LGE 2026 Manifestos: Health, social support, youth, sport and culture 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. We counted every promise that the comparison page places under “Health, social support, youth, sport and culture”, 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We also keep Integrity Watch, a public register of documents that were corrected, withdrawn, refunded or punished after someone found made-up material in them.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 health, social support, youth, sport and culture promises in election manifestos sit within a council’s own powers, and which sit with another sphere of government.

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. There are 38 in all. Among them are 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 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 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 health, social support, youth, sport and culture? #

South Africa has three spheres of government: national, provincial and local. This theme holds four kinds of promise: health, social support, youth, and sport, culture and other amenities. Ukweli’s table of powers treats them differently.

Ukweli’s table of the 38 municipal matters includes “municipal health services”, “child care facilities”, “local amenities”, “local sport facilities”, “municipal parks and recreation” and “public places”. The 38 are the matters in Schedule 4 Part B and Schedule 5 Part B of the Constitution. None of the 38 matters is called library, hospital, clinic, welfare, youth, culture, heritage or social (checked against Ukweli’s table of the 38). That does not mean a council can do nothing on those subjects. It means the data has to place each promise by another route, and the sections below show where it did.

For welfare and health the table says the main power sits elsewhere. It says welfare services are a Schedule 4 Part A function, shared by national and provincial government. It says health services are a Schedule 4 Part A function of provincial and national government. The table also says that municipal health services, which it describes as environmental health, are held by metros and districts, not by local councils. On child care, the table says registering crèches and day care is a provincial task, and a council takes part only by written agreement with the province.

What the health, social support, youth, sport and culture promises are #

We counted every promise in the twelve manifestos that the comparison page files under “Health, social support, youth, sport and culture”, one of its ten themes. We found 260, from all twelve manifestos. Some sentences hold more than one promise, and we count each separately. Each promise sits under one theme only. The comparison page’s own note for this theme reads “free basic services go here”.

A theme count says where a promise is filed, not what a manifesto contains. A word search of all 2,419 promises, in every theme, finds “health” in 75. Of those, 48 are filed here and 27 under other themes, mostly “Waste, environment and climate” (8) and “Roads, transport and other infrastructure” (6). The word “clinic” is in 44 promises: 29 filed here and 15 elsewhere, such as “universal access to dignified sanitation in every public school and clinic” (ANC, page 24, filed under “Water and sanitation”). The words “free basic” are in 14 promises. Of these, 12 are filed here and 2 under “Running the council”, for example “helping expand and protect Free Basic Water and Free Basic Electricity for qualifying indigent households” (ANC, page 40). The word “hospital” is in none of the 2,419 promises.

The comparison page does not split this theme. To show what is in it, this folio ran its own word search over the 260 and counted the matches by verdict. The four word lists are in the notes at the end. This is the folio’s word search, not Ukweli’s placement of the promises. A sentence can match more than one list, so the rows do not add to 260: 158 match one list, 51 match two, 7 match three, and 44 match none.

Read the table by row. Of the 69 that match sport, culture and amenities words, 35 are within a council’s own powers and none is led by another sphere. Of the 86 that match health words, 24 are led by another sphere and 11 are within. Of the 85 that match social support words, 25 are about how the council runs itself, 20 are within and 11 are outside. Of the 41 that match youth words, 10 are outside and 9 are within.

None of the 260 promises is in “Shared with other spheres of government”.

Party by party #

All twelve parties have promises filed under this theme. The counts below say how many promises are filed for each party. They say nothing about how good the promises are, or how much of a manifesto is about the subject. Ten of the twelve parties have at least one promise within a council’s own powers. FF Plus and IFP have none there. Under this theme, IFP has 4 promises and FF Plus has 2 that match the folio’s sport, culture and amenities words. Ukweli placed none of these within a council’s own powers. That says where their promises are filed, not what their manifestos contain.

Inside a council’s own powers #

As Ukweli placed them, 69 of the 184 assessed promises (37.5%) are on a matter listed for municipalities in the Constitution (section 156(1)). The placement is Ukweli’s, not a ruling on the law. A council still acts under national and provincial law, and some of these carry a check, set out below. 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 69, the matters cited most often are local amenities (46), municipal parks and recreation (35), local sport facilities (29), public places (17). Next come electricity and gas reticulation (9), water and sanitation services (8), municipal health services (7), cleansing (5) and refuse removal (4). 49 cite at least one of local amenities, local sport facilities and municipal parks and recreation. For example: “Mayibuye will build and maintain local sports fields, parks, and playgrounds.” (AMM, page 48) and “Maintenance of libraries, community halls, sports fields, and recreational spaces.” (UDM, page 12).

Seven cite municipal health services. For example: “Appointing Environmental Health Officers to strictly enforce municipal by-laws on health standards, pollution and sanitation controls.” (DA, page 38). For these seven the table attaches one check: municipal health services are held by metros and districts, not by local councils. The check is on the matter, not on the wording of the sentence. One promise cites child care facilities, and the table attaches the crèche check set out above.

12 cite electricity, water or refuse matters. The comparison page files free basic services here, and six of the 69 use the words “free basic” or “indigent”. For electricity (9 promises) the table’s check is whether the council itself distributes electricity in that area, or Eskom does. For water (8 promises) the check is which council is the water services authority. That is the council responsible for making sure people can get water and sanitation. It is a metro, a district, or a local council that the Minister has authorised.

Libraries need a note. Eighteen promises mention libraries: 4 are within, 11 mix different powers and 3 could not be assessed. None of the 38 matters is called libraries. Schedule 5 Part A of the Constitution lists “libraries other than national libraries” as a provincial matter. Each of the 4 within promises cites “local amenities”. Ukweli placed them there, and the schedules do not settle it.

The 69 are not all the same kind of promise. Ukweli records what kind of act each sentence commits to:

• Deliverable (46): the sentence commits to making something exist or providing something, and a reader could later check whether it happened. For example: “Mayibuye will build and maintain local sports fields, parks, and playgrounds.” (AMM, page 48).
• Aspiration (11): the sentence states a result the party wants but names no act that would produce it. For example: “Our cemeteries must allow families to bury and remember their loved ones with dignity.” (ANC, page 57).
• Process (3): the sentence commits to how the work is organised, paid for or overseen, rather than to the result itself.
• Kind not shown (9): no kind is shown. For 1 of them Ukweli’s checks agreed on the verdict, the subject and the matters cited, but not on the kind. For 2, the verdict is a ruling on the Schedules, not one the checks agreed on. For the other 6, 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 #

25 of the 184 assessed promises (13.6%) are here, against 189 of 1,865 (10.1%) across every topic. Eight parties have at least one. Twenty-four of the 25 are about clinics and primary health care, and 15 of those 24 use the word “clinic”. For the 24 clinic promises, Ukweli’s table says the main power is provincial (Schedule 4 Part A). A council takes part only through a service level agreement with the provincial health MEC. For example: “All clinics in Mayibuye municipalities will be open 24 hours.” (AMM, page 74). Another is “Primary healthcare is principally a provincial responsibility, but where municipalities operate healthcare facilities, ActionSA will use that capacity to improve access and ensure residents receive a professional and dignified service.” (ActionSA, page 58).

The check the table attaches is whether the council has a service level agreement with the provincial health MEC. The agreement itself is the source for that check. The word search for “clinic” above also finds promises filed under other themes, which are not counted here.

The other one is about land for early childhood development sites: “Mayibuye will provide access to municipal land or vacant buildings for new ECD sites in low-income areas.” (AMM, page 47). For the early childhood development sites promise, the table says a council plans for housing, designates land for it and manages land use. It says any council may take part in national housing programmes, and only a council accredited by the provincial housing MEC may administer one. Accredited means approved by that MEC against set criteria.

How the council runs itself #

The 40 promises here (21.7%) are about the council’s own machinery: indigent registers, rebates, debt and payment arrangements, reporting and budgets. Twenty-two of the 40 use the words “indigent” or “free basic”. For example: “Indigent register thereafter updated quarterly.” (ANC, page 62). By party the counts are EFF 11, AMM 7, ANC 6, ActionSA 5, DA, FF Plus, GOOD and UDM 2 each, and ACDP, BOSA and IFP 1 each. Ukweli’s table cites sections 151(3), 152(1)(a), 152(1)(e), 195(1)(b), 195(1)(e), 195(1)(f), 195(1)(g) and 215(1) of the Constitution for these 40. They sit apart from the 69 above because they are about how the council works, not what it provides.

Outside a council’s powers #

47 promises (25.5%) are outside a council’s powers, as Ukweli placed them. The table names a subject for most of them. Welfare, social development and gender-based violence support has 23. Hospitals and general healthcare delivery has 11. Local economic development, jobs and enterprise has 9. Local government funding and the national fiscal framework has 1. For 3, no subject is named: two are FF Plus lines on heritage and multilingualism, such as “PROMOTE MULTILINGUALISM.” (FF Plus, page 12), and one is an AMM line on local heritage (page 48).

For welfare, the table’s reason reads: “Welfare services are a Schedule 4 Part A function, shared by national and provincial government (Constitution). Neither Schedule 4 Part B nor Schedule 5 Part B lists welfare services.” For health care, the reason reads: “Health services are a Schedule 4 Part A function of provincial and national government. Neither municipal schedule lists hospitals. Only ‘Municipal health services’ (4B-09), which is environmental health, is municipal.” For local economic development, the reason begins: “No item on Schedule 4 Part B or Schedule 5 Part B covers local economic development, employment or enterprise support as such” For local government funding, the reason cites section 214(1) of the Constitution, which it says sets how national revenue is divided among the three spheres.

“Hospitals and general healthcare delivery” is Ukweli’s name for a group of 11 promises. None of the 11 uses the word “hospital”. One is “Enforce ambulance response time targets of a maximum of 20 minutes in urban areas and 30 minutes in rural areas.” (EFF, page 39). Welfare examples include “Support survivors of gender-based violence through shelters, places of safety, counselling services, and ward-based support programmes.” (EFF, page 35). Among the 41 promises that match the folio’s youth words, 10 are outside. One is “Youth development initiatives linked to skills, innovation, and local economic opportunities.” (UDM, page 12), which the table files under local economic development.

A promise outside a council’s powers is not a false one. The matter sits with another sphere. The second reading of these promises is set out under Limits.

A party’s own conduct #

Three promises (1.6%) are about what a party will do, not what a council will do, one each from AMM, DA and FF Plus. For example: “The Freedom Front Plus will, therefore, strive to promote community-based social services.” (FF Plus, page 23). Folio 08 does not count these among the council-business promises. Across every topic, 216 of 1,865 assessed promises (11.6%) are of this kind.

The promises with no verdict #

76 of the 260 (29.2%) carry no verdict. Across all 2,419 promises the share is 22.9%, so this theme is higher. The reasons:

By the folio’s word search, the 76 split like this: 27 match health words, 26 match social support words, 17 match youth words and 27 match sport, culture and amenities words. A sentence can match more than one list. A short line such as “Strengthen clinics, mental health & primary healthcare.” (SACP, page 6) is among the ones that could not be assessed. So is a list of several services: “Provide free basic water, electricity, sanitation, and refuse removal to all indigent households, including those in informal settlements, backyard dwellings, and rural communities.” (EFF, page 21). We do not fill the gap by guessing.

Take “Mayibuye municipalities will invest in sports, arts, and culture to create employment.” (AMM, page 15). Ukweli’s checks agreed that it mixes different powers: it names sport, arts and culture, and it also names creating employment. 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.

This theme is not one subject, and the counts show it. Of the 69 within promises, 35 match the folio’s sport, culture and amenities words. Of the 25 promises led by another sphere, 24 are about clinics. Of the 47 promises outside a council’s powers, 34 are filed under welfare or health care. A voter can use that. Ask a sports-field promise for its budget and its date. Ask a clinic promise what agreement it rests on. Ask a welfare promise whom the council will ask for the money, and what it will do if the answer is no.

Questions to put to any candidate #

1. Does our council run any clinics? If it does, under what agreement with the province, and who pays for the staff and the medicine?
2. Which halls, sports fields, pools and libraries will you open or repair first, what is in the budget, and who will run them?
3. Free basic services: who qualifies, how will a household register, and how will the council cover the cost?
4. For welfare, youth jobs and support for survivors of violence: what will the council do itself, what will you ask the province or national government for, and what happens if they say no?

Promises counted in two folios #

Each promise sits under one theme only, so none of the 260 is in the Safety folio (Folio 10), the water folio (Folio 11), the electricity folio (Folio 12) or the waste folio (Folio 13). A search of the 260 for immigration and border words finds one, on EFF page 39, where “migrants” is in a list of vulnerable groups. Folio 09 counts that sentence as one of its 16 immigration promises, so it is in both folios. 181 of the 184 assessed promises are among the 1,649 promises about council business that Folio 08 counts across every topic. The other 3 are the party-conduct promises, which Folio 08 does not count. Each folio stands alone.