The GOOD Party has raised concerns over the Democratic Alliance’s (DA) alleged use of the City of Cape Town’s Council Chamber for a party-political gathering, while formal council meetings continue to be conducted virtually.
The controversy follows the release of video footage allegedly showing DA members using the chamber for what GOOD councillor Sandra Dickson described as a “party-political, motivational gathering”.
Dickson questioned why the chamber could be used for a DA event while councillors are still reportedly required to participate in council meetings online.
“Video footage posted today shows the DA using the Cape Town Council Chamber for what was clearly a party-political, motivational gathering. Yet the next formal Council meeting, scheduled for 30 July 2026, will once again be held online,” she said.
Dickson argued that the situation raises concerns about transparency, equal access to public facilities and the separation between municipal resources and party-political activities.
“This raises a serious question: if the Council Chamber is available, safe and suitable for a DA party meeting, why is it not being used for the democratic business of Council?” she said.
According to Dickson, councillors should be debating key issues affecting residents, including budgets, service delivery, land-use decisions and governance matters, in person and in full public view.
“Councillors should be able to debate the City’s budget, services, land decisions and governance face-to-face, in full public view, not continually from behind computer screens,” she said.
The GOOD Party is calling on the City and the DA to disclose who authorised the use of the chamber, whether the party paid the required venue and service costs, and whether municipal resources were used to support the event.
“The City and the DA must disclose who authorised the use of the chamber, whether the DA paid the applicable venue and service costs, and who covered security, technical support, cleaning, staff time and any other municipal resources used,” Dickson said.
She added that the City should also clarify whether opposition parties would be granted access to the chamber on the same terms.
“This is about more than a venue. It is about the proper separation between City resources and DA party resources, equal treatment of political parties, transparency, and respect for the institution of Council.”
Dickson further argued that the continued use of virtual council meetings has limited open debate and accountability, despite repeated objections from opposition councillors.
“The reported use of the City of Cape Town Council Chamber for an internal DA meeting raises serious questions about the use of public facilities and the continued exclusion of councillors from normal in-person Council meetings,” she said.
The GOOD Party has called on the Speaker and the City administration to urgently disclose the nature of the event held in the chamber, who approved it, under which policy it was authorised, whether the DA formally booked and paid for the venue, and why council meetings remain virtual.
“Until these facts are provided, the perception will understandably be that one set of rules applies to the DA and another to opposition councillors,” Dickson said.
She maintained that the Council Chamber should primarily serve the democratic functions of the municipality.
“The Council Chamber should first and foremost be used to conduct the public and democratic business of the City. If it is available for an internal political meeting, there can be no credible justification for continuing to keep Council itself out of the chamber.”
IOL has reached out to the DA for commentary, and this story will be updated once feedback has been received.
IOL News
Get your news on the go. Download the latest IOL App for Android and IOS now.
