JOHANNESBURG, Gauteng — As citizens prepare to evaluate the South Africa local election manifestos ahead of the November 4 polls, distinguishing between actionable policy and empty political rhetoric has become a critical priority. Africa Check Deputy Chief Editor Cayley Clifford recently outlined how voters can measure these service delivery promises, emphasizing the need for hard deadlines, realistic funding models, and clear accountability metrics.
Moving Beyond Empty Rhetoric to Measurable Targets
While fact-checking past political claims is straightforward using publicly available data, evaluating future promises requires a different analytical approach. Clifford notes that to prevent parties from making unachievable pledges, voters must look for measurability.
When a manifesto includes specific numbers, strict deadlines, and defined targets, it provides the electorate with a concrete benchmark to hold leaders accountable once they are in government. Without these metrics, parties can easily avoid scrutiny in subsequent election cycles.
Water, Sanitation, and Infrastructure Pledges
Basic services, particularly water and sanitation, feature prominently across the board, as these are the issues most directly associated with municipal governance.
Several major parties, including the ANC, EFF, DA, and Freedom Front Plus, have established clear, measurable targets in this sector. Notably, the ANC has committed to cutting all water losses caused by theft or leaks to 30% by 2031, alongside a pledge to reduce non-revenue water to below 30% in every metropolitan area by 2030.
In contrast, parties like ActionSA have described water security as a priority, outlining broad strategies such as fixing aging infrastructure and reducing water losses. However, Clifford points out that these manifestos lack direct, numerical targets, making it harder for voters to enforce accountability.
Road Maintenance and Financial Realities
Road infrastructure and pothole repairs remain a major focal point, though Clifford highlights a distinct lack of ward-level solutions in most manifestos.
Despite this, parties including the DA, ANC, EFF, and Freedom Front Plus have committed to spending 8% of asset value on road maintenance. This is a crucial, measurable target originally set by the National Treasury. Historically, municipalities have struggled to meet this benchmark. For context, the City of Johannesburg spent as little as 0.5% of its asset value on maintenance during the 2023–2024 financial year. Evaluating these promises against a party’s historical track record is essential for understanding their likelihood of delivery.
Municipal Debt, Crime, and Jurisdictional Limits
Financial instability is another recurring theme, with manifestos broadly addressing the need to clear municipal debt owed to Eskom and various waterboards.
Crime is also heavily featured, though Clifford warns voters to understand the threshold of municipal power. Because local governments do not have direct control over national policing, manifestos largely pivot to community safety. The ANC, for instance, specifically highlighted gender-based violence.
Red Flags for Voters
A major red flag for the electorate is when political parties make promises that fall entirely outside their jurisdictional control. Clifford warns that pledges regarding national competencies—such as altering the social grants system or enforcing immigration policies—cannot be delivered by local councils.
To make informed decisions, voters are urged to clearly understand actual municipal competencies, which include local roads, refuse collection, and specific aspects of water and electricity delivery, while recognizing the limits of local government authority.
