If you think politicians are tricky, consider voters. They are the ones who grasp popular slogans and big promises but glaze over at technocratic explanations and the complexity of getting public services to work better. And as we head towards the local government election, the it’s-so-easy claims for how everything will get better are being spread thick. Once again, many voters will fall for it.
But here’s the thing — governing is about technical decisions on trade-offs. Every cent spent on one thing is a cent not spent on another thing (or not spent at all, as some taxpayers may prefer). Every improvement to one system is done at the expense of some other system that got delayed because the government doesn’t have the resources for everything. You cannot keep all the people happy all the time, though many seem to believe you can. Perhaps we all win (“a better life for all”, as the ANC promised for a decade into democracy), but not all of us will get that better life at the same time. Prioritisation is inevitable.
So far that sounds pretty cynical. But serious political parties become good at delivering a technocratic manifesto that is realistic about trade-offs and makes measurable commitments, while still delivering the catchphrases and simple policies that actually persuade voters. They can therefore satisfy two very different audiences — the technically astute government watchers who are interested in the detail and what it means for real change in government performance, and the popular readers who will barely glance at the actual manifesto but catch some big points second-hand from commentators.
When I read manifestos, I focus on what is left out. On this, the ANC’s manifesto delivers an interesting pivot from the one for the 2021 election. Five years ago the ANC was in a defensive mood. The Zuma car crash was only just beginning to be tidied up, but the crisis in state institutions was raging.
The ANC made 11 pledges in rather vague and aspirational language — the first was “to do and be better”, along with appointing “honest and competent local government leaders” who are “action orientated” and will “listen” and be “available” to our people.
These are strikingly thin on technocratic detail (although deeper in that manifesto there were a few specifics), but the focus of the party then was to draw a clear line under the Zuma era. For the technocratic reader, though, the previous manifesto was an eyeroll. Five years later there is no way to assess whether these pledges were fulfilled and whether the party delivered.
This time it’s different. The 2026 version is an ANC much more on the front foot. The Zuma era is a forgotten nightmare. There are six discrete action areas, each with its own five-year targets with measurable intermediate steps. The areas start with a 100-day programme to deal with visible local government annoyances — fixing potholes, cleaning up the rubbish, getting streetlights working, stopping water leaks.
You may want to roll your eyes again, but these are at least actual targets that can be measured and for which local politicians can be held accountable. It is a fundamentally different beast from that of 2021.
While 2021 had much to say about ending corruption, 2026 is more specific. There will be mandatory lifestyle audits for mayors and senior managers. Critical posts must be filled within 120 days. Councillors must have performance agreements, with a party-imposed recall mechanism for those who fail.
In fact, one of the few specific commitments in 2021 was lifestyle audits for mayors and senior managers. Did those happen? The 2026 manifesto doesn’t say.
There are also some bad ideas that are equally specific. The party wants to “insource” various municipal services that are now undertaken by private sector contractors — waste collection, meter reading, security and so on. This was never mentioned in 2021, and I am pretty wary — if the focus is on making local government effective and accountable, we should get there first before reallocating services from current providers to local government. It should prove that it can deliver better than the private sector providers. If it did that, I would support it. But right now, it is easier to hold the private sector provider accountable than it is to hold the public sector accountable. Turn that equation around first.
There is also a lot about local government reform, in line with the push the ANC has made on professionalisation, perhaps the clearest follow-through of the 2021 pledges. The new draft white paper on local government reform is full of good ideas even though it was rushed, and the manifesto promises to follow through on the systemic changes that could be material in improving the performance of local government.
But the manifesto still relies on the “better life for all” slogan from the election campaigns of 30 years ago. That’s fine as an aspiration, but you have to be realistic that some will have to wait, as if it has not become obvious over the past three decades. Good political leadership has to manage the trade-offs, choosing what gets done first. The good news for the technocrats is that the objectives have plans and targets. Performance can be measured against that and judgment made. That will keep them happy.
The problem is that the “better life for all” promise has to connect to voters. And polls are not favourable. Last week’s Ipsos poll shows the ANC polling nationally at 31% — still ahead of the next-highest party, the DA, at 25%, but far below the 46% national vote share it had in 2021. On a technocratic reading of the manifesto, this one deserves more support than the 2021 one.
Theobald is founder and chair of research-led consulting firm Krutham
