Helen Zille's mayoral ambitions in Johannesburg slammed by MK Party
DA's Federal chairperson, Helen Zille, said she was considering contesting the mayoral seat in Johannesburg ahead of the 2026 local government elections.
Image: Armand Hough / Independent Newspapers
MK Party (MKP) has rejected Helen Zille's intention to be the next mayor of Johannesburg, saying they are more capable of rescuing the city and returning it to its former glory.
The confidence stems from its performance in the 2024 national and provincial elections. This also included the recent by-election outcome.
'Let it be known that the MK Party stands ready and capable to rescue the City come the 2026 Local Government Elections,' MKP said in a statement.
This comes after DA federal council chairperson, Zille, told IOL that she was considering contesting the mayoral seat in Johannesburg metro. This is ahead of the local government elections in 2026.
MKP said it was nonsensical to consider the possibility of a Capetonian resident holding Mayoral capacity in a City that she is alien to.
'We call on the residents of Johannesburg, especially proud black people, to reject the propaganda that the DA does not see colour. As shown in the City of Cape Town, the DA's priorities tend to shift depending on the race of the residents.
'There are more than enough black candidates who can adequately fulfil the mayoral mandate in the City of Johannesburg,' the MK Party said.
Additionally, in the build-up to the local government elections, the MK Party said it will share a credible plan on how to rebuild this once glorious but broken city.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Next
Stay
Close ✕
However, the party blamed the ANC-led government in the city, saying they should hang their heads in shame for emboldening a 'white supremacist' and giving her the confidence to believe that she can adequately run the city.
'It is vital for us to remind Zille and her cronies that the current state of disarray found in the City of Johannesburg is courteous of their absent Mayor Dada Morero, and has resulted in the City being brought to its knees,' the party said.
Meanwhile, it was reported that the DA in Joburg was not moved by Zille's plan to run for mayor.
ActionSA was skeptical about Zille running for the mayoral seat while she was in another province.
kamogelo.moichela@iol.co.za
IOL Politics
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
44 minutes ago
- IOL News
US strikes on Iran escalate tensions in the Middle East
Smoke rises above buildings in Tehran following an Israeli strike. Image: AFP THE US's surprise strikes on Iran at the weekend threaten to deepen the conflict in the Middle East after Israel also launched its own bombing campaign against Iran, with Tehran vowing to retaliate against US involvement. In response to the US attack, Iran's armed forces said they targeted multiple sites in Israel including Ben Gurion airport, the country's main international gateway near Tel Aviv. Israeli rescuers said at least 23 people were wounded. Iran's Huthi allies in Yemen repeated their threat on Sunday to resume attacks in the Red Sea if Washington joined the war, saying they were ready to target US ships and military warships. This was after President Donald Trump claimed total success for the operation in an address to the nation just hours after the attack, and Vice President JD Vance followed up on Sunday morning. "We know that we set the Iranian nuclear program back substantially last night, whether it's years or beyond," he told ABC. "We're not at war with Iran -- we're at war with Iran's nuclear program," he added. "The president took decisive action to destroy that program last night." Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ The UN's International Atomic Energy Agency said it had not detected any increase in radiation levels at the nuclear sites and Tehran said on Sunday there were no signs of contamination. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu hailed the US strikes, saying Trump's decision to "target Iran's nuclear facilities with the awesome and righteous might of the United States will change history." The Israeli military was also checking the results of the US raid on the deeply buried nuclear facility in Fordo, with a spokesperson saying it was "too soon" to know if Iran had removed enriched uranium from the site. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said Trump "seeks peace, and Iran should take that path. "This mission was not, and has not been, about regime change." "We devastated the Iranian nuclear program," Hegseth told a Pentagon press briefing, adding that the operation "did not target Iranian troops or the Iranian people." Standing beside Hegseth, top US general Dan Caine said that "it would be way too early for me to comment on what may or may not still be there." "Initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction," he told reporters. The main US strike group was seven B-2 Spirit bombers flying 18 hours from the US mainland to Iran with multiple aerial refuelings, Caine said. People gathered in the center of Tehran to protest against US and Israeli attacks, waving flags and chanting slogans, state TV showed.
IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
Is R700 million for a national dialogue worth it?
Before the government spends R700 million on a(nother) national dialogue, it is reasonable to ask what the dialogue promises to deliver, is this worth more than R700 million and what are the chances the stated objectives will be achieved, ask the author. Before the government spends R700 million on a(nother) national dialogue, it is reasonable to ask what the dialogue promises to deliver, is this worth more than R700 million and what are the chances the stated objectives will be achieved. Dr Oyama Mabandla, a member of the national dialogue preparatory task team, asks us to give the national dialogue a chance, reminding us that '[t]he national dialogue is an attempt to reinvigorate and fix a dangerously adrift democracy. It will involve the entire populace, instead of the self-selecting and incestuous elites, who have been producing one after another failed plan, while the rest of us have been spectators.' But of course it won't involve the entire populace and the outcome will be a big report that no one reads. How can it be anything other than this? Even if you could speak to everyone. What then? Which ideas do you implement and which do you ignore? No member of the task team can do anything other than talk and although conversations matter, you need executive power to change things and you get executive power through lots of votes. The reason we have elections is that you can't involve the whole populace of 63 million people in any dialogue, no matter how important. So we compromise and although they are very far from perfect, elections are the only way we have to get a sense of what citizens want. South Africans didn't decide to give the ANC 40% of the vote in the last election to teach anyone a lesson, as experts love to tell us. A gogo voted for the DA because she believed they would give her grandchildren the best future and a young, first-time voter put their X next to Juju's face because they believe the EFF will give them the best opportunities, but most didn't even do that. Voting is the only opportunity you have to not get the government all the other idiots deserve. It is only in those few minutes in a cubicle where you can actually get something changed. The national dialogue is not even that. You can say as much as you want in conversations and you will be ignored. This is not personal. It is the very heart of how democracy works. No one vote counts for anything unless millions of others agree with you and then that vote really counts. I have no idea why President Cyril Ramaphosa feels like a(nother) national dialogue will yield anything positive (aside from the events' organisers who will no doubt be skimming their 25%) or why borrowing R700m to fund this will yield more in value than the R700m, plus interest, that will be spent. (We currently borrow around R1 billion per day, so the national dialogue is an extra 17 hours or so of borrowing, which somehow doesn't feel that bad. But it is). It's all about social compacting, we are told. But what is this magical phrase loved by many and understood by few? Does Ramaphosa love social compacting more than Trump loves tariffs? Will the national dialogue make more people less poor or will everyone just be R700mn poorer? Social compacting would pop up in masterplans in the Department of Trade Industry and Competition for example, and mostly seemed to mean that a small number of dominant companies could meet with the government, without minutes or recordings, to determine how the rest of the industry should work. It failed even with the full power of government and the largest companies in the country behind it. South Africans, when you ignore the loudest and emptiest vessels, talk with each other just fine (even if that is mostly to complain about the government). The problem is that South Africans are getting poorer and most citizens don't believe the government, irrespective of which party is in charge, can fix that. That is why so many people don't bother voting. The most important first step to economic transformation is to make it easier for more people not to be poor. The three great social ills in South Africa of poverty, unemployment and inequality, leaves out the fourth great ill which is lack of economic freedom. The EFF hijacked this term for their version of communism, but economic freedom allows people to solve their own problems. Not another pile of the Master's Plans, pushed down onto South Africans, but allowing them more freedom to do what they believe is important for them. But the government doesn't trust its own citizens, so you can be "given" a free house shitty house after waiting decades but you can't sell it, because the government doesn't believe you can be trusted with your own money. You wait for decades because with free stuff, the demand always outstrips the supply and no one has an incentive to increase the supply. We know poor people will pay for houses if they can own them, because poor people currently pay for houses they cannot own. Rich people have economic freedom and poor people are not allowed to make their own economic decisions and so remain poor. We have the only national dialogue that matters, which are the conversations which happen in parliament. Have your say and vote and you are part of the dialogue. Spending R700m so you can be told by a(nother) group of people how they can lift you from poverty, as long as you do as you are told, is a terrible idea.
Daily Maverick
5 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
US joining war on Iran creates major political headache for SA
With the world on tenterhooks following the US bombing of Iranian nuclear sites, South African politicians have been notably cautious in articulating their initial positions. By sunset on Sunday, 22 June, as news of the extraordinary US bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities at Israel's behest continued to ricochet globally, barely a single South African politician seemed willing to come out publicly with a position on the matter. Fikile Mbalula. Gayton McKenzie. Herman Mashaba. These are hardly shrinking violets when it comes to making their views known on forums like X — yet on the matter of the Iranian bombing, at the time of writing, there was a deafening silence from them. Neither was there yet an official statement available from either the DA or the ANC, suggesting that SA's two biggest political parties were to some degree agonising over what, exactly, to say. From Parliament's committee on international relations: niks. The Department of International Relations and Cooperation (Dirco) was mute on Sunday too, and a Daily Maverick query to its spokesperson, Clayson Monyela, went unanswered. Ramaphosa issues mild reprimand of US By mid-afternoon, President Cyril Ramaphosa had grasped the nettle — kind of — and released a statement that said relatively little. 'President Cyril Ramaphosa and the South African government have noted with a great deal of anxiety the entry by the United States of America into the Israel-Iran war,' it read, followed by a weak rebuke of the Trump administration. 'It was South Africa's sincerest hope that President Donald Trump would use his influence and that of the US government to prevail on the parties to pursue a dialogue path in resolving their issues of dispute.' The statement concluded, as is on brand for Ramaphosa, with a call for 'peaceful resolution'. Despite the fact that Tehran and Pretoria enjoy warm diplomatic relations, Ramaphosa's statement revealed the diplomatic egg dance that the situation presents to the South African government. South Africa cannot risk alienating the Trump administration further, with the relationship still on life support from the buildup to the Trump-Ramaphosa Oval Office showdown in late May. The Israel factor is a significant complication The difficulty for Pretoria is that the Iranian strike was overtly carried out at the behest of Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump's brief televised announcement, confirming that US fighter jets had targeted multiple nuclear research sites in Iran, ended not only with 'God bless the Middle East' and 'God bless America' but also, specifically, 'God bless Israel' — a closing flourish that left little doubt about whose interests were being prioritised. South Africa has positioned itself internationally as one of the staunchest critics of Israel's conduct, culminating in its landmark International Court of Justice case accusing Israel of genocide in Gaza. Pretoria has also publicly cut diplomatic ties with Israel, formally downgrading the embassy. In the face of this new regional escalation, it must now consider how to balance that principled commitment with its allegiance to Iran, a fellow BRICS member — while simultaneously avoiding direct confrontation with a still-dominant United States. With that in mind, the silence of the political class on Sunday was, frankly, understandable. BRICS buddies band together? South Africa and Iran have shared membership of BRICS since an invitation was issued to the latter at the 2023 Johannesburg summit. Other BRICS states were less hesitant in responding to the bombing. The Chinese foreign ministry issued an unambiguous condemnation: 'China strongly condemns the U.S. attacks on Iran and bombing of nuclear facilities under the safeguards of the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency]. The actions of the U.S. seriously violate the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and international law, and have exacerbated tensions in the Middle East. China calls on the parties to the conflict, Israel in particular, to reach a ceasefire as soon as possible, ensure the safety of civilians, and start dialogue and negotiation.' Saudi Arabia, whose new BRICS membership sits awkwardly with its often-fraught relationship with Iran, struck a more guarded tone. Its official English-language X account posted: 'The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is following with great concern the developments in the sisterly Islamic Republic of Iran, represented by the targeting of Iranian nuclear facilities by the United States of America.' The United States, meanwhile, was vocally backed by a handful of close allies. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer offered a firm endorsement of the bombing, posting on X: 'Iran's nuclear programme is a grave threat to international security. Iran can never be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon and the US has taken action to alleviate that threat.' But from other corners of the West, the reaction was unease rather than celebration. Carl Bildt, co-chair of the European Council on Foreign Relations, called the bombing a 'clear-cut violation of international law'. UN Secretary-General António Guterres said he was 'gravely alarmed' by the use of force by the US. A massively unpopular war Complicating the picture for South Africa is the fact that this conflict is likely to be widely unpopular across the globe — including among Western populations. Comparisons are already being drawn with the disastrous US invasion of Iraq in 2003, and social media suggests a growing generational divide in how such conflicts are understood as the post-World War 2 political consensus crumbles. Young people in particular are questioning why Israel, which has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and possesses undeclared nuclear weapons, is held to a radically different standard than Iran, which remains under international inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency. This is also a moment when support for Israel is at an all-time low. Tens of thousands of protesters flooded European capitals over the weekend, voicing opposition to the ongoing bombardment of Gaza. In June, a YouGov poll showed support for Israel in Western Europe had sunk to its lowest levels ever recorded. In Germany, France and the UK, only between 13% and 21% of respondents now hold favourable views of Israel, compared to 63% to 70% expressing negative sentiments. As South Africa mulls its response, the stakes are particularly high. The government has sought to portray itself as a champion of the Global South, a defender of international law, and a broker of multipolar diplomacy. The entrance of the United States into open hostilities against Iran, with Israel applauding from the wings, tests every aspect of that narrative. DM
