René Fiona Benjamin

Attendance

Present

54

Leave of absence

10

Absent without leave

0

Arrived late

0

Left early

1

Reasons given for leave: Private business (4), Party business (2), Ill health (2), Other (1), No reason recorded (1).

"Absent without leave" means the signed minutes of a meeting held while they were on council neither list them as present nor excuse them, and no similar name appears that day, so misspellings in the minutes don't count against anyone. Each square links to the minutes.

In the chamber

From the 10 sittings transcribed so far in their term. Times are approximate, to the nearest transcript line.

Not present when called

1

Times given the floor

2

Average wait to start

17 s

Average greetings first

51 s

Apology or leave of absence (3)

• 27 Aug 2026 · 00:05:12Leaving early. Listed among councillors leaving early; time not stated. sitting
• 27 Aug 2026 · 00:09:35Leaving early. DA: leaving early at 4:00 p.m. sitting
• 26 May 2026 · 00:13:45Party business. Leave of absence tabled by a DA whip; the first name is garbled in the transcript. sitting

Not present when called (1)

• 30 Sept 2026 · 07:55:07Called on items 21 to 23; she responded soon after, citing unmuting problems. sitting

In their words

Every time the chair gave them the floor in a transcribed sitting (2), newest first. The words are the AI transcript of that stretch of the livestream (Argon), so they can include the chair or an interjection; the time link is the place to check.

• 30 Sept 2026 · 07:55:17Items 21, 22 and 23: Disaster management policies and plan · 11 min 45 s

  Read what they said (1401 words)

  Speaker, sorry, we're trying to unmute. Our systems are not great in this weather. Thank you, Speaker. Yes, I will speak on all three items. Um Madam Speaker, um greetings to yourself and to the executive, um all protocol...

  Close the door. We hear the cars, we hear everything. Councillor Benjamin.

  Hello.

  That's not me.

  Councillor Benjamin.

  Yes, Madam Speaker.

  Your time is running. Please close the door wherever you are.

  I don't have an open door, Madam Speaker. I'm sitting at the back end of a house. There's no open doors. If there's noises, it's coming from someone else.

  Councillor Karolia. Councillor Benjamin, can you move?

  Can you still hear me, Council... Speaker, can you still hear me?

  I can hear you, Councillor.

  Thank you very much, Speaker. Um so Disaster Management uh Volunteer Policy, um these are the residents who are going to put up their hands in the communities and are going to help out when there are disasters. Um but the volunteers don't just form the bridge that, uh form the bridge for the gap; they are also the foundation when we need to recover. The city has a responsibility

  not only to these volunteers, but also to our residents that they will assist. The Democratic Alliance supports effective data, disaster preparedness, and response. Our published policy commitment includes strong early responses, capability, public awareness, and communities that are better prepared for risk. My concern with this policy is that its financial implications says

  "to be determined". We are being asked to approve a policy document that cannot outline its financial impact on the city and its residents. This is not an acceptable response in a document at the highest level of the City of Johannesburg. What happens when the first recruitment campaign succeeds? Who checks the qualification? Who conducts the training? Who provides the equipment? And at what point are the volunteers considered ready

  to be deployed? None of these are covered within this policy. The annexure calls for the public liability insurance to be extended to these volunteers. It also calls for a comprehensive framework. None of these are outlined within this policy. These are not just questions designed to delay a good policy; they are the questions that make a good policy safe to implement. Speaker, we are in an election period, and we cannot just rubber-stamp this.

  But the Council must judge these proposals by whether they can protect the people that we are putting out there, as well as protect the residents. It wasn't raining when Noah built the ark, yet he was prepared for the flood that came. And we need to take up the same responsibility, a responsibility needed to continue long after this announcement, so that the risk faced by the volunteers we deploy and the residents waiting for their assistance is minimum.

  Our position is straightforward: we need to establish that the volunteer services run properly, or they should not run at all. Item 21, as great as it is, brings this Council no information. It has no based cost...

  roll out for the seven regions. There's no managed recruitment. Who is doing the training, what is the equipment required and most importantly, what is the cost to the residents of the city. Madam Speaker, at this stage as it currently stands, the DA cannot accept or agree to item 21 as it stands. Item 22's policy framework is equally concerning. Again,

  no financial implications. However, there needs to be first responders who are sent out in situations as just alluded to in the first policy, with all the equipment training that needs to go. The principles of the services that needs to be surrendered needs to be set out in a proper

  framework. A framework that works, a framework that puts these guys in a position to manage a disaster and not become part of the disaster. A local government's commitment must also emphasize professional administration, transparency and financial discipline. We need a financial framework that the council can show it can deliver what it is promising to our residents, because their lives depends on what we agree to today.

  What is the value of the proposed fund? Well, we don't know, because it says there is none. A disaster does not wait for a department to resolve a budget concern. On paper, the city appears prepared. At the scene, the resident waits, the responder improvises and precious time is lost. The framework must be led to action in our wards. The ward councillors as well as its residents must have an input

  into where the high risks are within the wards. Speaker, we approach this elections. Residents will hear many promises about a safer, better managed city and they deserve such. They also deserve to know who promises are backed and that his promises are backed by resources, sorry. We cannot rubber-stamp financial commitments that have not been clearly explained. Any approval today must stand up to the scrutiny tomorrow,

  regardless of who occupies the seats after the election. The DA supports an effective disaster management framework that is transparent, funded and capable of producing results. We cannot stop disasters, Madam Speaker, but we can arm ourselves so that the lives are not lost, but saved because of effective disaster preparedness. Again, the financial

  implications of this policy is not listed and it needs to be that this council cannot make a decision on funding it is not aware of. In its current form, the DA cannot approve item 22. Item 23 is the disaster management plan. When a disaster happens, residents do not see the organograms of the city. They see whether someone arrives when they call and whether the help that arrives, arrives in time.

  The first responder at the scene needs to know where his support is coming from and whether the information they've

  Councillor Benjamin,

  Yes, Madam Speaker.

  just hold on, please. Councillor Marais, are you calling a point of order on your councillor? Councillor Marais, Stewart Marais, your hand is up. Okay, Councillor, continue. His hand is up and he's not responding. Continue, Councillor Benjamin.

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Um the first responders must know where their support comes from, that the information they get is reliable and that the decisions they make are backed up. The DA supports a proper resourced disaster management capacity, strong early response and communities that are prepared for risk. Council is asked to approve an updated plan, support stronger capacities at a disaster management center

  and endorse a governance model across all seven regions and a structure with three sub-centers. The council needs to know what it will take to make this proposed structure work. The annexure proposes 23 additional posts. It also recommends the location of the disaster management function in the city manager's office. Yet, the report again shows no financial implication.

  So I'm not sure how we are funding 23 positions and the moving of an entire disaster management function to the city manager's office. Answers is a correction we can make today in council, Madam Speaker, or if we get this wrong, it becomes a life that we cannot bring back tomorrow. The plan also points towards a level two plan and has an independent risk and voluntary vulnerability assessment, my apologies.

  Look, the work needs a clear timetable and meaningful input from those affected, being the residents on the ground through the ward councillors, but the future does not remove the need to explain today's staffing, funding and organizational proposals. Madam Speaker, this plan may offer a welcome headline, it needs to be grounded in realism and financial stability to make it sustainable when our residents find themselves at their most vulnerable.

  Our duty is to test whether this progress is real. We cannot rubber-stamp a plan because it feeds positive or gives a good impression to our residents. Transparency is essential when council is making decisions that affect our residents' lives. Item 23 has no costed staffing and implementation plan, a clear explanation of a proposed organizational changes,

  a timetable for the level two assessment and recommendations stating precisely what council is asked to approve. We need to make decisions with our eyes open, because again it will cost our residents its their lives. Madam Speaker, as item 23 currently stands, the Democratic Alliance cannot approve. I thank you.

• 22 Jul 2026 · 07:21:4927 to 33 · 3 min 36 s

  Read what they said (495 words)

  Good day, Madam Speaker. Thank you. All protocol observed. When our residents leave their homes in the morning, they do not care about our quarterly reports, our performance indicators, or our mitigating plans. They care about whether the pothole that has been standing outside their um yard has been fixed or not. Some reported years ago, some reported months ago. They care whether the stormwater infrastructure works when it rains. And increasingly across Johannesburg, the answer to these questions

  is no. Madam Speaker, the roads are not simply strips of tar connecting one place to another. They are the arteries of Johannesburg's economy. They connect people to jobs, businesses to customers, and investors to opportunities. A city that cannot maintain its road cannot credibly say that it is open for business. When investors see deteriorating roads, failing infrastructure, and neglected public spaces, they do not see opportunities,

  they see risk. This is why road maintenance is not merely a service delivery issue. It is an economical imperative. The report before us states the JRA received 72% of its performance target during the third quarter, yet residents continue to navigate potholes, collapsing bridges, and failing stormwater systems and non-working robots. Madam Speaker, oversight can only work when those responsible

  are willing to be held accountable. Again, MMC Kunene is not in the house. This follows the pattern of him missing Section 79 Transport meetings month after month. He chooses rather to send a representative from his office to take notes. Our resident demands answers. All we get is his empty chair. The message to our residents is very clear: your prolonged traffic trips and your vehicle damage does not matter.

  It is time to stop grandstanding by slapping hashtags on programs on what is JRA's core function of repair and maintenance and calling it the MMC's program, deciding on roads to be fixed without consulting the ward councillors. Yesterday at an event, I had a resident ask me, "Why the fanfare? Why aren't they just not fixing the roads? This is all unnecessary."

  The reality is that the entity responsible for maintaining one of Johannesburg's most important economic asset is under severe financial strain, while infrastructure backlogs continue to grow. The frustration of the residents is not that infrastructure occasionally fails. They know infrastructure ages, storm happens, and emergency occurs. The frustration is that preventative maintenance has been replaced by crisis management. The DA believes infrastructure maintenance is an investment,

  not an expense. That is why we support preventative maintenance, ring-fenced maintenance budgets, accountability, and transparent reporting. Because good government is not measured by how quickly it responds to a crisis; it is measured by how effectively it prevents the crisis from happening. The MMC responsible for this oversight is absent. Maybe we should stop reporting and just tell them that Gogo Zille is coming. Because at this point, Madam Speaker, the potholes are showing up more constantly than the MMC of Transport.

  I thank you.

Spoke on

• 30 Sept 2026 · 07:54:24Items 21-23: Disaster management policies and plan, DA opening
• 22 Jul 2026 · 07:17:01Items 27-33: Transport, JRA, Metrobus and MTC