Joburg’s water battles don’t need a political messiah

Johannesburg’s residents have spent years confronting a deepening water crisis through sustained civic pressure, technical engagement and difficult negotiation with the City of Johannesburg, Joburg Water and the national government.

The current plans to stabilise and rebuild our water system did not emerge overnight. They were forced onto the agenda through persistence, evidence and community mobilisation.

On the ground, this effort has brought together ordinary people from across the political divide. Supporters and members of all parties, and those with no affiliation, have stood alongside one another as residents first. They did not come to advance party programmes or political agendas, but to confront a shared crisis affecting their communities.

Our non-partisan approach has been one of the strengths of the response and reflects citizens working together in the spirit of the Constitution. My own journey as a member of the ANC and a co-convenor of the Water Crisis Committee has reinforced a fundamental lesson: leadership is not something you claim by jumping on a bandwagon after the hard work is done. This grounded approach is the antithesis of the top-down “messiah” politics we see currently attempting to hijack our work.

History teaches us something about moments like this. Time and again, in politics and public life, some arrive once the hardest ground has already been broken. When the organising has been done, the evidence compiled and the doors have finally opened, latecomers appear to claim ownership of progress built through the labour of others. Helen Zille is a case in point. We are not claiming victory; the crisis is not over. But we have reached a point where communities and civil society have secured direct influence over the path forward.

What we achieved was not accidental. As civil society, we organised, protested and convened meetings across affected communities. We repeatedly engaged officials and insisted that decision-makers come to our areas and account directly to residents. Through that sustained pressure, we earned our place at the table where solutions are now being shaped. During this time, many DA councillors looked on, issuing press statements, circulating petitions and reacting from the sidelines rather than leading. They appeared uncertain and hesitant while communities did the difficult work of mobilisation and engagement.

Johannesburg residents are now being asked to accept lectures from a figure whose long public career has been marked by repeated controversies and statements that have alienated many of the very communities now expected to embrace this intervention. Over the years, Zille’s public statements have repeatedly ignited backlash, from defending aspects of colonialism, to comments about “black privilege” and remarks on migration and identity. These episodes have made her one of the most polarising figures in domestic politics, known as much for provocation as for policy.

There is a profound irony in her sudden arrival. One could say that the accumulation of her missteps and gaffes are large enough to fill many of Johannesburg’s potholes, yet none of them has fixed a single pipe. Why does the DA feel compelled to import leadership from Cape Town rather than rely on local competence that understands this city’s lived realities? If the DA’s competence is as deep and institutional as claimed, it should have been cultivated locally, embedded in councillors and community leadership within this city. Sustainable governance is not demonstrated by parachuting in high-profile figures, but by building durable capacity where people live and work.

DA pushed out competent civil servants

We look at the historical record of DA governance in our city. In 2016, under the DA-led coalition government in Johannesburg, several competent public servants were forced out or marginalised during a period that should have prioritised institutional stability. At the same time, key city entities were carved up among coalition partners and treated as sites of political management rather than centres of technical delivery. This fragmentation weakened oversight, disrupted continuity and contributed to the deterioration of institutions that required focused professional leadership.

Among those lost to this instability was Dr Sean Phillips, an experienced infrastructure professional whose expertise was directly relevant to the challenges the city faces now. Today, he is making a significant contribution at the national level. That is precisely the kind of expertise Johannesburg needed to retain.

When governance environments fail to protect professional capacity, infrastructure suffers. Furthermore, in the inner-city suburbs, residents witnessed the rapid expansion of multiple-dwelling properties that were often illegally densified. These developments accelerated under the watch of local DA councillors, with little enforcement action to align them with planning and infrastructure requirements. This pattern of densification without matching investment in bulk infrastructure is one of the root causes of the crisis we face today.

Civil society did the hard yards

Our progress did not come from reactive press statements or symbolic visits. It came because we organised. We protested in the rain, held community meetings and mobilised across neighbourhoods. We demanded answers and refused to be ignored. We engaged repeatedly with the authorities.

When political leaders entered this space later, many participants experienced it as a disruption of a civic process that had been intentionally nonpartisan from the start. At the 1 November protest outside the municipal chambers, we witnessed Zille arriving with DA supporters in party regalia. This action felt less like joining a community struggle and more like inserting a partisan presence into it. This stood in contrast to the many individual DA members, alongside people from other political formations, including members of the governing ANC, who had already participated in good faith without advancing party interests. They came as citizens first, recognising the crisis as a collective responsibility.

Johannesburg Water has now presented a programme to repair failing pipes, refurbish reservoirs and upgrade pumping capacity. Civil society has engaged with that plan in detail. It is not perfect, but it is largely credible and can be implemented if properly funded and managed. Importantly, recent national commitments have begun to align with these local efforts, including R156-billion committed over the next three years for water and sanitation infrastructure.

The technical diagnosis is now on the record; we have moved beyond merely identifying problems. Recovery plans exist, and national funding is being unlocked. However, civil society is not stepping back. Our role now shifts from demanding a plan to policing its delivery. We will continue to insist on transparent timelines and deep-seated structural reform.

Johannesburg does not need a political messiah to descend from the Western Cape with a readymade miracle. We need the continued grounded courage of our residents who have already proven that we can bridge the partisan, provincial and ideological divide to rebuild our city. The only force that actually fixes pipes is genuine, non-negotiable social solidarity. We have forced a transition; now the state must perform. That is the hard, unglamorous work ahead, and it is a struggle that the people will continue to lead. DM

Ravin Singh is a co-convenor of the Water Crisis Committee. He writes in his personal capacity.