has written a beautiful obituary, which we’re publishing on BizNews today. Given that the two of you were in the same party and province, I presume you were as saddened by his passing as many others were.
John Steenhuisen (24:21.446):
Yes, of course. When I joined politics, Peter was in the twilight of his career, but he, along with Lindy, his former wife, were stalwarts of the Progressive Federal Party, Progressive Party, and Democratic Party. I had the privilege of meeting them several times when I was still a young activist. Going into the Durban City Council, where I served for 10 years, Peter Mansfield’s name was certainly prominent. When he was on the Manco of Durban, they made some catalytic decisions to position Durban as a premier world-class city. Peter and his team were behind projects like the RCC, the Durban Exhibition Centre, and Expo Durban. These initiatives really helped put Durban on the map.
Peter wasn’t always the easiest person to deal with, but he was never afraid to share his opinions. I think he left active politics too soon, but he’ll always be remembered with great fondness. His work, along with people like Margaret Blummeyer, Libby Goodall, and others, set an incredible example for younger politicians entering civic life at a city level, showing what can be achieved with the right strategic focus.
Alec Hogg (25:55.3):
It’s interesting that I met Peter when he was running an internet business after leaving municipal politics. Back then, running the Durban municipality didn’t offer much of a retirement plan. But he built a very successful online business, which he later sold. I think that enabled him to live comfortably in his later years. It shows that public servants can be as savvy as anyone in other sectors of society, even if that’s not always fully appreciated.
John Steenhuisen (26:37.734):
Absolutely. And, just before we close, I think it’s important to remember that politicians are humans too. We get things right, we get things wrong. We have great achievements, and we make mistakes. The day we lose that humanity in politics, we might as well replace all politicians with AI robots. But we’re human, and we are subject to the same frailties and fallibilities as anyone else.
Alec Hogg (27:02.82):
Yeah.
John Steenhuisen (27:05.86):
Exactly.
Alec Hogg (27:13.08):
Do you get as frustrated as anyone else when people talk nonsense about you, as clearly is the case with these vehicles? I mean, John, I’ve been attacked many times, mainly by competitors, but it’s nothing compared to the kind of nonsense you have to put up with almost daily.
John Steenhuisen (27:33.222):
What disappoints me is not the puerile politics of parties like Action SA—they can’t help themselves. It’s like criticising a bird for flying or a fish for swimming. It’s all they’ve got. But I do get irritated with organisations—I’m sorry to use your platform, but I’ve written about this in a piece going out later on The Daily Maverick. With basic journalistic ethics, anyone would be able to see when those vehicles were purchased and know that I haven’t spent any new money on them.
The points I made in my article are, if I’d pushed someone off the road with a blue-light convoy, it would’ve been front-page news. There would have been social media outrage. It’s not there. Basic journalism says it’s not your job to listen to arguments about whether it’s raining—it’s your job to stick your head out the window and see for yourself. It disappoints me that in their rush to criticize the DA, they’ve discarded basic journalistic principles, and it’s no wonder so many people are leaving The Maverick. People are seeing through the thin veneer of DA-bashing rather than dealing with facts.
Alec Hogg (29:16.92):
I’d like to believe that the editorial process has failed in this case and that it’s not driven by an agenda. But anyway, John, it’s been good talking to you. All the best in Kampala, and enjoy the engagements. I look forward to seeing you in Davos later this month. John Steenhuisen, leader of the opposition and Democratic Alliance. I’m Alec Hogg from BizNews.com.
Read also:
