Note to Editors: Please find attached English and Afrikaans soundbites by Cllr Hilton Maasdorp and Sesotho soundbite by Cllr Lucas Xaba
– Unrealistic revenue assumptions.
– Key budget information is missing.
– Staff structure affordability concerns.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) in Dihlabeng did not support the adoption of the Municipality’s 2026/27 Budget due to serious concerns regarding its credibility, affordability, transparency, and ability to deliver sustainable services to residents.
While the budget exceeds R1.3 billion and aims to address the municipality’s operational and developmental responsibilities, the DA remains concerned that several key assumptions have not been adequately substantiated. Most notably, the municipality has consistently failed to meet its projected revenue targets over several years, yet the current budget is once again based on optimistic revenue assumptions without sufficient supporting evidence.
The DA also noted inconsistencies in the budget documentation regarding proposed electricity tariff increases, further raising concerns about the budget’s accuracy and reliability. The budget does not clarify the 30% electricity tariff increase, even though it has been budgeted for. We further proposed that this item be ring-fenced to ensure proper financial control and accountability.
Additional concerns were raised regarding the municipality’s performance in Water and Sanitation services. Our recent Blue Drop and Green Drop assessments show ongoing gaps in these critical areas, so we need targeted interventions and measurable improvements.
The DA further questioned the absence of key supporting documents required for effective oversight and informed decision-making. These include debt collection reports, creditor age analyses, repairs and maintenance schedules, capital funding schedules, and SCM deviation reports.
Without these documents, residents are effectively being asked to trust the municipality without the evidence needed to assess the budget’s credibility.
The public cannot be assured that revenue is being collected efficiently, that suppliers are being paid on time, that infrastructure is being properly maintained, or that procurement processes are being followed. Ultimately, the consequences of poor financial planning are borne by residents through declining service delivery, deteriorating infrastructure, service interruptions, and increased financial pressure on ratepayers.
The DA also expressed serious reservations regarding the proposed Staff Establishment. Council was requested to approve the structure without being provided with the financial implications of individual posts, salary levels, post grades, or the total personnel cost. Without this information, Council cannot determine whether the structure is affordable, sustainable, or aligned with the municipality’s financial position.
This raises significant governance and financial management concerns, as an unaffordable staff structure could place additional strain on municipal finances and divert resources away from essential services and infrastructure maintenance.
The DA believes that a municipal budget must provide a realistic and transparent framework for service delivery, economic development, job creation, and long-term financial sustainability.
As sufficient certainty was not provided on several critical matters, the DA voted against the budget and remains committed to accountable governance, sound financial management, and improved service delivery for all residents.