In recent weeks, South Africans following the build-up to the City of Johannesburg’s mayoral race have witnessed a campaign strategy that raises serious questions about leadership, credibility, and respect for voters. The campaign by Helen Zille, positioned as the Democratic Alliance’s mayoral candidate, increasingly appears to rely less on presenting practical solutions for Johannesburg and more on attacking political opponents, particularly the Herman Mashaba-led ActionSA and the African National Congress.
At a time when Johannesburg residents are desperate for real answers to deteriorating infrastructure, water shortages, electricity disruptions, crime, and collapsing municipal services, what they are getting instead is a campaign defined by political spectacle. Press conferences highlighting alleged “defections” from rival parties, public displays of individuals supposedly leaving other organisations, and repeated attempts to frame the city’s problems purely as the fault of opponents have become central features of Zille’s messaging.
But there is a problem. In several instances, ActionSA has publicly stated that it does not even recognise some of the individuals presented as former members who are supposedly joining the Democratic Alliance. This raises serious concerns about the credibility of such announcements. When a campaign relies on theatrics that cannot be verified, voters are right to question whether the focus is on governing Johannesburg or simply winning headlines.
Leadership requires more than political point-scoring. Johannesburg is not a stage for campaign gimmicks it is South Africa’s economic engine, a city of over five million residents whose daily lives are being shaped by failing infrastructure and institutional neglect.
If the tone of a campaign reflects the type of leadership a candidate intends to provide, then voters must ask themselves a difficult but necessary question: what kind of mayor will Johannesburg get if the campaign itself is built on discrediting opponents rather than presenting credible solutions???
A mayor’s job is not to demonise rivals. A mayor’s job is to fix the city. In contrast, the campaign by Herman Mashaba has largely centred on a clear and consistent message: fixing Johannesburg. His campaign banner… #OperationFixJoburg speaks directly to the crisis facing the city and proposes an agenda rooted in governance rather than political theatrics.
Mashaba’s credibility in this conversation is not theoretical. It is grounded in experience. During his tenure as mayor of Johannesburg between 2016 and 2019, Mashaba led an administration that prioritised financial discipline, anti-corruption efforts, and service delivery reforms. His administration uncovered billions of rands in irregular contracts and corruption-linked tenders, cancelled questionable agreements, and introduced stronger procurement oversight mechanisms within the municipality.
Under Mashaba’s leadership, the city began tackling the entrenched culture of patronage that had weakened governance for years. Efforts were made to professionalise the administration, strengthen revenue collection, and redirect resources towards improving municipal services.
Of course, no mayor operates in isolation, and Johannesburg’s challenges are structural and complex. But what distinguished Mashaba’s administration was its focus on restoring accountability within the city government and confronting corruption head-on.
That is precisely why his current campaign resonates with many residents who are exhausted by political grandstanding.
The question voters must ask is simple… who is presenting a credible plan to rebuild Johannesburg? Because attacking opponents is not a plan.
Equally concerning are some of the policy ideas emerging from Zille’s campaign rhetoric, particularly around privatisation and the role of the private sector in delivering essential services. A recent article by Eyewitness News reported on Zille’s pledge to partner with the private sector to resolve Johannesburg’s water crisis.
At first glance, the idea of public-private partnerships may sound appealing. However, without strong regulatory safeguards and affordability protections, such arrangements risk transferring the cost burden directly onto residents who are already struggling with rising living expenses.
Public reaction to these proposals has been swift and telling. A Commentator on Twitter, Honey Makwakwa captured the concern succinctly in a widely circulated post responding to the report:
“Elect Zille if you want to pay R3000 for 1kL of water. You will say that nobody told you and she will tell you that water is not a human right but a privilege.”
While the tweet is provocative, it reflects a genuine fear among residents that essential services could become unaffordable if privatisation is pursued without careful consideration of social and economic realities.
Water is not a luxury product. It is a constitutional right in South Africa and a basic necessity for human dignity. Any policy proposal that risks turning it into a high cost commodity will understandably alarm communities already facing unemployment, poverty, and rising living costs.
Johannesburg’s water crisis requires infrastructure investment, improved maintenance, reduced water losses, and better management of the city’s water entities. Simply outsourcing responsibility to the private sector does not automatically solve systemic governance failures.
If anything, it risks replacing public accountability with profit-driven decision-making.
Equally troubling is the attempt to portray the Democratic Alliance’s governance record in the Western Cape as a universal blueprint for success. Yet residents across that province increasingly point to growing inequality, infrastructure pressures, and service delivery challenges in several municipalities. No province in South Africa is immune to governance failures, and the Western Cape is no exception.
So when Zille suggests she will single-handedly transform Johannesburg, voters are entitled to ask: if the solutions are so simple, why are similar problems still visible in parts of the Western Cape?
Johannesburg deserves honesty about the scale of the challenge. The city needs infrastructure rehabilitation, improved financial management, serious crime prevention strategies, investment in housing and transport, and an administration capable of implementing long-term reforms. These issues cannot be addressed through press conferences announcing questionable party defections or through endless attacks on political opponents.
Residents are not naïve. They are living the consequences of failing governance every day from dry taps and pothole-ridden roads to power outages and collapsing public services. They are looking for leadership that respects their intelligence.
The upcoming mayoral race will ultimately be decided by voters who want competence, credibility, and a clear plan to restore Johannesburg’s functionality. Campaign gimmicks may generate short-term media attention, but they do not fix leaking pipes, broken traffic lights, or crumbling infrastructure. Johannesburg’s future should not be reduced to political theatre.
As the campaign intensifies, citizens would do well to look beyond the noise and examine what each candidate is actually offering. The question is not who can shout the loudest about their opponents, but who has demonstrated the ability and the seriousness to rebuild the city.
Johannesburg needs a mayor focused on solutions, not spectacle. And voters must be careful not to be distracted by campaign tactics that underestimate their intelligence.
Because ultimately, the people of Johannesburg are not props in a political performance.
They are citizens demanding a city that works.
Johannesburg Deserves Solutions, Not Political Theatre
In recent weeks, South Africans following the build-up to the City of Johannesburg’s mayoral race have witnessed a campaign strategy that raises serious questions about leadership, credibility, and respect for voters. The campaign by Helen Zille, positioned as the Democratic Alliance’s mayoral candidate, increasingly appears to rely less on presenting practical solutions for Johannesburg and more on attacking political opponents, particularly the Herman Mashaba-led ActionSA and the African National Congress.
At a time when Johannesburg residents are desperate for real answers to deteriorating infrastructure, water shortages, electricity disruptions, crime, and collapsing municipal services, what they are getting instead is a campaign defined by political spectacle. Press conferences highlighting alleged “defections” from rival parties, public displays of individuals supposedly leaving other organisations, and repeated attempts to frame the city’s problems purely as the fault of opponents have become central features of Zille’s messaging.
But there is a problem. In several instances, ActionSA has publicly stated that it does not even recognise some of the individuals presented as former members who are supposedly joining the Democratic Alliance. This raises serious concerns about the credibility of such announcements. When a campaign relies on theatrics that cannot be verified, voters are right to question whether the focus is on governing Johannesburg or simply winning headlines.
Leadership requires more than political point-scoring. Johannesburg is not a stage for campaign gimmicks it is South Africa’s economic engine, a city of over five million residents whose daily lives are being shaped by failing infrastructure and institutional neglect.
If the tone of a campaign reflects the type of leadership a candidate intends to provide, then voters must ask themselves a difficult but necessary question: what kind of mayor will Johannesburg get if the campaign itself is built on discrediting opponents rather than presenting credible solutions???
A mayor’s job is not to demonise rivals. A mayor’s job is to fix the city. In contrast, the campaign by Herman Mashaba has largely centred on a clear and consistent message: fixing Johannesburg. His campaign banner… #OperationFixJoburg speaks directly to the crisis facing the city and proposes an agenda rooted in governance rather than political theatrics.
Mashaba’s credibility in this conversation is not theoretical. It is grounded in experience. During his tenure as mayor of Johannesburg between 2016 and 2019, Mashaba led an administration that prioritised financial discipline, anti-corruption efforts, and service delivery reforms. His administration uncovered billions of rands in irregular contracts and corruption-linked tenders, cancelled questionable agreements, and introduced stronger procurement oversight mechanisms within the municipality.
Under Mashaba’s leadership, the city began tackling the entrenched culture of patronage that had weakened governance for years. Efforts were made to professionalise the administration, strengthen revenue collection, and redirect resources towards improving municipal services.
Of course, no mayor operates in isolation, and Johannesburg’s challenges are structural and complex. But what distinguished Mashaba’s administration was its focus on restoring accountability within the city government and confronting corruption head-on.
That is precisely why his current campaign resonates with many residents who are exhausted by political grandstanding.
The question voters must ask is simple… who is presenting a credible plan to rebuild Johannesburg? Because attacking opponents is not a plan.
Equally concerning are some of the policy ideas emerging from Zille’s campaign rhetoric, particularly around privatisation and the role of the private sector in delivering essential services. A recent article by Eyewitness News reported on Zille’s pledge to partner with the private sector to resolve Johannesburg’s water crisis.
At first glance, the idea of public-private partnerships may sound appealing. However, without strong regulatory safeguards and affordability protections, such arrangements risk transferring the cost burden directly onto residents who are already struggling with rising living expenses.
Public reaction to these proposals has been swift and telling. A Commentator on Twitter, Honey Makwakwa captured the concern succinctly in a widely circulated post responding to the report:
“Elect Zille if you want to pay R3000 for 1kL of water. You will say that nobody told you and she will tell you that water is not a human right but a privilege.”
While the tweet is provocative, it reflects a genuine fear among residents that essential services could become unaffordable if privatisation is pursued without careful consideration of social and economic realities.
Water is not a luxury product. It is a constitutional right in South Africa and a basic necessity for human dignity. Any policy proposal that risks turning it into a high cost commodity will understandably alarm communities already facing unemployment, poverty, and rising living costs.
Johannesburg’s water crisis requires infrastructure investment, improved maintenance, reduced water losses, and better management of the city’s water entities. Simply outsourcing responsibility to the private sector does not automatically solve systemic governance failures.
If anything, it risks replacing public accountability with profit-driven decision-making.
Equally troubling is the attempt to portray the Democratic Alliance’s governance record in the Western Cape as a universal blueprint for success. Yet residents across that province increasingly point to growing inequality, infrastructure pressures, and service delivery challenges in several municipalities. No province in South Africa is immune to governance failures, and the Western Cape is no exception.
So when Zille suggests she will single-handedly transform Johannesburg, voters are entitled to ask: if the solutions are so simple, why are similar problems still visible in parts of the Western Cape?
Johannesburg deserves honesty about the scale of the challenge. The city needs infrastructure rehabilitation, improved financial management, serious crime prevention strategies, investment in housing and transport, and an administration capable of implementing long-term reforms. These issues cannot be addressed through press conferences announcing questionable party defections or through endless attacks on political opponents.
Residents are not naïve. They are living the consequences of failing governance every day from dry taps and pothole-ridden roads to power outages and collapsing public services. They are looking for leadership that respects their intelligence.
The upcoming mayoral race will ultimately be decided by voters who want competence, credibility, and a clear plan to restore Johannesburg’s functionality. Campaign gimmicks may generate short-term media attention, but they do not fix leaking pipes, broken traffic lights, or crumbling infrastructure. Johannesburg’s future should not be reduced to political theatre.
As the campaign intensifies, citizens would do well to look beyond the noise and examine what each candidate is actually offering. The question is not who can shout the loudest about their opponents, but who has demonstrated the ability and the seriousness to rebuild the city.
Johannesburg needs a mayor focused on solutions, not spectacle. And voters must be careful not to be distracted by campaign tactics that underestimate their intelligence.
Because ultimately, the people of Johannesburg are not props in a political performance.
They are citizens demanding a city that works.