LGE 2026 Manifestos: Running-the-council promises, and what they commit a council to

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 “Running the council”, 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We also keep Integrity Watch, a public register of documents that were corrected, withdrawn, refunded or punished after someone found made-up material in them.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 what the promises about running a council commit the council to, and which of them sit within a council’s powers.

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 lists the matters a municipality may administer. There are 38. They include 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 2026 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 running a council? #

Running a council means deciding how it spends money, who it employs, how it buys goods and services, what it tells the public and how residents take part. These are not services such as water or refuse. They are the machinery behind every service.

For these promises Ukweli found the matter is not on the lists. The data ties them instead to the Constitution’s rules for how a public body is run. These are the rules it cites most:

• Section 195 sets values for public administration, including accountability, transparency, efficient use of resources and good human-resource management, and says they apply to administration in every sphere of government.
• Section 215 says budgets and budget processes must promote transparency, accountability and effective financial management.
• Section 217 says that when an organ of state contracts for goods or services, it must use a system that is fair, equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective.
• Section 160 says a council makes decisions on the municipality’s powers and functions, may elect committees, and may employ the personnel it needs.
• Section 152 names, among the objects of local government, democratic and accountable government and the involvement of communities.

So these promises are not mainly about which sphere holds a power. They are about how a council uses the powers it has. Ukweli’s theme rules put three kinds of promise here that a reader may not expect. One is how procurement and payment are done. Another is billing and revenue collection that are not aimed at one group. The third is a duty on a party’s councillors towards the public, such as to report, be reachable, train or be assessed.

Folio 08 counts the group “How the council runs itself” across every topic: 740 of the 1,649 promises about council business. Its question was whose power a promise needs. This folio asks a different one: what do these promises commit a council to? Of the 740, 521 (70.4%) sit under this theme. The other 219 are filed under the nine other themes and are not counted here.

What the running-the-council promises are #

We counted every promise in the twelve manifestos that the comparison page files under “Running the council”, one of its ten themes. The theme covers money, staff, anti-corruption, reporting and public participation. We found 736, from all twelve manifestos. That is 30.4% of all 2,419 promises.

Some sentences hold more than one promise, and we count each separately. Each promise sits under one theme only. A word search finds the same subjects under other themes too, as the section on the 521 shows, and those promises are not counted here. A theme count says where a promise is filed. It does not say what a manifesto contains.

Of the 736, 659 carry a verdict. The other 77 (10.5%) do not. Across all 2,419 promises on every topic, 22.9% carry no verdict, so this theme is lower. The table gives the groups.

Party by party #

All twelve parties have promises filed under this theme, from 7 for the SACP to 149 for AMM. For the SACP, Ukweli holds a launch-statement extract and a poster from the party’s newsletter, not a full manifesto. The counts below say how many promises are filed under this theme for each party. They say nothing about how good the promises are or how much of a manifesto is about the subject. Every party has at least one promise in the group “How the council runs itself”.

Inside a council’s own powers #

7 of the 659 assessed promises (1.1%) are on a matter the municipal lists give a council. Across all 1,865 assessed promises from the 12 manifestos combined, on every topic, 392 (21.0%) are. Here the share is small.

The 7 touch these listed matters. Municipal planning has 2, electricity and gas reticulation 2, water and sanitation services 2, municipal roads 1, municipal public works 1, municipal public transport 1, and refuse removal, refuse dumps and solid waste disposal 1. A promise can cite more than one matter. One example is “Every Mayibuye Integrated Development Plan will therefore contain Village Development Plans, Township Development Plans, Informal-Settlement Plans and Neighbourhood Development Plans beneath the statutory municipal and ward planning framework.” (AMM, file page 61). Another is “Reduction of municipal waste before placing additional burdens on residents.” (UDM, file page 6).

Led by another sphere, council has a role #

12 of the 659 (1.8%) are here. Across all 1,865 assessed promises on every topic, 189 (10.1%) are. In this theme, 11 of the 12 are about traditional leaders and councils, such as “Consultation with traditional leaders where applicable.” (UDM, file page 14). Ukweli’s table attaches section 81(2)(a) of the Municipal Structures Act and the Traditional and Khoi-San Leadership Act 3 of 2019 to them.

The twelfth is “eliminate corruption in housing delivery.” (EFF, file page 47). Ukweli’s table attaches sections 9(1), 9(2) and 10 of the Housing Act 107 of 1997 to it.

How the council runs itself #

521 of the 659 assessed promises (79.1%) are here. Across every topic the group holds 740 promises, which is 44.9% of the 1,649 promises about council business. This theme holds 521 of the 740. All twelve parties have promises in the group. This part opens the group up.

What kind of promise they are

Ukweli records what kind of act each sentence commits to. Of the 521, 186 are deliverables. The sentence names something to make or provide, so a reader could later check whether it happened. Another 151 are process promises, about how the work is organised, paid for or overseen. And 125 are aspirations: a result the party wants, with no act named. For 59 no kind is shown. For 19 of those, Ukweli’s checks agreed on the verdict and the cited items but not on the kind. For the other 40, 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.

What the 521 cite

Every one of the 521 cites between one and six items of the Constitution, 1,496 citations in all. They are 14 different items. A promise that cites several is counted under each. The most cited is the duty to be accountable (270 promises). Then come efficient and economic use of resources (194), transparency (151), budgets (139) and democratic and accountable local government (131). The least cited are the right to govern on its own initiative (20) and the power to do what is reasonably necessary for a function (9).

Six families of commitment

The 14 items fall into six families. This grouping is the folio’s own, made so that the five subjects in the theme note can be read off the data. Each count is of promises that cite at least one item in the family. A promise can sit in several families: 138 cite items from one, 248 from two, 109 from three and 26 from four.

The data has no item named for corruption. The nearest is the duty to keep a high standard of professional ethics, cited by 117 promises.

What a word search adds

The theme note names five subjects: money, staff, anti-corruption, reporting and public participation. We ran a word search for each on the 521. The word lists are the folio’s own, not Ukweli’s finding. They are listed under “How we counted”. Each row counts the promises that contain any word on its list, so it measures words and not subjects. A promise to buy local, for example, can contain a procurement word. A promise can contain words from several lists. 115 of the 521 contain none of them.

Two checks go with these figures. First, every word list has a hit in the promises of all 12 parties when all 2,419 promises are searched, whatever the theme. Second, the last column shows that each subject is also filed under other themes. A theme count says where a promise is filed, not what a manifesto contains.

Of the 117 promises that cite the ethics item, 59 contain a word from the corruption, tender and procurement list. A further 33 promises that do not cite it contain one too.

What the sentences say

These examples show the range. They were not picked as the best or the worst. The label is the folio’s own word search, and a sentence can fit more than one.

• Money. “Every municipality will audit its billing and revenue systems within the first year to identify revenue losses and strengthen collection.” (ANC, file page 40, process).
• Staff. “Merit-based appointments of municipal managers and senior officials.” (UDM, file page 6, aspiration). Also “Mayibuye will conduct a municipal capacity and skills audit to identify critical vacancies, skills shortages, and organisational weaknesses.” (AMM, file page 44, process).
• Corruption words. “Conduct lifestyle audits of municipal officials and enforce strict consequences against corruption and wrongdoing within municipal administrations.” (EFF, file page 60, process). Also “Protection for whistle-blowers: Employees, councillors and residents who report corruption in good faith must be protected from intimidation, retaliation and victimisation.” (IFP, file page 20, deliverable).
• Reporting. “Ward-by-ward performance data is published quarterly, so residents do not have to take the City’s word for whether the standard is being met.” (GOOD, file page 6, deliverable). Also “Introducing digitised, publicly accessible tender and budget-allocation dashboards, showing what has been awarded, to whom, and how the municipal budget is being spent, updated regularly.” (BOSA, file page 25, deliverable).
• Public participation. “Municipalities will introduce participatory budgeting and provide feedback on what was funded and why.” (ANC, file page 51, deliverable). Also “Municipalities will publicly report on participation and outcomes.” (ANC, file page 29, deliverable).

Ukweli does not say whether any of these will be kept or are affordable. It says only that the sentence is about how the council runs itself.

Outside a council’s powers #

39 of the 659 assessed promises (5.9%) are outside a council’s powers, as Ukweli placed them. Across all 1,865 assessed promises on every topic, 327 (17.5%) are outside. Here the share is lower. Ukweli gives each outside promise a subject from its table of powers that parties often promise but councils do not hold:

Most are about money and oversight from above. One is “Fighting to ensure that municipalities are properly funded for the services they are required to provide.” (DA, file page 36). Another is “At least 50% of municipalities achieving clean/unqualified audit outcomes.” (ANC, file page 41). Others are about mines. One is “The municipalities will maintain a public register showing every mine, its approved Social and Labour Plan commitments, budgets, projects, implementation dates and progress.” (AMM, file page 70). A promise outside a council’s powers is not a false one. A council can still lobby, partner with or press the sphere that holds the power. The second reading of these promises is set out under Limits.

A party’s own conduct #

80 of the 659 assessed promises (12.1%) are in this group. Across every topic, 216 assessed promises are (11.6% of 1,865). Of those 216, 80 are filed under this theme, 114 under “Party conduct and general pledges” and 22 under other themes.

Why a promise lands here. The group is for a sentence about what a party’s own people will do, or how the party will behave, and not about an act of the council. Ukweli tests a promise against what a council may do. A sentence about what a councillor will do, or what a party will fight for, is not a thing a council does, so that test does not apply. All 80 carry no cited item of the Constitution.

Two separate questions are asked of each promise. The first is the theme, and it follows what the promise is about. Ukweli’s theme rule files a duty on a party’s councillors towards the public, such as to report or be reachable, under running the council. The second is the group, and it depends on whether the sentence is about something a council does. A sentence about what councillors will do is not, so promises of that kind sit in the group “A party’s own conduct” and not in the 521. That group holds 80 promises, and 40 of them contain a word such as councillor or mayor.

Three examples follow, one from each of three manifestos.

• “Our councillors will communicate regularly about issues raised, actions taken and progress achieved.” (ActionSA, file page 71).
• “The Freedom Front Plus will diligently fulfil a watchdog role in municipal councils.” (FF Plus, file page 28).
• “We will end cadre deployment in local government and restore a culture of performance, accountability and service.” (DA, file page 4).

What the group does and does not mean. It is a label for what kind of sentence it is. It is not a verdict on any party’s conduct, and it does not say a promise is good, bad, kept or broken. Ukweli found no matter among the 38 that they are about, so they are left out of the 521. By kind, 35 are aspirations, 24 process promises, 13 deliverables and 8 are not settled. A word search for councillor, representative, mayor, office-bearer, public office or candidate finds one of those words in 40 of the 80. That search is the folio’s own. The party-by-party table above shows how the 80 are spread.

The promises with no verdict #

77 of the 736 (10.5%) carry no verdict. Across all 2,419 promises the share is 22.9%, so this theme is lower. 29 mix different powers and 48 could not be assessed. The reasons:

For example, Ukweli’s checks agreed that “Publish regular reports on youth employment, procurement, training, bursaries, and enterprise development to ensure transparency and accountability.” (EFF, file page 63) mixes matters that fall under different powers. It lists several subjects: reports on youth employment, procurement, training, bursaries and enterprise development. One verdict would be wrong for part of it. We do not guess. The card says so.

Another, “Our councillors must remain accountable.” (SACP, file page 11), could not be assessed because Ukweli’s checks did not agree.

Our view #

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

Many of these promises name values that the data ties to the rules for public administration: being accountable, open and efficient. The data ties 270 of the 521 to the duty to be accountable alone. Such a promise is hard to check unless it names a date or a document. A voter can sort the 521 by what each sentence names. Ukweli’s kind field records 186 deliverables, 151 process promises, 125 aspirations and 59 where no kind is shown. A deliverable names something that could be checked later. A process promise says how the work will be organised, paid for or overseen. An aspiration names a result and no act.

The 80 promises about a party’s own conduct are different. They say what a party or its people will do, so a council’s powers cannot be tested against them. A voter can still ask how anyone would know it happened.

Questions to put to any candidate #

1. Which money figures will you publish each year, such as the budget, what was actually spent and the audit result, and where can a resident read them?
2. How will senior posts be filled, and will vacancies and appointments be published?
3. For contracts, what will be published about each one, and where does a resident take a concern?
4. How will residents take part in the budget, at which meetings and when, and what happens to what they say?
5. If you promise what your councillors will do, such as report-back meetings, how will residents know it happened?

Promises that appear in more than one folio #

Each promise is filed under one theme, so none of the 736 is also counted in the Safety folio (Folio 10), the water folio (Folio 11), the electricity folio (Folio 12) or the waste folio (Folio 13). The 579 assessed promises about council business here (521, 7, 12 and 39) are among the 1,649 that Folio 08 counts across every topic. The 80 about a party’s own conduct are not, because Folio 08 leaves that group out.

A search of the 736 for these letter strings finds one promise: immigra-, migrant, migration, border, illegal foreign, foreign national, deport, undocumented, illegal alien and xenoph-. The one promise is BOSA, file page 17, about a municipal tax on foreign nationals, filed here as outside a council’s powers. The party’s sentence in full is “Enacting equitable immigrant taxation, which will see the introduction of a specialised municipal tax and levy framework for foreign nationals to ensure they contribute to public infrastructure and local services.” (BOSA, file page 17). Folio 09 shows a BOSA file page 17 promise on the same tax in shorter words. Counting such a promise in both folios is deliberate: each folio stands alone.