WHO REPRESENTS THE 47% WHO DID NOT VOTE?
Let us look at the 2026 election figures for Ward 113 in Table View.
Based on the available figures and an estimated eligible electorate:
Electoral participation                                    People
Estimated eligible voters                                18,500
Registered voters                                               15,465
Actually voted                                                         9,761
Registered but did not vote                              5,704
Not registered                                                         3,035
Eligible people who did not vote                   8,739
These figures tell us something that deserves serious consideration.
Only approximately 52.8% of the estimated eligible electorate actually voted. Almost 47.2% did not participate.
What does that tell us about representation?
It would be wrong to assume that every person who stayed away from the ballot box did so for the same reason. Some may have been indifferent, some unable to vote, and others may simply have chosen not to participate.
But we must also acknowledge another possibility: many people no longer believe that conventional party politics gives them a meaningful voice, or that their concerns are adequately represented by those elected in their name.
And therein lies the problem.
Democracy cannot be reduced to voting once every few years.
A community does not stop having needs, concerns, opinions and aspirations the day after an election. Residents still have to deal with deteriorating infrastructure, crime, municipal services, planning decisions, traffic, environmental concerns and the many other issues affecting their neighbourhoods.
Yet the ordinary resident often has very little influence over the decisions being made.
A different level of democracy
This is why Community Advisory Panels deserve serious consideration.
Imagine every suburb and neighbourhood having its own independent Community Advisory Panel, made up of residents who live there and understand the issues affecting their immediate surroundings.
These panels would not be political parties. They would not compete for political power or replace elected councillors.
Their purpose would be to give residents a permanent, organised and accessible voice in local governance.
They would:
Identify and prioritise the actual needs of their communities.
Consult residents, including those who do not participate in party politics.
Develop proposals and solutions based on local knowledge.
Present community priorities directly to councillors and municipal structures.
Monitor responses and hold representatives accountable for addressing matters raised.
Report back to residents on progress and outstanding issues.
Importantly, participation would not depend on party membership, political allegiance or whether someone voted in the previous election.
The question politicians should answer
If elected representatives genuinely believe in public participation, transparency and accountability, why should they fear a structured system that gives residents a stronger voice?
Community Advisory Panels would not undermine democracy. They would create another avenue through which democracy could function between elections.
The 2026 figures in Table View give us a reason to ask whether our existing systems of representation are reaching the entire community.
Of an estimated 18,500 eligible voters, only 9,761 actually participated.
What about the other 8,739?
Do we simply accept that they have no meaningful contribution to make? Or do we create a system that invites them back into the democratic process without first asking them to choose a political party?
The future of democracy should not belong exclusively to those who win elections. It should also belong to the people who live with the consequences of the decisions made by those who win.
It is time to put the community back into community governance.
Democracy must begin in the neighbourhood, not end at the ballot box.
CAPE OF GOOD HOPE NPC FOR COMMUNITY ADVISORY PANELS