If you haven’t yet Googled Tom Bradley, do it. What a remarkable career in public service: shaped by the Civil Rights movement, grounded in social justice and guided by the liberal values of freedom, opportunity and equality. He embodied what becomes possible when a society widens access and insists on dignity for all.
Ironically, Bradley is better known for something far removed from the remarkable fact that he was the mayor of Los Angeles for two decades. The Bradley Effect, referenced by John Davenport in his recent Business Day column on Johannesburg’s mayoral race, describes the idea voters may say one thing publicly but do another in the privacy of the voting booth (“How reverse Bradley Effect could reshape Joburg’s mayoral race”, January 13).
Davenport posed the question whether this year’s local government elections could see voters in Johannesburg reverse the Bradley Effect and vote for the DA, after being fed up with the city’s well-documented failings.
I am not an analyst or a theoretician, and I am also not running for mayor of Johannesburg (though I obviously support Helen Zille’s candidacy). I believe South African voters use their polls intelligently. One measure of this is the uncanny accuracy of some of the polls before the May 2024 election. What I am interested in is less to do with political bias than public service.
While analysts debate polling veracity and voter psychology, my focus is simpler: look at what government delivers. On that score, the DA’s record is clear. Where the DA governs, services work better. That is not my opinion, it is fact. Last year President Cyril Ramaphosa himself acknowledged DA-run municipalities tend to be better administered than those governed by other parties.
We have allowed the bar in South Africa to sink so low that simply ‘keeping the lights on’ is sometimes framed as success.
Why does this matter? Because across much of South Africa (particularly in smaller metros and municipalities) failure has become normalised. Potholes destroy vehicles. Electricity disappears without warning. Water interruptions shut down households and factories. Refuse piles up. Trust between communities and government erodes. These factors determine where people want to live, whether businesses can operate, and whether young people are hopeful.
Take Gauteng South. In recent times a narrative has developed of a “tale of two municipalities” between DA-run Midvaal and its non-DA-run neighbours. It captures what residents and entrepreneurs know: while surrounding areas struggle with collapsing infrastructure and administrative failure, Midvaal is different. Businesses have moved there because of predictability: roads are maintained, water flows and electricity is managed. The basics are respected. Residents feel what it is like to live in a place that cares.
Development, dignity and inclusion
That is what competent government looks like. We have allowed the bar in South Africa to sink so low that simply “keeping the lights on” is sometimes framed as success. However, that is mere survival, and if we are serious about development, dignity and inclusion government must do more than prevent collapse. It must create the conditions in which people can plan, invest, employ and prosper.
This is why service delivery is a moral issue. You cannot credibly talk about jobs if roads make logistics impossible. You cannot promise opportunity if water cuts halt production. You cannot claim to fight crime while corruption hollows out the institutions meant to protect communities. You cannot build a modern economy without the basics done right.
Businesses are not asking for miracles. They simply want the basics done right so they can focus on their work. Part of that work is creating employment, because when people have work communities have dignity. That is how growth happens.
Davenport is right that elections are shaped by complex social dynamics. I am purely focused on making sure my party delivers to the people of South Africa. It’s that simple. From conversations I have had across the country one message comes through clearly: people have been badly let down. They want hope. They want to know things do not have to be this way. And they don’t. We must insist on a state that serves everyone.
Serving people
Inside the DA there is a principle that has guided our work for decades. As a public representative you serve every resident in your ward, irrespective of whether they voted for you. That belief continues to shape how we approach public life. We are in the business of serving people. That is our job, and part of what I aim for as SA leader is to ensure when you vote for us you see results in your daily life: in the streets you drive on, the water that comes out of your tap, the safety of your neighbourhood and the opportunities available to your children.
Whether the Bradley Effect proves decisive in Johannesburg will be for commentators to debate after the ballots are counted. However, beyond theory, one reality cannot be wished away: where the DA governs, services are more reliable, finances are cleaner and opportunity grows. Every DA-run municipality exists because citizens chose differently. They chose accountability and professional administration.
Which brings me back to Bradley. He lived and worked to widen opportunities, to treat people with dignity and to make freedom real for everyone. That is the standard I care about. If South Africa is to move forward it will be because we chose competence, care and service. It will be because we insist on putting people first, in the same way Bradley did.
• Steenhuisen is leader of the DA.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.