The Speaker of the IFP-led Uthukela district municipality anchored in Ladysmith in northern KwaZulu-Natal is under pressure to convene an urgent council sitting to rescind a shocking decision to condone almost R1-billion in unauthorised, irregular, fruitless and wasteful expenditure.
This is after last week Speaker Lihle Nqubuka allegedly failed to follow the rule while allowing her party’s (IFP) councillors to irregularly vote in favour of the condonation that had raised eyebrows.
The allegations against Nqubuka are contained in a letter dated May 30 2025. These were written by DA councillor Thys Janse van Rensburg, who alleged that the DA, alongside other political parties like the ANC, raised material concerns during the meeting regarding the aforementioned reports.
Wants sitting reconvened
He explicitly requested that these matters be put to a vote by show of hands, as mandated by rule 30(1) of the standing rules.
Hence, he wants the sitting to be reconvened.
“We request that the council meeting be reconstituted to ensure compliance with Rule 30(1) and Rule 29(2), which requires a majority vote for passing budgets and other prescribed matters. The failure to follow proper voting procedures may render the decisions on the UIFW reports and F2027 budget procedurally invalid, necessitating a reconvened meeting to address these items transparently,” Van Rensburg wrote to Nqubuka’s office.
UIFW refers to a situation where municipal funds are not spent according to the guidelines of the Municipal Finance Management Act.
Van Rensberg further requested that the section 139 Administrator, Dr Vusi Mthembu, should properly perform his oversight role and ensure that this matter is addressed expeditiously to restore public confidence in the municipality’s governance processes.
Processes not followed
“The adoption of a budget and UIFW reports without transparent voting undermines the municipality’s constitutional duty to serve the community’s best interests. And it may contravene the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (Act No. 3 of 2000), which requires procedural fairness in administrative actions.
“We kindly request a written response within 7 days from the receipt of this letter, detailing the steps to be taken to address these concerns. Should no satisfactory response be received, the DA reserves the right to escalate this matter to the MEC for local government or seek judicial review under the relevant legal frameworks,” he added.
Despite repeated attempts to get a comment from the municipality, it did not respond to queries from Sunday World.
