The proposed endorsement of the District Development Model (DDM) One Plan 2025 by the Govan Mbeki Municipality Council has come under intense scrutiny from the Freedom Front Plus (VF Plus), with Cllr Aranda Nel-Buitendag submitting a formal list of oversight questions demanding clarity on its legal, financial, and governance implications. The VF Plus has warned against a “rubber-stamp mechanism” that could undermine council oversight and expose the municipality to significant risks.

The matter arose during a council meeting where the municipality was tasked with endorsing the reviewed DDM One Plan 2025, as mandated by Coghta Circular No. 84 of 2025 from the Mpumalanga MEC for Co-operative Governance Human Settlements & Traditional Affairs. The circular directs district and local municipalities to formally adopt and approve the plan, with the resolution then submitted to the MEC’s office to ensure compliance. The DDM One Plan is described as an operational model aimed at improving co-operative governance and building a capable, ethical developmental state, aligned with national regulations requiring annual review and endorsement.

However, Cllr Nel-Buitendag, representing the VF Plus, raised a series of critical concerns, asserting that the council is being deliberately excluded from substantive debate or amendment of the plan.

Key Concerns Raised by VF Plus:

1. Legal Status and Council’s Role: The VF Plus questions whether the endorsement is merely procedural or if the Council retains the legal authority to reject, amend, or impose conditions on the DDM One Plan. They highlighted the absence of a formal legal opinion outlining the implications of endorsement, which is crucial for an informed and lawful decision.
2. Insufficient Financial Detail: The report on the DDM One Plan refers to an impact on future municipal budgets without providing any quantified financial exposure. The VF Plus demands clarity on the estimated Rand value of commitments, confirmation of a costed implementation plan, and assurance that these commitments are aligned with a funded budget, particularly given the municipality’s existing challenges with unfunded budgets, trading losses on water and electricity, and outstanding bulk service debt.
3. Accountability and Consequence Management Vacuum: The DDM One Plan acknowledges ongoing governance failures, including irregular expenditure, political interference, and poor audit outcomes. However, the VF Plus notes that the plan lacks mechanisms for assigning responsibility, corrective actions, timelines, or consequence-management measures. They question how accountability will be ensured when the same leadership structures associated with these failures are responsible for implementation.
4. Erosion of Council Oversight: Concerns were raised that DDM governance structures, chaired by Executive Mayors, could marginalize the Council, MPAC, and other oversight committees. The VF Plus seeks assurances that Council oversight will not be reduced to a formality and that statutory oversight bodies will retain their authority, confirming that endorsement does not limit the Council’s future ability to refuse funding for unfunded projects.
5. Persistent Service Delivery Failures: While the plan confirms severe service delivery and infrastructure challenges (ageing infrastructure, sewer spillages, electricity failures, Eskom debt, and vandalism), the VF Plus demands clarity on specific, funded interventions scheduled for Govan Mbeki Municipality. They argue that the Council should not endorse long-term development plans while basic service delivery issues persist without concrete solutions.
6. Questionable Public Participation and Community Legitimacy: The VF Plus points out that the plan acknowledges weak attendance at public participation structures, lack of community feedback, and political interference in ward committees. They request confirmation of documented community inputs that informed the plan and assurance that endorsement will not be used to imply unsubstantiated community support.
7. Procedural Integrity and Workshop Timing: Finally, the VF Plus found it concerning that a workshop for councillors on the DDM One Plan is proposed after endorsement, rather than before the Council is asked to make such a far-reaching decision. They also seek clarity on whether endorsement binds future Councils and budgets, and if the current Council retains the right to amend or withdraw funding.

The VF Plus has formally requested that these questions be responded to by the Executive Mayor and Municipal Manager, with responses recorded in the Council minutes, and considered prior to or alongside the decision on Item A177/12/2025. Cllr Nel-Buitendag emphasized that “Council cannot lawfully or responsibly endorse a plan of this magnitude without full clarity on affordability, accountability, and oversight safeguards.”

The outcome of these demands and the municipal response will determine whether the DDM One Plan 2025 proceeds with the full backing of the Govan Mbeki Council or faces further delays due to unresolved governance and accountability issues.