LGE 2026 Manifestos: Waste, environment and climate promises, and the council’s share of them

What we did: we took the manifesto data for the twelve parties as at 22 October 2026 and counted every promise that the comparison page places under “Waste, environment and climate”, by the verdict on each. Sources are listed at the end.

We also keep Integrity Watch, a public register of documents that were corrected, withdrawn, refunded or punished after someone found made-up material in them.

This folio is about a different kind of check. It asks which of the waste, environment and climate promises in election manifestos a council can deliver after winning.

The 2026 local elections in short #

The vote. South Africans vote in local government elections on 4 November 2026. They choose the councillors who run 257 municipalities: 8 metropolitan (big-city), 44 district and 205 local. The Electoral Commission of South Africa (IEC) certified 136,790 candidates for 10,526 council seats. On 15 October 2026 the Constitutional Court directed the IEC to take the steps needed to put 181 ANC candidates on the ballot in six municipalities, so the final count will change. On 16 October 2026 the IEC said 32 other parties in the same position would get the same relief.

How many parties. 732 political parties are registered with the IEC at various levels. The IEC says 546 of them nominated candidates for this election.

What a council does. South Africa has three spheres of government: national, provincial and local. Part B of Schedules 4 and 5 of the Constitution list the matters a municipality may administer: 38 in all, among them drinking water and domestic waste-water and sewage systems, electricity and gas reticulation (the local networks), refuse removal, municipal roads and street trading. Jobs, schools, hospitals, welfare, the courts and immigration are not on those lists. A council can still lobby, partner with or press the government that holds the power.

What a manifesto is. A manifesto is a party’s published list of promises, so that voters can read them and decide.

What Ukweli did. Ukweli has analysed twelve party manifestos for this election. It found 2,419 promises and quoted each in the party’s own words, with its page. It checked each promise it could assess against the Constitution’s lists of what a council does. Where a sentence is too short or vague to test, or Ukweli’s checks did not settle it, the card says “Could not be assessed by Ukweli”. Where a sentence promises several things that fall under different powers or spheres of government, the card says “Mixes different powers”. Both labels describe Ukweli’s check, not the party.

Who is in. The twelve parties are shown below. Ukweli analyses any 2026 local government manifesto it can obtain from the party’s own publication. That is a rule about documents, never a judgement about a party. Parties have reported 19 manifesto launches; for the other seven, Ukweli cannot yet reach a readable document online. Many other parties contest the election, and this folio does not cover them.

Each party’s assessment is one click away.

ACDPRead the assessment →ActionSARead the assessment →AMMRead the assessment →ANCRead the assessment →BOSARead the assessment →DARead the assessment →EFFRead the assessment →FF PlusRead the assessment →GOODRead the assessment →IFPRead the assessment →SACPRead the assessment →UDMRead the assessment →

Each button opens that party’s assessment on ukweli.io in a new tab, so this page stays open. Party logos belong to the parties and are shown for identification only. Ukweli is not affiliated with any party.

What Ukweli does not do. It does not score, grade, rank or endorse any party. It does not say whether a promise will be kept or whether it is affordable. A promise outside a council’s powers is not a false promise.

Figures in this section as at 22 October 2026. They come from the IEC, the Constitution’s schedules and Ukweli’s live manifesto pages (sources at the end), and they move when a manifesto is added or the IEC publishes a new figure. Errors: hello@ukweli.io.

Who is responsible for waste, the environment and climate? #

South Africa has three spheres of government: national, provincial and local. Part B of Schedule 5 of the Constitution lists “refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal” among the matters a municipality may administer, and so are “cleansing”, “public places” and “control of public nuisances”. Part B of Schedule 4 lists “air pollution”. The wider matters “environment” and “pollution control” sit in Part A of Schedule 4, the list shared by national and provincial government, not on a municipal list. None of the 38 matters on those two municipal lists is called “climate” or “environment” (checked against Ukweli’s table of the 38). That does not mean a council can do nothing about floods or pollution. Planning, stormwater, parks and public places are on the lists, and a council may do what is reasonably necessary to carry out its functions, as Folio 08 explains.

Who runs the rubbish tip is not the same everywhere. Ukweli’s table of powers attaches one check to the refuse item: for landfills only, a district council holds waste disposal sites that serve more than one local municipality. The check named in the table is section 84(1)(e) of the Municipal Structures Act. Section 84(1)(e) gives a district municipality solid waste disposal sites, in so far as it relates to the determination of a waste disposal strategy, the regulation of waste disposal, and the establishment, operation and control of waste disposal sites, bulk waste transfer facilities and waste disposal facilities for more than one local municipality in the district. A district municipality is one with authority over an area that includes more than one municipality (a category C municipality). The provincial MEC for local government may move this function to a local municipality (section 85(1)(b)), so who runs the tip can differ from place to place.

What the waste, environment and climate promises are #

We counted every promise in the twelve manifestos that the comparison page files under “Waste, environment and climate”, one of its ten themes. We found 120, from eight manifestos. Some sentences hold more than one promise, and we count each separately. Each promise sits under one theme only. A text search for “waste” finds 46 other promises under other themes, mostly under “Running the council” (21) and “Water and sanitation” (17). They are not counted here.

Four manifestos have nothing filed here, and that is not the same as saying nothing on the subject. A promise is filed under one theme only, and a sentence that lists several services goes under one of them. The IFP promises regular refuse collection on pages 5, 12 and 13 of its manifesto, and those sentences are filed under “Roads, transport and other infrastructure” and “Water and sanitation”. BOSA mentions refuse backlogs and refuse removal on pages 10 and 14, filed under two other themes. GOOD’s Cape Town plan has climate and green-space promises, such as “Climate-smart tariff design” (page 3, filed under “Running the council”) and “protecting remaining natural land and water catchments” (page 4, filed under “Housing, land and title deeds”). For the SACP, Ukweli holds a launch-statement extract and a poster from the party’s newsletter, not a full manifesto, and a word search of the 41 promises taken from them finds none about waste, the environment or climate. So eight is the number of manifestos with a promise filed here. It is not the number that say something on the subject.

The theme is wider than rubbish. 81 of the 120 do not contain the word “waste”. They are about flooding and drought planning, a climate response plan, wetlands and rivers, plastic bags, invasive species and a circular economy. None of the 120 is in the group “Led by another sphere, council has a role” and none is in “A party’s own conduct”.

Party by party #

Some parties have many promises filed under waste, environment and climate and some have few. The counts below say how many promises are filed under this theme for each party, and nothing about how good they are or how much of a manifesto is about the subject. A zero for BOSA, GOOD, IFP or SACP means nothing is filed here, not that the manifesto is silent on the subject. All eight parties that have promises under this theme have at least one within a council’s own powers.

Inside a council’s own powers #

70 of the 87 assessed promises (80.5%) are on a matter the Constitution gives a council, so it does not need another sphere’s permission to act on them. Across all 1,865 assessed promises from the 12 manifestos combined, on every topic, 392 (21.0%) are within a council’s own powers. That says nothing about money or capacity. A promise can cite more than one matter. Across the 70, the matters cited most often are refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal (50), cleansing (17), public places (11), air pollution (10) and control of public nuisances (8).

50 of the 70 carry one check. Ukweli’s table attaches it to the refuse item, not to the wording of a sentence: for landfills only, a district council holds waste disposal sites that serve more than one local municipality. It matters when a promise is about a disposal site that serves more than one local municipality, such as “Assess, rehabilitate, and expand landfill and waste transfer facilities to ensure compliance with environmental and safety standards.” (EFF, page 57). The table limits the check to landfills. We counted how many of the 50 mention landfills or dumping. 24 contain one of the words landfill, dump, disposal, drop-off, waste site or waste facility, and 10 use the word “landfill”. The other 26 contain none of those words, for example “Reliable refuse collection: We will provide regular, scheduled refuse collection across formal and informal communities, with services appropriate to local needs.” (ActionSA, page 18). The check is attached to them in the table, but nothing in the sentence points to a disposal site.

The other 20 do not carry it. They rest mainly on planning, air pollution, parks and amenities, and stormwater, such as “Planning for changing risks: Municipal planning and infrastructure investment will consider changing rainfall patterns, flooding, water scarcity, extreme heat and other local climate risks.” (ActionSA, page 66).

The 70 are not all the same kind of promise. Ukweli records what kind of act each sentence commits to:

• Deliverable (39): the sentence commits to making something exist or providing something, and a reader could later check whether it happened. For example: “Reliable refuse collection: We will provide regular, scheduled refuse collection across formal and informal communities, with services appropriate to local needs.” (ActionSA, page 18).
• Aspiration (10): the sentence states a result the party wants but names no act that would produce it. For example: “We will keep communities clean.” (ActionSA, page 76).
• Process (7): the sentence commits to how the work is organised, paid for or overseen, rather than to the result itself. For example: “Permit compliance should be supported by the broad use of a compliance checklist, helping landfill operators fulfil permit requirements and conditions.” (DA, page 37).
• Type not settled (14): no kind is shown. For 6 of them the three readings agreed on the verdict, the subject and the matters cited, but not on the kind, so it is shown as not agreed. For the other 8, Ukweli’s data records the kind as not checked.

An aspiration is not a worse promise than a deliverable. The kind says only whether the sentence names an act that could be checked.

Led by another sphere, council has a role #

None of the 87 assessed promises is here. Across all 1,865 assessed promises from the 12 manifestos combined, on every topic, 189 (10.1%) are led by another sphere. For waste, environment and climate the count is nil.

How the council runs itself #

The 11 promises here (12.6%) are about the council’s own machinery: how it contracts, reports, plans and complies with the law. DA has three, ACDP and ANC two each, and AMM, EFF, FF Plus and UDM one each. For example: “GPS tracking of waste collection services will ensure work is done and that payments are justified.” (DA, page 38). They sit apart from the 70 above because they are about how the council works, not what it provides.

Outside a council’s powers #

Six promises (6.9%) are outside a council’s powers, as Ukweli’s engine placed them. Two are about prosecuting or holding to account: “CRIMINALLY PROSECUTE ACCOUNTABLE OFFICERS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION VIOLATIONS.” (FF Plus, page 22) and a promise to hold private companies criminally and civilly liable for pollution (ACDP, page 10). One is a municipal circular economy (AMM, page 79). One is investing in wetland and river rehabilitation (ANC, page 54). One is removing invasive species through society-wide programmes (DA, page 38) and one is replacing single-use plastics with biodegradable ones (DA, page 38). A promise outside a council’s powers is not a false one, but a council cannot keep it alone. In a second reading of these six against the 38 municipal matters, two readers agreed with the engine that four are outside (the prosecution promise, the ACDP accountability promise, wetland and river rehabilitation, and invasive species), one reader agreed on single-use plastics, and neither agreed on the circular economy promise.

The promises with no verdict #

33 of the 120 (27.5%) carry no verdict. Across all 2,419 promises the share is 22.9%, so waste, environment and climate is higher. The reasons:

By a word search for waste, refuse, landfill, dump or recycl, 17 of the 33 contain one of those words and 16 do not. Reading the 16 without them, 14 are about the environment, climate, flooding or pollution and 2 are about refuse and reuse (missed collections and swop shops). The broad ones read like “ActionSA will build cleaner, greener and more resilient communities that people are proud to call home.” (ActionSA, page 62). Even a sentence that looks plainly about refuse is among them: “Mayibuye will guarantee regular refuse collection, eliminate illegal dumping” (AMM, page 34), because the engine’s answer for it was malformed. We do not fill the gap by guessing.

Take “We will turn the waste crisis into an energy opportunity by investing in Waste-to-Energy infrastructure that reduces landfill dependence, lowers electricity costs, and creates local jobs.” (DA, page 37). The three readings agreed that the sentence mixes matters that fall under different powers: it names waste, and it also names electricity costs. One verdict would be wrong for part of it. We do not guess. The card says so.

Our view #

This is the folio’s own view. It is kept apart from the counts above.

Waste promises are mostly about services the Constitution gives a council, and that is why four in five of the assessed ones are within its powers. The sharper question for a voter is who runs the disposal site that serves the area, because a promise about a landfill can depend on that. The environment and climate promises are harder to test. No matter on the Constitution’s municipal lists is called climate, and at least 14 of the 33 promises with no verdict are about them. A voter can ask which department, budget line and hazard a climate promise is meant to deal with.

Questions to put to any candidate #

1. Which council runs the landfill or disposal site that serves us, ours or the district? What is the plan when it fills up?
2. How often will refuse be collected, in which areas, and how will residents report and track a missed collection?
3. If the plan is recycling, composting or waste-to-energy, what will it cost, who pays, and what approvals does it need?
4. For floods, drought and heat: which areas and hazards come first, what is in the budget, and what will you publish each year so residents can see progress?

Promises counted in two folios #

No waste, environment or climate promise is also counted under another theme, so none is in the Safety folio (Folio 10), the water folio (Folio 11) or the electricity folio (Folio 12). A search of the 120 for immigration and border words finds none, so none is among the 16 immigration promises in Folio 09. All 87 assessed promises are among the 1,649 promises about council business that Folio 08 counts across every topic. Each folio stands alone.