The democratic foundation of South Africa is simple: that those elected to power will serve the people who put them there, that public money will be spent accountably, and that when government fails, Parliament will hold them accountable. It is a foundation that mirrors the Constitution’s founding values of accountability, responsiveness and openness balanced by Parliament’s duty to oversee the executive. And it is a promise, one that is tied to a single prerequisite – citizens can see whether it is being kept through transparent access to information so they can hold power to account. However, right now, they largely cannot as South Africa’s accountability ecosystem is weakened by poor oversight, obfuscated processes and limited practical transparency.
“Transparency is the enemy of corruption and maladministration,” says Wayne Duvenage, CEO of OUTA. “When performance is visible and decisions are trackable, behaviour changes. The moment you remove that visibility, you remove the pressure that keeps institutions honest, and right now that visibility is largely absent.”
The consequences of this lack of visibility are, unfortunately, significant. Collapsing infrastructure, undelivered services and wasted public funds are directly impacting citizen lives and livelihoods. Institutional failure, poor governance and lack of accountability are the central drivers of South Africa’s infrastructure and service delivery crises, and are primarily the result of mismanagement, cadre deployment, corruption and neglected maintenance. South Africans are living in a no consequence culture with recurring irregular expenditure and unaddressed material irregularities continuing year after year.
The data needed to catch these patterns and behaviours exists, it is just in a format that’s been fragmented and inaccessible, and this has made it challenging for citizens to access and understand. As Duvenage points out: “If citizens can’t see the trends, they can’t apply the right pressure.”
For years, OUTA has monitored parliamentary committees manually, scrutinising select portfolios to hold government accountable, but with upwards of 30 committees operating at any given time, that effort could only produce a partial picture. One that isn’t enough to provide the systemic accountability that South Africa needs. This understanding led to the development of ParliMeter, in collaboration with OpenUp and the Parliamentary Monitoring Group (PMG), and co-funded by the European Union. The solution converts years of accumulated parliamentary records into searchable and visual data that shows how MPs, parties and portfolio committees are actually performing.
ParliMeter makes it possible, for the first time, to detect trend visibility at scale. It is easier to call out repeated failures, to identify departments that are ignoring committee recommendations year after year, and to track ministers who don’t answer questions meaningfully. The Budget Review and Recommendation Reports that portfolio committees compile each year are among Parliament’s oversight tools. Now, with ParliMeter, they can be followed up on and it is possible to see whether there are year-on-year repeat recommendations. This insight is crucial, making it possible to track recurrent offenders and identify the lack of follow-through on actually fixing concerns raised over time.
“Currently, we do not have the data and evidence to actually track and measure whether they were acted on. This is another massive gap in Parliament, and something that needs to be reported on. Sadly, it is out of scope of this project, since it will take months (if not even years) to source this information.
“We need graphical, sliceable data that shows red flags and performance patterns,” says Duvenage. “A living picture that reflects what’s happening and makes it hard for government to claim progress when there is none.”
However, Duvenage is clear that the data is not enough. Parliamentarians and government employees do not consistently behave as though they are accountable to the public and until that changes, transparency will remain something civil society extracts rather than something the state delivers as default.
“The people in these positions don’t see themselves as servants of the public and this has to change,” he says. “Visible and accessible data is one of the most powerful tools to force that change because it makes poor performance undeniable and removes the ability to hide behind process.”
This is why ParliMeter exists, as a tool to create the conditions under which accountability becomes structural. Citizens can now see exactly what their representatives are doing, what patterns of failure are impossible to ignore and where transparency finally carries the weight of consequences.
“Transparency without consequences doesn’t rebuild public trust, it erodes it and South Africans have waited long enough for oversight that does exactly that – deliver consequences,” concludes Duvenage.
Share
