When I worked for State-owned power utility Eskom, the top position went to either an engineer or an accountant, often turn by turn. When the engineer was in charge, the system was solid and reliable and we had all the smart and cool stuff we needed. When the accountants were in charge, the utility made lots of money, but the maintenance regime fell off significantly. What was obvious was that the top dog did make a difference to how the organisation operated, large as it was.

From this observation, it could be concluded that it would make sense for the leaders in government to bring appropriate experience to the various Ministeries that they head. But this is seemingly not the case. Political reliability is the thing that counts. So, I thought I would, rather than moan about the lack of suitability of various Cabinet Ministers, give my observation as to how to make things worse than they are by giving some ideas of who might, in an imaginary government, be totally not suitable for the post.

Minister of Mineral Resources: Ideally, he or she should be an engineer or have a mining background. In reality, government could appoint a totally unsuitable candidate, say, from either of the following: all-in wrestler or balloon pilot. Choose the wrestler.

Minister of Health: Should ideally be a doctor or medical professional. A totally unsuitable candidate could be chosen from a scuba instructor or a surfer. Choose the surfer.

Minister of Defence: Ideally, he or she should be a military professional. A totally unsuitable candidate could be a primary school teacher or a dentist. Choose the teacher.

You get the idea? Let us now consider how this would change things, based on these appointments. Having an all-in wrestler as the Minister of Mineral Resources would result in mining licences being fought for by representative teams of different mining houses. Thus, the Swedish Helmet Polishing Tag Team Quartet could end up running the Optimum colliery, say. The surfer as Minister of Health would make it illegal for stand-up paddle boarders to enter the sea, as they constitute a health risk to anybody in the ocean in general, especially surfers. Marijuana would not only be decriminalised if it would become a heavily subsidised export crop. The Minister of Defence teacher would make sure all the soldiers had a good sleep in the afternoon after playing war games.

Okay, it is ridiculous. But look at this: in government, we have Ministers for every darn thing: for defence, education, finance, social development, police, et cetera, but no Minister for engineering, yet engineering is one of the most important disciplines in South Africa.

Every project of any magnitude needs engineers. Mines, roads and factories need engineers. And yet, there is no Minister of Engineering. There is no government figure driving the educational needs and employment requirements and standards of engineers in South Africa. Instead, we exist in a state whereby, in many engineering disciplines, there is no design work that has to be done by qualified engineers – any person can, for example, design a power line.

Being a registered professional engineer (as I am) has no real benefit at all other than ensuring that there is somebody to blame if a design goes wrong and a claim is instituted. It is not enough to expect the voluntary institutes (for example, the South African Institutes of Civil Engineers or Electrical Engineers) to drive engineering through government, and professional bodies such as the Engineering Council of South Africa and Civil Engineers South Africa do not reach to government level. Really, we do need a Minister of Engineering.