It’s Election Day tomorrow. We vote for our local councillors. The role of the local councillor is critical to South Africa’s democracy. As outlined in the Municipal Systems Act of 2000, which lays the basis for a developmental form of local government that breaks with past exclusionary policies under apartheid, “A fundamental aspect of the new local government system is the active engagement of communities in the affairs of municipalities of which they are an integral part, and, in particular, in planning, service delivery and performance management.”
The Act further outlines a Code of Conduct for local councillors. This includes the following: “Councillors are elected to represent local communities on municipal councils, to ensure that municipalities have structured mechanisms of accountability to local communities, and to meet the priority needs of communities by providing services equitably, effectively and sustainably within the means of the municipality. In fulfilling this role, councillors must be accountable to local communities.”
However, in direct contrast to the Code of Conduct for councillors, our outgoing Observatory Ward councillor has consistently ignored his constituency’s opposition to the River Club re-development. He made no submission, as Ward Councillors are expected to do, in the Case Officer’s report on the rezoning application for the River Club in 2020. When we asked our Ward Councillor to oppose the rezoning application for the River Club redevelopment during the Municipal Planning Tribunal (MPT) in September 2020, he failed to do so. In fact, to our knowledge, he has never publicly expressed any opposition to the disastrous and irreversible impact of redevelopment on both the environment and the site as a critical heritage resource. As a result, the rezoning was given easy passage in the MPT.
Our local government system creates an inherent conflict of interest between councillor accountability to their constituents and to their political Party’s interests. He clearly chose his Party line. It not only exposes our councillor’s priorities, it highlights how our local government system is being undermined by vested interests.
We need councillors of integrity who understand the real meaning of development to make the system work. Local government representatives must be prepared to speak out publicly, and, if necessary, against their own Party’s directives, on matters their constituents believe to be critical in the local area.
As we pointed out in a previous Update, none of the larger political parties contesting the municipal elections in the Western Cape (WC) tomorrow responded to the Observatory Civic Association (OCA) invitation to state their position on the River Club redevelopment. The OCA also organised three virtual Town Hall meetings wherein candidates for our Ward councillor were invited to answer questions pertinent to the public’s concerns, including on the River Club redevelopment. The Ward candidate for the Democratic Alliance (DA) – the current WC ruling party – did not respond to multiple invitations to attend until after these meetings were completed. This appears to reflect an instance of how the Party dismisses constituent concerns when they conflict with Party priorities.
What would the DA candidate have said when asked about the DA’s River Club approvals? Ironically, the DA Manifesto for this election makes a clear statement that “We will endeavour to ensure that spatial planning protects our natural environment heritage for future generations …”
How exactly is approval of 150 000 square metres of concrete on a sacred floodplain protecting our natural environment and heritage for future generations? How exactly, does the City’s and Province’s approvals respond to the rejection by Heritage Western Cape of the approval of the redevelopment as unlawful because it fails to meet the requirements of the National Heritage Resources Act (NHRA), framed in the Preamble to the NHRA as intended to “… enable and encourage communities to nurture and conserve their legacy so that it may be bequeathed to future generations. Our heritage is unique and precious and it cannot be renewed.”
What the DA says in their Manifesto seems clearly not what they really intend; or they simply do not understand that alternatives to destroying the Liesbeek exist.
For example, the DA mayoral candidate, Geordin Hill-Lewis, repeated in his campaigning (in a DA Press release; at a talk for the Cape Town Press Club; and in a Daily Maverick opinion piece) that he was looking forward to cranes going up all over Cape Town, which should become “one big construction site.”
His vision of a future of shared prosperity is one where construction proceeds relentlessly – never mind what it destroys in the process. He would no doubt be happy with what he sees happening at the River Club currently – construction proceeding apace despite it undergoing a process of grading as a National Heritage Resource.
To achieve justice, we need your financial support to pursue our court challenge to stop this property redevelopment. We are scheduled to be in court on November 24th and 25th. Please consider assisting us with the legal fees. You can contribute at our fundraising site or directly via EFT here. For South African taxpayers, a SARS Section 18A certificate will be available for donations over R 1000.
For more information, please visit our website and follow the Liesbeek Action Campaign on twitter: @LiesbeekAction.
Now is the time to Make the Liesbeek Matter!