Gauteng Premier Panyaza Lesufi. (X)
Gauteng’s prolonged water crisis and Premier Panyaza Lesufi’s recent comments — for which he later apologised — about using hotel facilities during outages returned to the forefront as political parties responded to his State of the Province address.
The speech did not provide sufficient detail on how the province would end the chronic water shortages, ActionSA said, while the Democratic Alliance said it lacked actionable and measurable plans to stabilise supply.
In his address late on Monday, Lesufi acknowledged the severity of the crisis and apologised to residents affected by the outages, adding: “Water is life. We cannot allow a situation where our people go for days without this basic necessity.”
He said infrastructure damage and system strain had contributed to supply interruptions and outlined investment plans that included upgrades to reservoirs, pipeline refurbishment and maintenance work in partnership with municipalities and water entities.
Lesufi made bold commitments to fix the problems, including the provincial government putting aside about R750 million to stabilise supply in Johannesburg this year through new reservoirs, boosting stations and pipeline upgrades.
“We are committing significant resources to ensure that this matter is resolved and that our communities receive the reliable water supply they deserve,” he said.
But the R750m is a fraction of the R7 billion that Johannesburg mayor Dada Morero told the Mail & Guardian last week was needed to fix roughly 2 600km of infrastructure.
Lesufi’s promises come after he was roundly criticised for remarking that he had, at times, used hotel facilities to shower during outages. The comment drew backlash from opposition parties and residents. They said it reflected a disconnect from the plight of residents who had no alternative access to water.
Gauteng has faced recurring water supply disruptions over the past two years, with residents in parts of Johannesburg, Tshwane, Ekurhuleni and the West Rand reporting intermittent or prolonged outages.
Municipalities have attributed the disruptions to ageing infrastructure, high demand, maintenance backlogs, power failures affecting pumping stations and system constraints linked to bulk supplier Rand Water.
Responding to Lesufi’s address, ActionSA Gauteng chairperson Funzi Ngobeni said the province required measurable plans and timelines to address ageing infrastructure and water losses, adding that residents needed “reliable water in their taps, not more promises”.
“If businesses are still struggling with unreliable water, if residents still do not have consistent supply, then it is fair to ask whether the fundamentals are really in place,” Ngobeni said.
“If municipalities had consistently directed at least 8% of their budgets to infrastructure maintenance, as treasury requires, we would not be facing recurring breakdowns.
“If preventative maintenance had been treated as a priority instead of an afterthought, we wouldn’t need emergency ‘war rooms’ every summer. The reality is that Gauteng does not have a shortage of speeches and recurring promises. It has a shortage of maintenance and proper asset management.”
Democratic Alliance provincial leader Solly Msimanga said communities across parts of Gauteng continued to experience intermittent supply and demanded clear implementation plans linked to the infrastructure spending that had been announced.
He said residents in Midrand, Melville, Westbury and other areas had gone weeks without reliable access and criticised the government for making endless promises without tangible results.
The Good party’s Matthew Cook called for transparency on the progress made with previous commitments and detailed reports to residents about on delivery targets.
“Before making such declarations (about improvement) the premier should check the taps because in many communities across Gauteng, they are still dry,” Cook said.
“Delays of that magnitude cannot simply be repackaged as progress. Infrastructure that consistently misses deadlines erodes public trust and deepens frustration in already vulnerable communities. Without clear assessments of past performance and concrete action plans, public addresses risk being viewed as empty rhetoric rather than effective governance.”