DA majority in Joburg within reach, but hinges on voter turnout

You can also listen to this podcast on iono.fm here.

JEREMY MAGGS: Now, could the Democratic Alliance (DA) do what once seemed politically impossible and govern Johannesburg outright? Well-known political commentator and pollster Gareth van Onselen believes it is within reach. He argues that if the party can attract another 500 000 votes in the local government election, it could secure an outright majority, ending the era of unstable coalition politics.

But one’s got to ask, if the maths is realistic, and where would those voters come from? And if all of this happened, what would it mean for South Africa’s political landscape?

Gareth, a very warm welcome. Let’s start with that big headline, it’s not the first time we’ve heard it. Is a DA outright majority in Johannesburg genuinely achievable, or is it more of an aspirational campaign slogan?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: Okay, well, just to be clear, that’s not my target, that’s the DA’s target. Helen Zille argues that if the DA gets, I think it’s just under 500 000 votes, in other words, individual voters who are willing to vote for the DA, they will get a 51% majority.

So there are two ways to assess this. The one is to assess whether the maths on that particular calculation is correct, and I think it is. I think if the DA does manage to get 500 000 votes, given the decline in turnout, it will be able to secure a 51% majority.

The next question is, of course, is that a realistic goal, however credible it is, and I think it is probably a stretch too far for the DA. Those 500 000 voters do exist.

The DA got 486 000-odd voters in 2016, and its whole narrative is that if it can replicate the 2016 environment, it will be able to achieve them again.

But things have fundamentally changed since then. Turnout has gone through the floor, which means fewer voters are turning up on election day, which means you’re going to get a smaller total, and I think it’s a bit of a stretch. But parties have to be aspirational, and they have to set goals. So it’s good to have something that’s mathematically sound. Whether it’s achievable is quite another question.

Read:
Johannesburg collapse risk spurs call for state to run city
Clock is ticking as Godongwana gives CoJ new notice over funding cuts
Helen Zille’s first 100 days – if she becomes Joburg mayor

JEREMY MAGGS: Let’s talk about that then. Is it about persuading ANC (African National Congress) voters to switch? Is it bringing non-voters to the polls – you‘ve already made a good point about registration – or is it taking support from smaller opposition parties?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: It’s a bit of everything. I think the depressing truth about the DA is that even if it achieved its goal, which would be a remarkable outcome and would necessitate a fundamental change in turnout levels, which would be encouraging for everyone, but seems unlikely, it would really just be returning to zero. In other words, where it was at its peak in 2016.

So its whole campaign is really fundamentally focused on getting people who are already in the DA bubble to get out and vote, rather than winning new voters.

Now, that’s not to say the DA doesn’t want to win new voters. I’m sure it does, and it’s pouring massive resources into it. But I think its primary concern and its fundamental drive is getting existing voters to make a mark on the day.

JEREMY MAGGS: Are you able to break that down more geographically? Where would those DA voters actually come from? Is there paucity in some wards where the party needs to focus its attention more?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: The DA has got a universal problem. Its decline in support, particularly in Johannesburg from 2016, is universal, it’s across the board. So in 2016, the thing that made that election so remarkable was, on the one hand, its core support base, which seems to occupy a stretch right through the middle of Johannesburg, the southern suburbs and towards the north, turned out in extraordinary numbers. So its base was highly, highly motivated.

But simultaneously it managed to get 7% to 8% in places like Soweto and Alexandra, and both of those have declined in previous elections. So its base has reduced and its ability to win 8% or 9% in Soweto has dropped to around 4%. So it needs a universal uplift across the board of those existing voters. There’s not one particular area that suffers disproportionately.

Listen/read: Mashaba hints at mayoral run, refuses to back Zille

JEREMY MAGGS: Gareth, whether it be zip-lining across potholes or rowing dinghies, Helen Zille has made the campaign a personal mission. Is she still the party’s greatest electoral asset when it comes to this particular election, or do you think she still limits the party’s appeal in key communities?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: No, I think she is, by some distance, the most powerful brand in the Johannesburg election. She’s built up her reputation over many years. From a DA perspective, there is quite an overlap between the nature of the crisis that faces Johannesburg, a fundamental decay in basics and systems and structures and infrastructure maintenance, and Helen Zille’s reputation, which is as someone who’s managed in the past to be able to fix these things and turn them around.

So you have a curious situation – maybe it’s particular to the DA.

I don’t think it extends outside of that metro, where people who are typically opposed to Helen Zille will say, “Well, we’re actually willing to vote for the DA in this particular case because we actually don’t care about ideology anymore. We just want this place to work.”

So those two things have come together quite well for the DA, I think.

JEREMY MAGGS: But where does the risk lie? What prevents the party from achieving that half million votes, in spite of the widespread dissatisfaction that you outline with the current administration and the problem of decay?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: The two primary problems, and they’re not particular to the DA, they affect all big parties, including the ANC, are apathy and alienation – so people don’t turn out on election day and vote – and fragmentation. The extent to which, 52 parties competed in the 2021 local government election in Johannesburg, which is an extraordinary number, and what’s happening across the board now is the vote is fragmenting into lots of small little patches.

It’s very hard, harder than it’s ever been in the past, for any one big party to consolidate votes. You’re fighting this huge and powerful and growing force that tends towards fragmentation.

JEREMY MAGGS: Let’s assume the Democratic Alliance falls short of 51%, but, as appears potentially likely, emerges substantially stronger. Gareth, would that fundamentally change the coalition equation in Johannesburg?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: Yes, I think it’s a universal truth that the biggest party in a coalition, in other words, the party that ends up with the highest proportion of the vote share, does carry the most informal power in negotiations. I’m a bit dismissive of all this rhetoric about Helen’s relationships with various leaders being tenuous or stretched or divisive. I think when the election results come in, it comes with a huge amount of informal power, depending on your results.

All political leaders know that it’s very hard to dismiss a party as insignificant if it’s got a huge majority, even if it’s not 51%.

Voters don’t like that kind of anti-democratic attitude. The real politics of it is, when you sit down in a negotiation, the bigger your majority, the more powerful your negotiating power.

JEREMY MAGGS: Just a final question. A little earlier you used that word “decay” as far as Johannesburg is concerned. Fair to say that this election is going to be won on competence rather than ideology?

GARETH VAN ONSELEN: Yes, I think that’s 100% correct. It is actually a bit of a problem because there are two kinds of problems that face Johannesburg. The one is the basics, in other words, the delivery of picking up refuse, fixing the roads, making sure the lights are on, the kind of standard indicators you would expect any metro to deliver.

Then there are far more profound problems with regard to investment, infrastructure spend, and the long-term vision for the metro.

The latter tends to be defined by a vision and a set of principles and values. The former is by competence, and I think competence has been elevated over a long-term strategic vision for the metro. We need both things and competence is very important, but these parties need to bear in mind that we also need a long-term strategy for the metro.

JEREMY MAGGS: So much to play for. Gareth van Onselen, thank you very much indeed.

Read:
Auditor-General posts another miserable scorecard for municipalities
Johannesburg’s decline since the 2010 World Cup is stark