Despite occasional improvements, the overall trend remains bleak, with only a handful of municipalities achieving clean audits. The 2022-23 financial year is no exception. A staggering 268 material irregularities, amounting to more than R5  billion in estimated losses, were uncovered, highlighting the deep-rooted problems that continue to plague local governance.

These issues are not just numbers on a page; they reflect the reality of municipalities struggling to manage their finances effectively, often leading to compromised service delivery and eroded public trust. Even major metropolitan areas, which should set the standard for good governance, are faltering. The City of Ekurhuleni, once a model of clean governance, has regressed, while Johannesburg and Tshwane, although showing some progress, still face significant hurdles. 

This pattern of stagnation and regression is not only alarming but also indicative of a system in desperate need of reform. The question we must ask is not only why these problems persist, but what must be done to break the cycle of mismanagement and set our municipalities on a path toward accountability and transparency. 

In the 2022-23 financial year, the auditor general report outlines that municipalities with clean audits manage 29% of the local government’s expenditure budget. Compared to the previous financial year, only 34 municipalities received a clean audit — down from 38. 

Ekurhuleni and Cape Town were the only two metro municipalities to obtain a clean audit in 2021-22 but Ekurhuleni lost that status in 2022-23 while the City of Cape Town retained its clean audit status. This regression is primarily attributed to instability and inadequate monitoring and review of controls related to compliance

A clean audit opinion signifies that a municipality’s financial statements and performance report are transparent and credible, providing an accurate account of its financial health and its success (or failure) in meeting service delivery targets.

These reports are vital tools for accountability, offering a reliable picture of a municipality’s performance. They empower councils, the public and oversight bodies at the national and provincial levels to evaluate municipal performance and take necessary actions where needed.

A clean audit opinion also means the municipality complied with the important legislation that applies to it and, where transgressions did occur, they were rare or not material.

Although a clean audit is a strong indicator of good governance and compliance with relevant legislation, it is not always a direct reflection of the quality of service delivery. But a clean audit positions a municipality to transparently communicate to residents whether and when their needs will be met through accurate records.

Auditor general Tsakani Maluleke themed the latest general report, “A culture of accountability will improve service delivery”. In the report she states that “inadequate maintenance, ineffective planning, and poor execution of infrastructure projects over many years have not only affected government’s ability to deliver services to the public, but also have significant cost implications, placing further strain on government finances and the environment.

“Investing in preventative controls to address the causes of infrastructure project failures is more effective than dealing with the consequences of such failures, which include lengthy delays, poor build quality, financial loss, and harm to the public and the environment.” 

The auditor general cited the following areas of concern that contributed to the poor audit outcomes:

l Lack of financial discipline and lack of consequence management;

l Lack of robust internal control systems to plan, measure, monitor and account for financial and performance management;

l Adequate systems to ensure the timely preparation of annual financial statements that are free from material misstatements;

l Sound project management disciplines to effectively manage infrastructure grant funding through proper planning, verification, monitoring and evaluation; and

l Lack of a culture of good governance, and political and administrative leadership.

For the citizens, public office-bearers and various sectors of society, the decline in municipal service delivery is exacerbated by a range of governance, institutional and financial weaknesses. 

The weak link between services provided and revenue collected is particularly alarming and has become too big for the government to solve on its own. It is concerning to note the inability of some municipalities to deliver even a core set of basic municipal services efficiently and effectively is also affected by the lack of infrastructure and appropriate delivery models in remote rural areas, as well as the general neglect of maintenance and repairs of municipal infrastructure.

Local government in South Africa has become synonymous with dysfunctional municipalities, financial mismanagement, council and administrative instability and crumbling infrastructure. 

These issues have contributed to a steady decline in living standards and widespread service delivery failures, often sparking service delivery protests. 

These protests are not isolated incidents, but are a growing number that have affected various parts of South Africa over the past 18 months. Of grave concern is the increasing number of protests, resulting in destruction of property, injury and even death. 

The frequency of the violent incidents demonstrate the extent to which channels of communication between the government and the public have broken down. The situation has become dire to the extent that the public protector announced that it would sanction its own investigation into the root causes of such protests. 

The most important reasons for people’s frustrated actions is the non-delivery of municipal services, including clean water and refuse removal, as well as high unemployment and poor infrastructure.  

To reverse this trend, municipalities need capable, accountable and citizen-centric leadership committed to fulfilling their mandates and improving the lives of South Africans. 

Municipal councillors must be held accountable for their failure to uphold ethical behaviour set out in the code of conduct. Councillors are expected to represent people in their wards by providing progress reports on the decisions of council, the effect of municipal programmes and assessment of whether services are rendered in an efficient, effective and sustainable manner. 

Service delivery improvements will only be possible when local governments prioritise transparency, effective governance, and the needs of the people they serve.

Dr Darion Barclay is the head of department of the Gauteng department of cooperative governance and traditional affairs.