Sean Kreusch

Attendance

Present

50

Leave of absence

8

Absent without leave

1

Arrived late

4

Left early

1

Reasons given for leave: Private business (5), Party business (2), Other (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

5

Average wait to start

9 s

Average greetings first

0 s

Apology or leave of absence (1)

• 27 Aug 2026 · 00:05:12Leaving early. Listed among councillors leaving early; time not stated. sitting

In their words

Every time the chair gave them the floor in a transcribed sitting (5), 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 · 00:59:08Item 13: MTC Service Delivery Agreement addendum · 44 s

  Read what they said (80 words)

  Okay, great. Sorry, Speaker, I do apologize. I couldn't understand that. I'm assuming we're rising on item 13, which is the MTC item. The Democratic Alliance doesn't obviously support the item for various reasons, other than the fact that we believe that MTC should actually be incorporated back into the city,

  and also the fact that a lot of what is being offered there should actually be internalized rather than outsourced. So the Democratic Alliance does not support the item.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 06:48:589 · 3 min 36 s

  Read what they said (547 words)

  Thank you, Madam Speaker. All protocol observed. Um, look, I think I want to start by unequivocally stating the Democratic Alliance's position on public transport and that we support the idea that the city needs a functional and efficient bus service, and the citizens deserve that. Uh, they deserve a bus service that is on time, they deserve a bus service that is cash positive,

  free of all sorts of shenanigans. And to be frank, the Rea Vaya system has really not performed well, and after 15 years looking at the state of Piotrans and the loss of its contractual services is just indicative of the failure of the city to succeed. That being said, um, the Democratic Alliance does not support this item, and fundamentally because we consider it an absolute hospital

  pass to the city. To contractually sign to provide R3.2 billion over seven years and then expect sort of a commitment of R820 million back over seven years is a 25% return on investment, which is very weak economics. And when I look at the Treasury's red-flagging of this contract, there's some credible concerns. I mean, a R10 million liability red flag over passenger safety, one. Two, the fact that, you know, the new contractor, which is actually

  the contractor for Phase 1B, so we have a problem with monopolization of the route for one, and two, now we're going to rebuild this depot for another R213 or R14 million out of the city's budget, okay, and not even from Treasury. Now, Treasury's already made it very clear that it's divesting from BRTs because of the way in which there has been a chronic amount of double-dipping from taxi associations running on the same routes with these Rea Vaya

  buses. And so although we want a functional bus service, we want a successful bus service, this is an absolute hospital pass. It is bad for the city in the sense that we are going to be carrying huge costs at a very high risk. We feel it is rushed. We supported this item initially because of public participation, but we've gone from zero to hero in a very short space of time, and I have a sneaky feeling it's got a lot to do with a new government coming in in the next two or three months.

  So poor returns, no real visibility of KPIs, uh, the fact that it's a monopoly and that Phase 1B, although it's better run, it still runs at a chronic loss. So we have to really look at this business model, we've got to look at why and how it has really failed. We've looked at the slow progress on 1C(a), which was the Alexandra bus company. We've had to prop up 63 buses as a city for them,

  and Treasury has made it clear there is no more CapEx spend on Rea Vaya. It's over. So in this point in time, we do not support this item because it is not appropriate at this time, and we need to take a strong look at other models, economic models to provide a very successful and fruitful bus system for this city. So I stand at that point. So no, the DA does not support this item. Thank you.

• 26 Aug 2026 · 05:54:03Item 5 · 34 s

  Read what they said (77 words)

  Uh thank you, Madam Speaker. Then I'll go with that, cuz I still know who I am. Um thank you. I rise, Madam Speaker, on item five. Uh all protocol observed. Now, when I joined council in 10 years ago, the the uh restricted suburbs at the time were roughly about 300.

  Councillor, just hold on. Councillor Wissler, can you please um ask the councillors next to you to lower their voices?

  Thank you.

  Thank you, councillor.

• 25 Jun 2026 · 01:33:2565 · 33 s

  Read what they said (78 words)

  Thank you, Speaker. All protocol observed. The DA recognizes the importance of regularizing and formalizing their relationship with the taxi industry in order to make acceptable and reasonable arrangements for the use of those facilities. So the DA supports the item in terms of a feasibility study, but does reserve its rights regarding to the actual final input that should come to Section 79 for approval and for further interrogation. So as it stands, the DA supports it.

• 28 May 2026 · 04:34:24Item 1 · 5 min 39 s

  Read what they said (844 words)

  Thank you Madam Speaker. I rise on behalf of the Democratic Alliance. Madam Speaker, protocol observed. I rise today to place on record the so-called IDP publication public participation process was nothing more than a box-ticking exercise, an insult to many of the residents of Johannesburg. Wards representing roughly 20,000 residents were each permitted only two questions. Two questions for entire communities facing collapsing infrastructure, failing transport systems,

  deteriorating roads and economic decline. Even ward councillors were barred from presenting IDP inputs on behalf of their residents, and they were elected to represent. That is not public participation, that's managed silence. And while the administration silences residents, the transport system of Johannesburg is collapsing in full public view. I select this portfolio solely because it plays such a vital role in the future success and development within the city. And I reply with the business plans in mind. Let us deal with the facts.

  Over the last two decades, nearly 80 billion rand has been poured into BRT projects with commuter volumes nowhere near proportional to an investment by Treasury. In the 2025/2026 period, National Treasury disbursed approximately seven and a half billion rand through the Public Transport Network Grant for BRTs. And with 15 years passed, Phase 1A under Piotrans has effectively collapsed,

  the contract cancelled and due to poor performance management, sabotage and theft. However, the city still continues paying Piotrans for basic feeder services because no proper transitional plan existed for the new bus operating company. Once again, the residents of Johannesburg are forced to pay for failure and fill the gap financially. Phase 1CA has had to rely on the 68 buses funded by the city because the Alexandra Bus Operating Company still cannot secure funding for the 141 buses required to fill its contractual obligations.

  Rea Vaya recorded only 12,000 trips against a planned target of just under 50,000, a staggering shortfall of 37,000 trips. Fare revenue amounting to only 25 million, which is just 11% of its target. Now Treasury has effectively suspended further funding for Phase 1CB until the Transport Department resolves the failures surrounding Phase 1A and 1CA.

  Speaker, public transport in Johannesburg is on the brink of collapse, yet Rea Vaya continues swallowing almost 900 million rand annually while delivering declining performance, declining reliability and declining public confidence. You cannot claim to have a people's plan when there's no plan for the people. You can't have the IDP without the capacity of the state to deliver services for every rand spent. Roads are collapsing, bridges are deteriorating, stormwater systems are failing, traffic signals are broken and never fixed,

  and residents are spending hours trapped in congestion because their administration has failed to move people efficiently across the city. That's not an IDP for the people, that's wishful thinking. The entire IDP becomes weak and meaningless when the basic movement of people, goods, services and economic opportunities is failing, and this under MMC Kunene. And this crisis extends far beyond public transport. The Johannesburg Roads Agency's road asset management system that manages all road inventories and data is itself in decline,

  operating at only 62% monitoring capacity for the critical infrastructure. So my question is, how was the IDP informed? The numbers are catastrophic. 38 billion rand needed for road repairs, 16 billion rand needed for bridge rehabilitation and repair, 61 billion rand required for stormwater infrastructure, and 370 million rand needed for traffic signals alone. In total, Johannesburg will require 115 billion just to simply rescue existing infrastructure

  from total decay. Where will this money come from? More borrowings? It's a fantasy IDP, full of buza. It is governance through denial, and after five years, the MMC Kunene has demonstrated neither urgency, nor innovation, nor leadership within his portfolio. Where is he today? I don't think he's attended one full Section 79 Transport Committee meeting. He's been absent from 12, and in fact we have had two committee meetings cancelled due to non-submission of reports by JRA.

  And we now have a IDP that covers transport, and how was this informed? Now compare this failure to cities that work. Cape Town's MyCiTi system is widely recognized as the most successful BRT system in the country because it delivers on operational resilience, ridership and integration. Ridership grew by 68% from 2021 to 2026, facilitating approximately 23 million passenger trips annually. That smacks from the 12,000

  that Rea Vaya did. 12,000 versus 23 million that this city performed with Rea Vaya. Then we look at Go George system, which achieved a 91% overall rating and a 97% reliability. That is well above the 52% from Rea Vaya.

  40 seconds left.

  Why are Cape Town and George retaining Treasury confidence? Because they are run by the Democratic Alliance. An IDP means nothing without political will. The people of Johannesburg are tired of excuses. We have the ideas, we have the competence, we have the integrity. And under the seasoned leadership of our incoming Executive Mayor Helen Zille in November, Johannesburg can become a functioning city again. Thank you.

Spoke on

• 30 Sept 2026 · 00:58:17Item 13: Addendum to MTC Service Delivery Agreement
• 26 Aug 2026 · 05:52:15Item 5: CoJ Security Access Restriction by-laws
• 26 Aug 2026 · 06:47:24Item 9: Rea Vaya Phase 1A Bus Operating Company public participation notice
• 25 Jun 2026 · 01:32:52Item 65: Feasibility study on public transport facility management models
• 28 May 2026 · 04:34:16Item 1: Cllr Kreusch (DA) on public participation and transport