In a contentious move, the Govan Mbeki Municipality (GMM) Council has formally resolved to extend the appointment of the Gert Sibande District Municipality (GSDM) as its implementing agent for electricity distribution in Bethal and eMzinoni for a period of 36 months, significantly longer than the 12-month extension that was initially discussed in reports. This decision, aimed at addressing Bethal’s long-standing electricity supply woes, has ignited a fierce debate, with Democratic Alliance (DA) Councillor Portia Mpatlanyane leading a vocal charge for accountability and transparency.

The GMM first brought in GSDM in July 2020, under Section 88 of the Local Government: Municipal Structures Act, with the objective of overhauling the failing electricity infrastructure and management. GSDM subsequently appointed EnPower Energy and Machite Engineering JV (Pty.) Ltd. (“EnPower Machite”) to manage the operations. While a report motivating the extension outlined significant improvements, including a revenue jump and reduced electricity losses, Councillor Mpatlanyane expressed deep skepticism and demanded concrete answers during the council sitting that led to the 36-month resolution.

The report highlighted several positive outcomes:

• A reported surge in monthly electricity revenue in Region 1 from R3.1 million in 2021 to R13.3 million in 2025.
• Electricity losses allegedly dropped from 74% to below 40%.
• Claims of approximately R40 million in annual Eskom savings due to improved load management.
• Improvements in infrastructure, reduced outages, and stable supply to critical institutions.

Despite these reported successes, Councillor Mpatlanyane challenged the very foundation and effectiveness of the proposed extension, which she had initially understood to be for 12 months, and which has now been extended to three years. Her questions, posed vehemently during the council sitting, underscored concerns about legality, financial accountability, and municipal competence.

Councillor Mpatlanyane directly challenged the council, asking:

“On what legal authority does this municipality continue to abdicate its core electricity responsibilities under Section 88? Has anyone verified this is lawful?” This question struck at the heart of whether GMM was legally permitted to delegate its fundamental duties for such an extended period.

She then focused on the financial claims made in the report, demanding clarity on where the revenue was going:

“We’re told revenue jumped from R3 million to R13 million a month — how much actually is reaching the municipal coffers? And how much of that 13 million is paid to Machite whilst electricity losses remain stubbornly at 40% — is Council satisfied with this level of failure?” Her query highlighted the discrepancy between stated revenue growth and persistent high electricity losses, raising doubts about the actual financial benefits for the municipality.

Mpatlanyane further questioned the credibility of the reported savings:

“Where is the proof of the alleged R40 million Eskom savings, or is this just political spin?“

Addressing the slow progress on critical infrastructure, she pointed out specific failures:

“The eMzinoni substation is less than halfway complete — who is taking responsibility for these delays?“

Expressing her frustration with the protracted external management, which has now spanned six years with a further three-year extension, she stated:

“After six years, this municipality is still not ready to take control of its own electricity. How much longer will citizens pay for incompetence masked as progress?“

Finally, her concerns about the cycle of extensions resonate even more strongly with the council’s decision to approve a 36-month term:

“And what guarantee exists that this “12-month extension” will not simply become another endless roll-over, leaving this Council and our residents powerless?” 12 months was the original proposal

Councillor Mpatlanyane concluded her plea with an impassioned call for better governance, stating: “Speaker, Council deserves answers, accountability, and results — not empty promises.”

The council’s decision to extend the contract by 36 months, significantly longer than initially anticipated in the proposal, signals a deeper reliance on GSDM and its appointed agent. While proponents argue this provides necessary time for infrastructure completion and skills transfer, Councillor Mpatlanyane’s questions will undoubtedly remain pertinent as residents continue to seek reliable electricity and accountability from their municipal leaders over the next three years.