Alex Christians

Attendance

Present

59

Leave of absence

5

Absent without leave

0

Arrived late

2

Left early

7

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

0

Times given the floor

31

Average wait to start

8 s

Average greetings first

2 s

Apology or leave of absence (4)

• 27 Aug 2026 · 00:05:12Leaving early. Listed among councillors leaving early; time not stated. sitting
• 25 Jun 2026 · 00:54:36Leaving early. Leaving at 16:00 for religious reasons. sitting
• 28 May 2026 · 00:38:17Other reason. Apology tendered because he is celebrating Eid. sitting
• 26 May 2026 · 00:14:43Arriving late. Expected to arrive late. sitting

Warned or stopped by the chair (2)

• 30 Sept 2026 · 01:48:30Chair asked him to withdraw a remark about ANC councillors; she later told him to stop mentioning political parties. sitting
• 26 Aug 2026 · 07:44:26Chair corrected Cllr Christians' point about an EFF resolution on property sales. sitting

In their words

Every time the chair gave them the floor in a transcribed sitting (31), 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 · 08:21:59Items 21, 22 and 23: Disaster management policies and plan · 43 s

  Read what they said (119 words)

  I had my hand up. Madam Speaker, I had my hand up.

  I cannot see your hand until someone told me that your hand is up. I do not have a gadget in front of me. I depend on the screen and I depend on people that are telling me and they all told me your hand is up now. Councillor Alex.

  Madam Speaker, I was raising a point of order that two of the biggest parties in this council have raised the issue of an incomplete report and without the actual MMC being here, can this item please be withdrawn by the Leader of Executive Business? Thank you. That's what I was raising my hand for. Thank you.

• 30 Sept 2026 · 01:43:41Item 26: Erf 56 Crown North development lease · 8 min 56 s

  Read what they said (1160 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I am here. Uh it's just that your reception at times drops so we can't hear you. Madam Speaker, thank you very much. Uh Madam Speaker, on this item, it is clear that this lease taken in 2019 for an open public uh space uh is now up for an extension. But the extension flies in the face of what the community has asked,

  because there has been no oversight of this property by officials, leading to what was rezoned for parking uh continuing to be used for business. And now they are trying to regularize that by asking for it to be rezoned to Business 3.

  Madam Speaker, if you look at the report, there is no um recommendations in terms of other departments in terms of safety of this land. And if you go to this land, you will see that this land has overhead pylons which do not allow for business, and that is why initially it was uh to be used only for parking.

  But the inhabitants of this property continue to use it for business. So, uh when this lease expires in 2029, they know they will not be able to get it because the residents association has already objected to them on more than one occasion.

  Madam Speaker, if you go back on this, this property has got a lot of value to the city, yet we continue to lease it out for parking at a very low rate, yet the the people utilizing it are making a lot of money off the city. Uh numerous um times you have we have seen that government departments have gone in there because not only is this property being used by many illegal foreigners, it is being used for goods that are not of high standard and therefore uh in contravention of what should be coming into the country.

  Madam Speaker, if I can go back to when this entire thing started, it started already in the early 2000s uh where this property was simply taken over uh in conjunction with the ANC councillors in charge and been and used for business. It was tried to be regularized as business,

  but could not because the community was living right at its doorstep and continually complained about businesses being uh business being run throughout the day and late into the night. Madam Speaker, we have not respected the residents by giving this park away to be used for for parking.

  Madam Speaker, furthermore, when this came to council previously, we saw that uh Madam Speaker, do I stop? There's two hands up.

  Whose hands is up there? Councillor Mmbengwa.

  No, please, man. Can Councillor Christians withdraw the aspersions and allegation to say that those uh spaces were used by the ANC councillors wrongfully? Can he withdraw that part?

  Okay. Councillor, the councillor says that you need to withdraw that because

  Which rule is he using?

  Who's that? Was it you, Councillor Christians?

  No, Madam Speaker, I'm waiting for your ruling.

  72.

  Uh-uh. Wait, colleagues, why are we doing this? And the other voice I said earlier on, it's an Alderman that's talking.

  Councillor Mmbengwa. Councillor Christians, can you withdraw? Um because the councillor says it's not true what you are saying. But then can I get the hand of MMC Amad?

  MMC Amad, your hand was up.

  It's a legacy hand, Speaker, I'm covered. Thank you.

  Okay. Councillor Christians, can you withdraw saying that uh ANC councillors, please?

  Uh Madam Speaker, uh I withdraw the use of ANC councillor, but the then ward councillor who was an ANC councillor. Can I do that? Because I did not say what the person said I must withdraw. I did not say any ANC councillor was utilizing the land.

  But you are still saying it's an ANC ward councillor. Can you withdraw that it was used by the ANC councillors because it is not factual. We don't know what happened.

  Madam Speaker, as I said, I cannot withdraw something I did not say. I did not say it was being used by an ANC councillor. I did not say that. And the recording will reflect that.

  What did you say? What did you say?

  Madam Speaker, I said in this started in 2000, and the ANC ward councillor was had given over this land to the official uh to to the people who then regularized it into a building. I did not say they were using it.

  Ja, neh? The turning of words. Okay. You can carry on.

  So, Madam Speaker, uh with this now once again being utilized for parking is now being asked to go

  Just hold on. Just hold on, Councillor Mmbengwa, and tell us on what rule are you standing.

  I'm still standing on Rule number 72. Saying the same simple things. Councillor Christians is alleging that it is the ANC councillors. There is a recording of what he's saying. If we replay that thing, this is what you are saying. And he's casting uh uh he's casting allegations to say that it was the ANC councillors.

  Okay.

  I have been I have worked long enough with councillors of the ANC since 2000, councillor in my ward. And I've worked

  Okay. Councillor Mmbengwa, we get what you are saying. Uh we will rule on it now. Councillor Belinda.

  Madam Speaker, I think you've partially uh going in the direction that I was going to remind you that you are allowing a point of order on a point of order, which is against the rules. Um so, since you have said that you are going to rule, I'm going to park it there for you to continue. Thanks.

  Dankie. My ruling remains exactly the same as I said. And I'm saying to Councillor Christians, Councillor, carry on. Stop mentioning political parties. Thank you.

  Thank Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, uh it is clear that the manner in which it was done in 2000 is now occurring in 2026 where they were uh the people who have applied for this land have moved from wanting it initially for parking, and now want to go to exactly where the residents said they would go, and we did and the officials did not believe them.

  They now want to regularize it and make it business, which will infringe on the rights of those residents staying right there, and it will ensure that what was the initial purpose of the lease then is now continued because nobody is actually standing up for the residents. Madam Speaker, with that, the Democratic Alliance will not allow for the rights of residents in a residential area to be trampled by people who are just looking for their own gain, their personal gain, and for the gain of their colleagues and their cadres.

  Madam Speaker, this is why the DA will not support this item. I thank you.

• 30 Sept 2026 · 00:23:57Quorum / roll call · 18 s

  Read what they said (42 words)

  Yes. Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, please note that we, there is, we are concerned in the manner in which we are doing quorum. We understand that it was agreed to by the whippery, but please note our concern. Thank you.

• 27 Aug 2026 · 03:14:25Item 46: Councillor Funeral Support Policy · 7 s

  Read what they said (22 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, in terms of rule 84, please record the opposition of the Democratic Party to that item.

• 27 Aug 2026 · 03:11:04Point of order on quorum procedure (rule 58.1) · 1 min 28 s

  Read what they said (227 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, for the record, can I please read the rule 58.1? Because the procedure followed was completely The procedure followed right now was completely incorrect.

  Just hold on. Let me also open up.

  Councillor Chris Avante Smith brought to your attention that there is no quorum during this meeting. At that point, you should have counted to see if that was correct. Instead, Madam Speaker, Madam Speaker, instead of that, you rang the bell. Let me read it verbatim for those who cannot read across from me and making a noise. If during any meeting, the attention of

  Wait, Councillor. Colleagues, allow Councillor Christians to read the entire rule. Read the rule.

  I am. If during any meeting, the attention of the Speaker is called to no quorum during the meeting, councillors present must be counted. And if it is found that there is no quorum, the Speaker must cause the call bell to be rung for at least three minutes. If after an interval of five minutes, there is still no quorum, the Speaker must forthwith adjourn the meeting. Madam Speaker, you rang the bell without counting. That means you have According to you, by ringing the bell,

  you verified that there was no quorum. But you did not do that. So, the procedure you followed was totally incorrect. Thank you.

• 27 Aug 2026 · 02:36:06Item 46: Councillor Funeral Support Policy · 3 min 1 s

  Read what they said (384 words)

  Thank you Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker seeing that I'm the only speaker on this item

  No you not, there's others.

  Uh uh they're not in the house. They've already left. Madam Speaker

  we dealt with this policy in the committee this week. We were told we'll get a get it and we'll be able to discuss it just before it came through, but it went straight through to council. So it didn't give us an opportunity to ask the relevant questions.

  And this policy has been delayed over and over again and as Councilor Nkubungu said

  a lot of councilors has passed away. And they weren't afforded a burial that previous ones had uh ones had when they were in this council.

  The dignity provided to those councilors compared to the ones after the rescission of this policy is chalk and cheese. But the rescission is what we should be discussing.

  It was done because there is no dignity in being buried with funds that the MFMA said we should not have.

  If you look at this policy Madam Speaker, the report says from from legal's side that we

  the legal implications, the policy complies with applicable municipal policies and guidelines.

  Yet in the meeting there were contradicting views from legal that funds from departments are still funds of the city even though it doesn't come from the legislature.

  And this is this is of concern to me because if it is that means we haven't yet corrected the part of the MFMA which says there should not be additional benefits to councilors outside what is being given to them.

  And we haven't been given that surety because now it seems that legal wants to comply with what they've been told rather than what the legislation says. And if that is the case Madam Speaker then there is no dignity in being buried with this funeral policy

  because we are doing it for ourselves. We not doing it for the benefit of the residents. So I'm not too sure whether Councilor Nkubungu has been briefed on that aspect. But if he he cannot give us an answer we cannot support this policy because it's because of the Democratic Alliance that we had to rescind the previous one because it was illegal. I thank you.

• 27 Aug 2026 · 00:45:09Item 33: 2027/28 IDP and budget time schedule · 7 min 49 s

  Read what they said (1103 words)

  Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Greetings to everybody. Madam Speaker, um let me start off by saying congratulations to the MMC on their malicious compliance with with the deadlines. And I use the word malicious compliance because that's just what this document is. For the last four years, we've been asking

  for us to be included, especially this side of the house, because we contribute to the second most wards in Johannesburg, but we've been ignored. This malicious compliance is just nothing more than a tick-box exercise that continues year on year.

  Mfundisi, ngiyabonga kakhulu.

  Thank you for your quotes, because that's exactly what is happening. We keep doing the same things over and over again, yet we expect a different result. Speaker, yesterday we spoke a lot about ethical leadership, and as soon as the MMC sat down, her very own caucus destroyed that. They started attacking other councillors in this house. So how do we have ethical leadership when people do not even understand it?

  But let me also just say a big congratulations and a thank you to our officials. All these timeframes that come in now, it's the officials that make it happen. We know the pressure on you, because when the MMCs, the Mayor or the Chairpersons get there, they want everything ready and set up for them. They do very little in saying, "Do you need help?

  Is this going to work? Is it the right time? Is it the right venue?" You've got to deal with that. Because when the residents are told to come at 10:00 in the morning and they complain, nobody hears them because they're not there. They're sitting somewhere else waiting just to be ushered in by you. So a big thank you, and I think everybody here should actually applaud you for that. Madam Speaker, this talks to to to the item I've been speaking for the last

  three years, not four years, three years, because Community-Based Planning cannot happen in two months. We have 135 wards. 135 wards to have Community-Based Planning in two months, that means you need at least two wards per day. It's not possible. And it's not possible for people like Bernice Strydom, who's up in the stands today,

  who's got to usher their people all the way from Riverlea to Danie van Zyl, and when they get there, they're told, "Sorry, only one person's allowed to speak." How is that Community-Based Planning? Let Community-Based Planning happen in Riverlea. It's a ward on its own. Don't cluster it. When Aunty Ola has to put the elderly from 250 old age units in Vrededorp into a bus, cart them to Brixton Multipurpose Centre,

  and then have the ward councillor not even there to greet them, you got to ask: Is this Community-Based Planning for wards? And then once again, we ask the community come to to give input, but you tell them, "Oh, there's a form, please fill it in, because there's not going to be enough time to do that." So Madam Speaker, when it comes to this document,

  we got to ask ourselves: Are we doing justice to the community? We've just passed the Public Participation Policy now, which allows many people who are techno-savvy to be able to do to give input that way. So hopefully the numbers will pick up in the next term. But ultimately, as older people, because we can't call ourselves aldermen now,

  you got to call ourselves older people, some of us do not want to to use technology to communicate. We want that face-to-face. We want you to understand what we are saying, rather than interpret a text that we are sending you. So hopefully going forward, the officials can hear me, is that let's expand it. It doesn't have to start just before. We can already start the process of getting communities' inputs in

  way before, because 135 wards is a lot to do in two months, and that is why you cluster it, yet you still call it Community-Based Planning. Madam Speaker, it's silly season in this house because it seems that some people are not talking to the item, but rather talking to other political parties. So let us consider why we're really here. Why we're really here is because we want

  the Executive and the officials to hear the concerns on the ground. I've just given you two examples. I can give you examples from Region C, where Councillor Benjamin always complains a community can't afford to go outside of the community to give input, yet we expect them. Yes, we provide transport, we provide them with with with meals, but then those people who are jumping on the bus are not coming there because of Community-Based Planning.

  They're coming there because those people are actually hungry. They need a meal, and because they're unemployed, they're sitting at home, they just jump on the bus. That's why the inputs are so low. So we need to consider what Councillor Benjamin says, and she says, "Please have it in my ward. Stop having it outside of my ward." And that is something that's very important when we do the the malicious compliance. Because yes, we go back to COGTA and say, "Yes, we've ticked the box, we've had CBPs,

  we've had uh feedback from the Executive, we've received input," but as I said in the in the last uh speech I gave about the IDP, 0.3% of residents of Johannesburg actually participated. 0.3% of 16 million people. The Mayor likes using that number. Big numbers in the City of Johannesburg,

  but very few people participating. MMC Masuku, through you, Madam Chair, said we need to work together. And irrespective of who's going to be government next year, we have to work together because we've got to give confidence back to the residents of Johannesburg. And it's going to be between the DA and the ANC who's going to be holding those wards. And we've got to start saying, because the DA is in government now,

  we can't just fight with them. And that is something that is very important. MMC um Mgcina, you can smile. Maybe you guys may get one ward seat, but unfortunately, this is a two-horse race. So so Speaker, ultimately, what we got to realize is what we're doing today is compliance, and yes, we've got all the boxes ticked,

  30 seconds.

  but it's because of the residents we, when we're in this house, we got to remember we are councillors, we're not only representing our parties. I thank you.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 08:48:4647 · 3 min 8 s

  Read what they said (443 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, always. That's why this time I'm using the laptop to show I'm not that old. Speaker, in terms of this report, I want to say thank you very much to the officials and your office for going through it under such a short time. However, there are some amendments I'd like to make to correct in terms of the policy itself, so that we cannot be called a Council that just pushes things through because we are gaining from it.

  So Speaker, the first part I'd like to raise is on page 47.4.

  So you must go slowly, nê?

  Yes. 47.4. I'll go as slow as possible while educating. Just before Policy Implications, the paragraph there: "The above list comprises of former councillors identified for assessment. Only those individuals whose verified service history results in 20 or more points..." At that point is where I'd like to make the amendment: "will be included," not "are included." "Will be included in the final list of recipients recommended for conferment of the..."

  And now this is where the policy differs. There are two types of Aldermen. Those who are currently councillors here in this chamber will be Aldermen. Those who have served previously, not only in the previous term, but even before that, become Honorary Aldermen. And I think that's the correction that needs to be made here. Before "Alderman title," it should be "Honorary Alderman title," because those are the two categories. So that's the first part. The second recommendation that I'd like to make

  is in the recommendation itself, that because you've still got to verify those 33, that Recommendation 4 falls away until the verification is made, and then it comes back to Council as Honorary Aldermen, because as it currently is, it is incorrect. They are not being conferred the Alderman title, but the Honorary Alderman title. And I can see the Secretary to Council shaking his head. So let me refer you, Secretary to Council, through you, Madam Chair, to

  the revised Alderman policy. Number two, Definition of Terms. And the third paragraph talks to: "The title of Honorary Alderman of the City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Council is conferred as the highest award to a former councillor in recognition of their exceptional service to Council." So we cannot have councillors who are former and not currently councillors being conferred to as Aldermen. And that is why I say we need to amend it, and that is my recommendation to the house, that we withdraw Number 4, because we cannot confer people who are not currently councillors as Aldermen. They'll be conferred as Honorary Aldermen. Thank you.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 04:55:41Item 38 · 24 s

  Read what they said (48 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, our speaker clearly stated the the illegal the the the illegal parts of this uh this uh item. Madam Speaker, please record the Democratic Alliance's uh opposition to this item in terms of Rule 84, and we reserve our rights. Thank you.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 02:45:053 · 26 s

  Read what they said (92 words)

  Thank you, Councillor Wax. Councillor T. Nkomo, ActionSA.

  Thank you so much, Councillor. Can we have Councillor Radebe from the EFF? Are you here, Councillor? I'm worried about the clock.

  Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, the first time somebody I rise on a point of order. The first time one of the speakers mentioned the Eskom debt, he did not say it was settled in full. But now it's been mentioned it's settled in full, and it's not. That is misleading this House. Can the councillor please retract that? Thank you.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 01:28:046 · 26 s

  Read what they said (81 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I had my hand up when you recognized for the caucus.

  Sorry, I didn't see at the time. I think you saw I was looking this side, yeah.

  Correct. Madam Speaker, uh, just a question of clarity before we go into the process. Uh, you mentioned previously that today and tomorrow are the last days of council. Is there an expected emergency sitting of Finance Committee that we have to elect a Chairperson? Thank you.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 01:04:265B · 39 s

  Read what they said (66 words)

  Thank you very much, Speaker. Uh, Speaker, some of the responses on the written say it'll be answered at the next council meeting, but this council has taken decision that this will be the last sitting today and tomorrow. Can those be, be answered in terms of Rule 110 (5), which means that if it's unsatisfactory, the executive must reply within 10 days. [00:04:50] [no speech]

• 30 Jul 2026 · 01:00:46Item 2: point of order during Lobi's speech · 17 s

  Read what they said (45 words)

  Yeah, Madam Speaker. Thank you very much. This way, our Council, it's much easier for me to stand on a point of order, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, Councillor Lobi is misleading this house. He's just made a statement that they are delivering service to everybody

• 30 Jul 2026 · 00:21:50Item 3: roll call process query · 31 s

  Read what they said (91 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I had my hand up before you went to the Chair of Chairs to table, so if you'll just indulge me, Speaker, if you can hear me. Speaker, I'm just a bit concerned about the manner in which we've done the roll call, because let me give you an example. PA said all present on the group, and when you announced apologies, you said there's one PA councillor not there. Can we get assurance from legal that the process is all above board? Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 05:45:027 · 11 s

  Read what they said (21 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. In terms of Rule 84, please record the opposition of the Democratic Alliance to this motion. Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 04:05:1590 · 17 s

  Read what they said (41 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, in terms of Rule 84, I'd like to record the opposition of the Democratic Alliance and also note that the decision does not come lightly because there is missing information in this report. Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:43:1888 · 3 s

  Read what they said (12 words)

  Thank you, Chair. Chair, the Member in charge will be reporting back.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:37:0088 · 6 s

  Read what they said (18 words)

  Thank you, Chair. Can we then ask that the Rules Committee have five minutes just to meet quickly?

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:27:0588 · 17 s

  Read what they said (33 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, this is the second time Councillor Zigebe is misleading this house. No political party asked for a referral of this; it was done by the Speaker's Office. Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:25:0288 · 13 s

  Read what they said (38 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, with due respect to Councillor Zigebe, he's misleading this house. We have got an Alderman Policy in place, which does exactly what he says is not there. Can he please retract that? Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:19:5088 · 3 min 43 s

  Read what they said (477 words)

  Thank you very much, Speaker, and greetings to the house once again. Speaker, this policy is in place. The review of it was basically semantics because ultimately it was a matter of interpretation and implementation. Already at the beginning of this year, we could have had Aldermen already. We could have had Honorary Aldermen as well. But

  unfortunately, we had to delay the process of that because of interpretation. Now, it's quite interesting that we get told that we are grandstanding, but this is grandstanding because nothing has changed in this policy. The core of this policy is the determination of the points. When I stood up a year ago and agreed to this policy, it was very clear.

  Councillor Annette Deppe sitting behind me has served four terms. That means, in terms of this, she would have served 20 years in office. That means 20 points. Quite simple. The math is right there in front of us, 1.4. For every 10 years she served, gives her an additional two points. That means 24 points. She's already an Alderman. Congratulations.

  Chair, for some of those who are not here, one from your own party, who served most of his time, I think it's the Eastern Cape or is it now KZN? It's that border place. He would have also automatically qualified, even though he served majority outside of Johannesburg. But remember, serving outside of Johannesburg just means you bring experience into Johannesburg. That's all it means.

  And he would have been an Alderman already, but we're still waiting because of interpretation. The late The late Councillor Martin Williams. This caucus was waiting for this to come through so that we can now approach you, Speaker. Because when a councillor is late or is no longer, we have to nominate, and we'll be nominating.

  We can't hear you.

  Sorry, Speaker, I'm getting a bit emotional. He is a late councillor like our previous Chair. He, just like Councillor Deppe, would have served his time. He's got more than 24 points already. So we, as a caucus, will be nominating him for Honorary Aldermanship. And that was the problem. It was just a matter of whether the Speaker understood the difference between her office's responsibility

  or a nomination. That's all we had to do when Councillor Jacques Hoon requested from another municipality that please look at my points. His mistake was that he nominated himself instead of waiting for the Office of the Speaker. And the nomination is for those who are not councillors, who are not councillors. So Speaker,

  and Chair of Chairs, and Secretary, I see they now given you that task, Secretary to Council. Please, we've got August. Let us do the ceremonies. There's enough time for us to do the math and see in this house the number of councillors that qualify. I thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:04:5387 · 1 min 33 s

  Read what they said (235 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, seeing this is the Rules Committee, I don't have to stand on any rule as per my chairperson. Speaker, this item is a bit of a concern. And I'll tell you why, because if you look at the problem statement, it talks to issues, but it does not talk to what the ward committee should be doing. The legislation is very clear that a ward committee is there to assist the councillor

  and also to expand public participation. Now if you look at public participation in the City of Johannesburg, it has been very, very low. I've quoted you figures of 0,033%. And our ward committees are failing us. And the reason for that, and many councillors on that side of the house and this side of the house would agree, once these people are elected to the ward committees, they think they're the councillor in waiting. And instead of doing what they're supposed to do to assist councillors,

  they are fighting behind the councillors' backs. So this does not go far enough. It is a start, but it does not go far enough. And we're only dealing with the symptoms, we're not dealing with the root cause. So Madam Speaker, from the Democratic Alliance side, we are saying ANC, this is your policy, you got to deal with it. When we come in after November, we'll fix it. Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:02:23Unknown · 6 s

  Read what they said (25 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. I'll be very quick. This is just in terms of a reply. This is my own South African colors. Thank you.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:01:24Unknown · 11 s

  Read what they said (38 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. In terms of Rule 84, I'd like to record the opposition of the Democratic Alliance, and we also reserve our right in terms of whether or not this is a financial matter. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 07:45:5485 · 11 s

  Read what they said (22 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, I stand in terms of rule 86, no, no, sorry, 84, just to record our opposition. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 06:38:2675 · 8 s

  Read what they said (27 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. Speaker, in terms of Rule 84, please record the opposition of the Democratic Alliance, and we reserve our rights on this one. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 06:20:3274 · 17 s

  Read what they said (58 words)

  Thank you. Thank you, Speaker. It was that very big yes that you hear every time. Madam Speaker, in terms of Rule 84, we'd like our opposition to this item to be noted. We are not against what is in there, but we are against the process that is followed because it makes it very risky. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 06:07:0373 · 16 s

  Read what they said (42 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I was stretching. I was stretching there, and I know you don't want me to stretch in the front. Madam Speaker, in terms of Rule 84, please record the opposition of the Democratic Alliance. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 05:55:5872 · 14 s

  Read what they said (31 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, in terms of Rule 84, please record the opposition of the Democratic Alliance and just Councillor Masuku is the only one saying yes. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 05:47:2971 · 11 s

  Read what they said (38 words)

  Thank you Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise in terms of Rule 84 now to record our opposition to this item. And we believe that this item was premature. Other items should have come before it. Thank you.

• 24 Jun 2026 · 05:35:2571 · 30 s

  Read what they said (27 words)

  Thank you Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I don't believe that is the correct call. So in terms of Rule 86(1), I hereby demand for a roll call.

Spoke on

• 30 Sept 2026 · 00:05:29Roll call and quorum by party whips
• 30 Sept 2026 · 01:42:13Item 26: Amendment of Erf 56 Crown North development lease
• 30 Sept 2026 · 01:46:58Point of order over remarks about ANC councillors
• 30 Sept 2026 · 08:19:53Items 21-23: Closure by MMC Mgcina and DA point of order
• 27 Aug 2026 · 00:42:25Item 33: 2027/28 IDP, Budget and Performance Time Schedule
• 27 Aug 2026 · 02:32:01Item 46: Councillor Funeral Support Policy tabled; DA and FF+ concerns
• 27 Aug 2026 · 02:48:40Rule 72 points of order on item 46
• 27 Aug 2026 · 03:03:03Second quorum count and Rule 58.1 dispute
• 27 Aug 2026 · 03:14:04Item 46 outcome and DA objection
• 26 Aug 2026 · 01:03:35Written questions (item 5B)
• 26 Aug 2026 · 01:28:04Clarity on why a Finance chair is being elected at the last sitting
• 26 Aug 2026 · 02:42:07Item 3: ANC on the ethics code and points of order
• 26 Aug 2026 · 03:00:02Item 4: Public participation outcomes report debate
• 26 Aug 2026 · 04:02:11Item 38: Procedural dispute over DA motion without notice
• 26 Aug 2026 · 04:45:36Item 38: Cllr Mzolo's speech
• 26 Aug 2026 · 04:54:46Item 38: Vote and recorded dissent
• 26 Aug 2026 · 06:01:57Objection to 'no-go area' remark
• 26 Aug 2026 · 06:53:41Item 9: dispute over voice vote and roll call
• 26 Aug 2026 · 07:43:14Point on earlier resolution against property sales
• 26 Aug 2026 · 07:45:48Items 11 and 12: vote and DA objection
• 26 Aug 2026 · 08:48:38Item 47: DA amendments on Honorary Alderman wording
• 30 Jul 2026 · 00:21:42Cllr Christians questions roll call process
• 30 Jul 2026 · 01:00:34Point of order on service delivery claim
• 25 Jun 2026 · 01:32:29Item 63 vote and DA objection
• 25 Jun 2026 · 02:03:14ActionSA speech and order dispute
• 25 Jun 2026 · 02:49:48Item 84 vote and roll call demand
• 25 Jun 2026 · 02:53:34Vote on preceding item and DA queries
• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:03:12Item 87: Review of the policy on ward committees
• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:16:04Item 88: Revised Alderman Policy debate
• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:27:38Item 88: Proposed amendment, Rules Committee caucus and adoption
• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:59:59Item 90: MMC response and adoption
• 25 Jun 2026 · 05:39:22Auckland Park motion: vote and recorded dissent
• 24 Jun 2026 · 01:18:49Closure of the Eskom debate under Rule 99
• 24 Jun 2026 · 01:21:44Item 61: Cllr Boer (FF+) and procedural dispute
• 24 Jun 2026 · 01:52:06Item 61: closing remarks and adoption
• 24 Jun 2026 · 02:16:15Decision to continue without screens; recording concerns
• 24 Jun 2026 · 02:58:42DA Rule 84 objection after item 62
• 24 Jun 2026 · 04:59:50Item 69 put to council and DA opposition
• 24 Jun 2026 · 05:34:09Item 71: reply, division of the house and result
• 24 Jun 2026 · 05:47:45Item 72: Johannesburg Water performance improvement action plan v2
• 24 Jun 2026 · 05:56:19Item 73: City Power Trading Reform Strategy 2026-27 (PIAP V2)
• 24 Jun 2026 · 06:07:23Item 74: Pikitup Performance Improvement Action Plan
• 24 Jun 2026 · 06:26:38Item 75: reviewed delegations of authority for City Power, Joburg Water and Pikitup
• 24 Jun 2026 · 07:31:16Item 85: updated shareholder compacts of City Power, Joburg Water and Pikitup

Promises

• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:05:57The DA says it will fix the ward committee policy problems if it takes over governance after the November elections.
• 25 Jun 2026 · 03:22:16The DA caucus will nominate the late Cllr Martin Williams for Honorary Aldermanship.