The fight we are witnessing in the City of Johannesburg council chamber is more than just a disagreement about a budget adjustment. It is the opening act of a far larger political contest, a battle for control over the city’s roughly R80bn annual budget.
As the 2026 local government elections slowly move into view, the tensions now spilling into public view between the ANC and the DA reveal that Johannesburg has already become the central battlefield of that contest.
It is evident that the two are fighting fiercely over a mid-year adjustment budget — not only about accounting lines but political power, influence and control over how the billions of rands are spent.
The latest episode unfolded dramatically with the recall of Johannesburg mayor Dada Morero by his own party, followed almost immediately by a public clash with DA councillor Belinda Kayser-Echeozonjoku over the adjustment budget vote.
In a now widely circulated post, Kayser-Echeozonjoku alleged that whistleblower information suggested Morero was plotting to destabilise the city and fabricate charges against senior municipal officials connected to the adjustment budget report.
Morero fired back sharply, accusing the DA of engaging in reckless political “brinkmanship” and of deliberately misrepresenting the technical processes behind the budget adjustment.
What should have been a routine financial oversight process has quickly transformed into a public political spectacle.
But beneath the noise lies a deeper reality. This fight is about control of Johannesburg itself. The city’s annual budget of roughly R80bn funds electricity networks, water infrastructure, roads, waste management, public transport, housing programmes and thousands of municipal jobs.
Control over that budget means control over priorities, procurement decisions, infrastructure investment and political patronage networks that shape the economic life of the metro.
And as we’ve heard, senior figures in the DA, including Helen Zille, have openly framed the coming municipal election as a battle to take back Johannesburg and restore what they argue would be competent governance over that enormous municipal purse.
In other words, the political war we are seeing today is the early positioning for control of one of the most valuable municipal administrations in the country.
Yet both parties are behaving in ways that should worry residents. The ANC has turned leadership in Johannesburg into a revolving door, with mayors rising and falling as internal party factions shift power.
Morero’s recall — reportedly driven by national leadership figures, including secretary-general Fikile Mbalula, once again highlights the instability that has plagued the city’s governance for years.
The real danger is that the battle for control of Johannesburg’s R80bn budget could leave the city itself weaker long before voters even reach the ballot box. A metro of nearly 6-million residents cannot afford endless cycles of recalls, political stunts and council deadlocks.
Every leadership change sends shockwaves through the municipal administration, delaying decisions, unsettling departments and creating uncertainty in a city that desperately needs consistent leadership to repair failing infrastructure.
The DA, however, cannot pretend to be merely an innocent bystander in this drama. Rejecting the adjustment budget outright and escalating accusations of sabotage and destabilisation may play well in opposition politics, but in a fragile coalition environment, it can cripple governance.
Oversight is a democratic duty, but when the DA is seen to weaponise budget votes purely as a campaign strategy, the city itself becomes collateral damage. And that collateral damage is already visible in the everyday frustrations of Johannesburg residents.
Adjustment budgets redirect funds to urgent service delivery needs by repairing substations, fixing collapsing water pipes, resurfacing roads, stabilising refuse collection depots and keeping the city’s transport and waste systems functioning.
When political battles disrupt these processes, communities from Randburg to Diepsloot to Cosmo City and Soweto beyond are the ones who feel the consequences first.
Businesses delay investment, infrastructure projects stall, and residents lose faith that anyone inside the council chamber is actually focused on solving the problems they face daily.
The language now dominating this dispute — accusations of smear campaigns, sabotage, destabilisation plots and shutdown tactics — shows how quickly governance debates are sliding into election warfare.
The DA frames itself as the watchdog exposing corruption and incompetence. The ANC counters that the DA is deliberately trying to collapse the administration to win the next election. Both these narratives contain elements of truth. Both also reveal that Johannesburg is already deep inside an early election campaign.
The real danger is that the battle for control of Johannesburg’s R80bn budget could leave the city itself weaker long before voters even reach the ballot box. A metro of nearly 6-million residents cannot afford endless cycles of recalls, political stunts and council deadlocks. What it needs is a political culture that recognises that governance is not simply a campaign platform but a responsibility.
If there is a way out of this spiral, it begins with restoring discipline to the institutions meant to run the city. Adjustment budgets must be scrutinised rigorously, but through transparent oversight rather than public political ambushes.
The ANC and its coalition partners must stop governing through factional manoeuvres and commit to stability for the full council term.
The DA (and other opposition parties) must remember that holding government accountable does not mean setting fire to the machinery of governance simply to prove a political point.
Johannesburg needs leadership capable of recognising that the city is larger than any party’s electoral ambitions. The real question by the time the 2026 local government elections arrive will not be who wins the battle for Joburg but whether the city itself can withstand the damage caused by the fight.
- Meth is a development and political communications strategist
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.