Taps run dry in Merafong after municipality defaults on bill
Merafong local municipality is still dogged by water rationing, even cut-offs, almost a year after restrictions were imposed by the Carletonville-based council.
It has emerged that the problem is that the municipality has not paid Rand Water, which has reduced water supply to the municipality.
Additionally megalitres of water are wasted through leaks.
Merafong owes Rand Water R1.2bn
The municipality owes R1.2 billion to Rand Water and is said to have defaulted on the payment agreement in April, resulting in a 20% cut in its water supply.
This adversely affected residents across the board, including loyal payers.
Now DA shadow MEC for infrastructure Nico de Jager has asked Gauteng premier Panyaza Lesufi and MEC for cooperative governance and traditional affairs Jacob Mamabolo to intervene.
ALSO READ: Municipal water disruption affects services at Carletonville Hospital
He blamed them for not taking action, though the situation has been deteriorating for some time.
De Jager said the Merafong water crisis was due to incompetent leadership and widespread mismanagement of financial and material resources in the municipality.
'This cash-strapped municipality is battling to pay its creditors due to financial mismanagement and maladministration.
Municipality battling to pay its creditors
'Years of neglecting its water infrastructure resulted in up to 50% water losses. The municipality also lost water through leaks and unmetered use.'
He said the administrative failure had now affected hospital services and many residents who were up to date with payments, because the rationing affected everybody.
'Without tangible solutions, action and intervention, more communities will join the thirsty queue as Rand Water is faced with maintenance challenges,' De Jager said.
ALSO READ: 11-hour water disruptions due to Eskom maintenance: Here are the affected areas
The Merafong water crisis has affected Carltonville and its surrounds and extends as far as Fochville and nearby mines.
The South African Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) has been asked to address Emfuleni local municipality.
In a letter to the commission, DA Emfuleni north constituency head Kingsol Chabalala, Emfuleni said the municipality was violating residents' right to access water and sanitation as stated in the constitution.
Sahcr asked to address Emfuleni
'The complaint pertains to Emfuleni's failure to provide essential services such as clean water, adequate sanitation and effective sewage management.
'This neglect has resulted in communities living in squalor.'
The municipality recently returned R636 million of its Municipal Infrastructure Grant to National Treasury that was unspent despite an urgent need to repair sewer and water systems.
NOW READ: Water cuts: Merafong to speak to Rand Water
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Star
7 hours ago
- The Star
Joburg mayor blames DA-led coalition as city faces R24. 4bn wasteful spending crisis
Simon Majadibodu | Published 7 hours ago Joburg Mayor Dada Morero has blamed the previous DA-led administration for the city's ballooning unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure, which has reached R24.4 billion over the past year. Speaking at a media briefing on Thursday, Morero confirmed he had submitted a comprehensive financial recovery plan to Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana, who had given the City of Johannesburg 14 days to respond after raising alarm over its financial mismanagement. This comes after Auditor-General, Tsakani Maluleke, flagged serious governance failures, including poor financial controls, weak revenue collection and chronic underinvestment. The National Treasury has cautioned that failure to resolve the crisis could result in the withholding of national grants. Morero said he received the letter from Godongwana on July 30, 2025, outlining the minister's concern over the city's ongoing non-compliance with the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA), specifically relating to unauthorised and irregular expenditure. 'The Honourable Minister requested that I respond within 14 days. I can confirm that I have now submitted a comprehensive response on behalf of the City of Johannesburg,' Morero said. The response, he said, includes a full account of the issues behind the R23.6 billion in unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure as reported in the city's 2023–2024 financial statements. Morero, who has served as mayor since August 2022, again blamed the Democratic Alliance-led coalition, which governed the city between 2016 and 2021. He previously served as an MMC for Finance at the metro in 2023. 'Our beloved city endured a period of mismanagement and poor leadership under the DA-led coalition. The R23.6 billion is a cumulative figure that increased progressively over several years, largely unaddressed and not regularised as required by the MFMA,' he said. He broke down the R23.6 billion figure, which includes R13 billion (55%) in unauthorised expenditure, R9.9 billion (42%) in irregular expenditure, and R735 million (3%) in fruitless and wasteful expenditure. Morero said most of the unauthorised spending, comes from bulk purchases of electricity and water that exceeded the approved budget. 'These bulk purchases are driven by resident consumption as well as both technical and non-technical losses during service delivery,' he said. Irregular expenditure mainly arose from procurement processes that failed to comply with supply chain regulations. 'It's important to clarify that irregular or unauthorised expenditure doesn't necessarily mean that the goods or services weren't received. It points to non-compliance in procurement procedures,' he said. Morero said to address these issues, he implemented key interventions including an enhanced expenditure reduction strategy focused on investigations, consequence management, and regularisation of non-compliant spending in line with MFMA Section 32.2. He said he also re-established the city's disciplinary board for financial misconduct and initiated criminal proceedings where necessary. 'In February 2025, I approached President Cyril Ramaphosa for technical support through the Presidential Working Group,' Morero added. He said the city also established a 'War Room' and introduced a 'Bomb Squad' to oversee financial recovery and monitor service delivery progress weekly. These interventions, he claimed, are beginning to show results. 'As of June 30, 2025, R12.9 billion of the R23.6 billion has been regularised. The balance of R6.7 billion is under investigation. The remainder has been investigated and is now being processed by municipal committees,' he said. Morero said he expects a 'significant reduction' in irregular expenditure in the city's 2024–2025 annual financial statements. He said the disciplinary board has completed preliminary investigations into six matters totalling R535 million, with outcomes to be presented to the Council during its next ordinary sitting. On July 31, the Council approved 12 further matters for investigation, amounting to R2.5 billion. These relate to alleged financial misconduct and unresolved unauthorised expenditure. Morero also claimed there were improvements in revenue collection through the War Room initiative, with the city achieving an 87% collection rate between April and June 2025 - a 2.7% increase from the same period last year. He said the city is now targeting a sustainable daily revenue collection of R200 million. 'The impact of the Presidential Working Group and Bomb Squad is beginning to be visible through accelerated service delivery,' he said. He said a new board has been appointed to oversee municipal entities, while oversight through the Group Audit Committees and the Mayoral Committee is being strengthened. He added, 'Reducing unauthorised, irregular and fruitless expenditure is now a key performance indicator for senior managers. The disciplinary board will continue expediting investigations into allegations of financial misconduct.' [email protected] IOL Politics
Daily Maverick
8 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Trophy hunting in the greater Kruger area — what the study overlooks
Trevor Oertel is an Executive Committee member of the Sustainable Use Coalition of Southern Africa (SUCo-SA) and has represented SUCo-SA at CITES meetings both in Panama and Geneva. He has served under various ministers of Environmental Affairs on the Minister's Wildlife Forum. A recent study published in Biological Conservation Vol 309, September 2025, and amplified by Adam Cruise in Daily Maverick claims that communities near Kruger National Park reject trophy hunting and that alternative livelihood options should be explored ('Communities near Kruger Park reject trophy hunting, embrace ethical alternatives — study', 28 July 2025). Yet the very same study simultaneously acknowledges the conservation and economic benefits that trophy hunting has delivered in southern Africa for decades. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads This contradiction is at the heart of the problem: the study does not confront the source of public opposition to hunting, nor does it critically assess how representative the voices quoted actually are of the broader land use reality in the region. The paper states that 'public pressure could end trophy hunting of wildlife, potentially negatively affecting species conservation and the human communities that depend upon the revenue hunting generates'. This is not an insignificant point. In fact, it is perhaps the most important finding in the study, though the authors treat it as a side note. But who is driving that public pressure? Animal rights ideology It is not coming from the rural African communities who live alongside wildlife and bear the costs of its presence. It is driven largely by foreign NGOs and urban-based lobby groups rooted in animal rights ideology, not conservation science or socioeconomic realities. These groups wield emotive campaigns across digital media, often misrepresenting facts and vilifying hunting without engaging the voices of landowners, conservation professionals or rural custodians. The resulting 'public pressure' is thus manufactured by narrative, and not grounded in local truth. The paper correctly identifies that banning hunting could harm both people and wildlife, yet it fails to interrogate why public opinion is being manipulated against a practice that has demonstrably conserved habitats, maintained viable populations of wild animals and their habitats, and generated revenue for landholders and communities. A prominent example of this group is World Animal Protection (WAP), a multimillion-pound UK-based animal rights group that has consistently lobbied against all forms of hunting, including regulated and sustainable hunting. Besides the study that Cruise cites being funded by WAP, it fails to clearly disclose up front that at least three of its authors are either employed by or have formerly been employed by WAP, calling into question the neutrality of the research and its conclusions (the authors' biographies are disclosed in hyperlinks, not in an up-front disclaimer). When those crafting the questions, framing the data and interpreting the findings are aligned with an organisation vocally opposed to hunting in any form, one must ask: Is this research or advocacy under the banner of science? The Daily Maverick article and the study it draws from focus on communities bordering Kruger National Park in the north-eastern Lowveld of South Africa. However, it is also worth asking: 'How much actual trophy hunting happens in this area?' The answer is very little, particularly on communal lands in the immediate vicinity of the park. Hunting in this region is constrained by land tenure, regulation and land-use policies. This means most households surveyed in the study have had minimal, if any, direct experience of benefits from hunting in general, and specifically from trophy hunting. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads It is therefore not surprising that many interviewees do not see hunting as a livelihood opportunity — they have not been given the opportunity to benefit from it in the first place. Deeper issue This raises a deeper issue — is this study truly about assessing trophy hunting, or is it part of an agenda to explore alternatives in an area where hunting hasn't really been implemented or tested as a sustainable revenue model? The study proposes alternatives like vegetable farming, sewing or craft-making — all worthy initiatives, but hardly equivalent in income potential, ecological compatibility or explaining how they would incentivise conservation in any way. Hunting alongside photographic tourism aligns livelihoods with managing wildlife and its habitats. Generating income from vegetables, sewing or crafts moves communities away from wildlife and disincentivises conservation. For instance, vegetable farming in buffer zones around protected areas risks increasing human-wildlife conflict. Water access, crop raiding by elephants or baboons, fencing costs and soil degradation are real constraints. Yet the paper glosses over these very practical concerns. In contrast, hunting incentivises keeping wild land wild, placing value on intact ecosystems and large, free-ranging species. It doesn't require land clearance or conflict with the ecosystem — it works with it. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Instead of using communities' limited exposure to hunting as proof of rejection, the study could have investigated: Why opportunities from hunting have not reached these communities. How to expand access and equity in hunting revenue, including governance reforms. How existing conservation success in neighbouring areas like APNR (Associated Private Nature Reserves) or KwaZulu-Natal community hunting initiatives could serve as models. The Daily Maverick article is penned by Adam Cruise, who is well known for his opposition to trophy hunting. In this instance, Cruise's tone borders on celebratory. However, as a journalist Cruise would do well to temper his personal biases and acknowledge the full scope of the study's findings, including its clear warnings that banning hunting could harm both conservation and local livelihoods. The study paradoxically confirms that ending trophy hunting could harm both conservation and communities, yet it aligns itself with a movement that is pressuring governments to do just that, without addressing the source of that pressure or the sociopolitical power imbalance behind it. Real conservation solutions must be led by local needs, backed by science and sound conservation management, and shielded from ideological interference. advertisement Don't want to see this? Remove ads Disregarding proven conservation industries like hunting simply because of foreign sentiment, often divorced from African realities, risks sacrificing both people and wildlife for the sake of fashionable morality. The debate about trophy hunting should not be about emotion or optics. It should be about what actually works for conservation and for the people who live with wildlife every day. DM
IOL News
10 hours ago
- IOL News
Morero Points Finger at DA for Joburg's R23. 6bn Crisis, Says City Paying Price for Past Misrule
Johannesburg Mayor Dada Morero has come out swinging, laying the blame for the city's deepening financial crisis squarely at the door of the Democratic Alliance (DA)-led coalition, which he says left behind a legacy of 'mismanagement, neglect, and non-compliance.' Addressing the media at the Joburg Theatre on Thursday, Morero unpacked the city's R23.6 billion in unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure (UIFW), calling it a 'direct consequence of failures by the previous administration to follow financial laws, fix broken systems, and take accountability.' Morero's remarks follow a damning letter from Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana, sent on 30 July, raising alarm over Johannesburg's apparent failure to comply with the Municipal Finance Management Act (MFMA). The minister gave the city 14 days to respond — a deadline Morero says his office met with a full breakdown of the crisis and its origins.'It must be understood that the city's financial crisis did not begin yesterday,' said Morero. 'This R23.6 billion figure is not the result of one year's missteps. It is the result of years of cumulative damage, largely caused by the DA-led coalition and its inability to govern the city responsibly.' Morero accused the DA of allowing unlawful expenditure to pile up while failing to implement mechanisms for oversight and accountability. In particular, he criticised their refusal to activate the city's disciplinary board, which is mandated to investigate financial misconduct. 'For years, they simply looked the other way,' he said. 'They did not establish the disciplinary board. They did not regularise irregular spending. And now, our administration is left to deal with the aftermath.' According to the 2023/24 financial statements, the UIFW figure includes R13 billion in unauthorised expenditure, R9.9 billion in irregular expenditure, and R735 million in fruitless expenditure.
