In a democracy, elections are not ceremonies of loyalty; they are tests of performance. They are the one moment when citizens, often unheard between election cycles, are given the power to ask a simple but profound question: Has my life improved?
In the Eastern Cape, that question carries particular weight.
It directs attention to the provincial administration under premier Oscar Mabuyane and the governing ANC, not as a matter of political rivalry, but as a matter of accountability.
Leadership is not judged by speeches or intentions, but by outcomes that can be seen, felt and measured in people’s daily lives.
For many communities, the answers are uncomfortable.
Dimbaza and Butterworth industrial parks, once envisioned as engines of growth, remain largely stagnant, silent reminders of opportunities deferred.
In Bhisho, the seat of provincial government, economic activity still struggles to extend beyond administrative functions.
Government buildings stand, but the broader economy they were meant to anchor has yet to take shape.
These are not abstract concerns. They speak directly to jobs not created, businesses not opened, and futures put on hold.
The data reinforces this lived reality.
According to Statistics SA, the Eastern Cape consistently ranks among the worst-performing provinces in employment.
The official unemployment rate sits at about 32–35%, while the expanded unemployment rate rises to about 44–47%.
Among youths aged 18–34, unemployment exceeded 60% in recent quarters.
Out of a provincial labour force of about two-million people, fewer than 1.3-million are employed, leaving a vast number without sustainable livelihoods.
Behind these figures are real economic declines.
Manufacturing, once a pillar of towns such as Dimbaza and Butterworth, has steadily weakened.
Textile factories that once employed thousands have either closed or operate at a fraction of their former capacity.
Butterworth has seen the gradual disappearance of small and medium manufacturing firms, with little industrial replacement.
At the same time, rural corridors, particularly between Dikeni and Peddie, and other similar roads remain largely neglected.
Despite a history of agricultural productivity, these areas suffer from poor road infrastructure, limited market access and minimal agro-processing investment.
Agriculture, which employs only about 5–7% of the Eastern Cape’s workforce, remains underutilised as a potential driver of rural employment.
The case for withholding re-election is not rooted in emotion, but in evidence.
Spatial inequality remains deeply entrenched.
Economic strategies have been announced, but the gap between planning and execution remains wide
The Eastern Cape contributes less than 8% to SA’s GDP, despite its population size, reflecting weak economic activity and limited industrialisation.
Former homeland areas continue to lag behind, with little evidence of structural transformation.
Infrastructure challenges persist, with many municipalities receiving poor audit outcomes and struggling with service delivery.
Roads, water systems and public facilities continue to deteriorate, further limiting economic participation.
Governance concerns deepen the crisis.
Weak consequence management, administrative inefficiencies and ongoing institutional instability have slowed development.
Even well-designed policies falter when implementation is inconsistent.
Then there is the matter of vision.
Economic strategies have been announced, but the gap between planning and execution remains wide.
Industrial revitalisation has been discussed for years, yet visible outcomes remain limited.
But beyond performance, another uncomfortable question must be asked: What criteria is being used to select and retain leadership?
If poor performance does not lead to consequences, if it is instead followed by reappointment, redeployment, or political protection, then accountability is fundamentally weakened.
When those who preside over stagnation are rewarded with continued leadership roles, the message sent to citizens is deeply troubling — that outcomes do not matter.
This raises serious concerns not only about governance, but about internal leadership standards within the ANC itself.
What metrics are being applied? Is performance evaluated against clear developmental targets, or is political loyalty outweighing service delivery outcomes?
For voters, this becomes a critical issue. Because if accountability is not enforced internally, it must be enforced externally, through the ballot.
Against this backdrop, a defining question emerges: If meaningful change has not materialised over the past decade, what reason is there to expect a different outcome in the next?
Ten years is more than enough time to demonstrate progress.
This is not about personalities. It is about performance.
Democracy does not demand perfection, but it does demand progress.
And where progress is absent, the burden of proof shifts decisively to those seeking another mandate.
Re-election is not impossible, but it must be earned.
It would require clear evidence that turnaround strategies are already under way and delivering results.
Communities must see tangible improvements — revived industrial activity, new or reopened factories, upgraded infrastructure and measurable reductions in unemployment, particularly among young people.
Leadership must demonstrate the ability to navigate constraints without allowing them to become permanent excuses for inaction.
And above all, there must be a credible, time-bound vision for inclusive economic growth, one that finally integrates neglected regions like the Dikeni–Peddie corridor into the mainstream economy.
Ultimately, the responsibility rests with the voter. Re‑election is not a reward for history, nor a gesture of loyalty. It is a verdict on performance.
That verdict must be informed by evidence.
What is the current status of industrial development across all district municipalities in the Eastern Cape?
Have new factories or manufacturing facilities been opened, and are there measurable outcomes such as job creation, skills development and meaningful support for local suppliers?
These questions go to the heart of whether development promises are being translated into lived economic improvement.
Voters should therefore be equipped with clear, accessible information that reflects both progress to date and the credibility of future implementation plans.
Informed voting depends on evidence of delivery, realistic planning, and a demonstrated alignment between development initiatives and local priorities.
The question is no longer what has been promised. It is what has been delivered.
Siphiwo Fumbeza is the author of the book 'Beyond Grandmother’s Mandate: The Fathers Who Forge My Path’. He writes this article in his personal capacity.
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.