KNYSNA NEWS - Knysna mayor Aubrey Tsengwa is facing yet another motion of no confidence to oust him from his position - this time from the EFF, one of his coalition allies in council.

This will be the third such motion in as many months that has targeted him.

In November he faced such a motion from the deputy mayor and fellow coalition partner, Alberto Marbi of the PBI, and the EFF’s Neil Louw, but that was withdrawn without reasons being given.

That motion was described by the DA as “a waste of time”.

'Immediate resignation'

Now Louw is reinstating the motion of no confidence against Tsengwa, demanding his immediate resignation for "failing the residents of this municipality by neglecting their basic needs, particularly in terms of service delivery - a fundamental right of every citizen”.

“The people of Knysna have endured countless hardships, including weeks without access to clean water, raw sewage running in the streets and the collapse of vital infrastructure.

'Can no longer stand by'

“Unfortunately, Tsengwa’s term (of office) has (allegedly) been characterised by neglect, corruption, and an utter disregard for the needs of the people he was elected to serve.

“We can no longer stand by while the mayor of this municipality continues to lead us into decay.

"The time for action is now. It is time for Aubrey Tsengwa to step down immediately, as he has proven to be incapable of fulfilling the responsibilities entrusted to him,” said Louw.

'Threats against councillors'

During the council meeting on 29 January another motion of no confidence by KIM did not proceed after alleged threats against councillors who were intending to abstain from voting.

KIM councillor Susan Campbell had called for the removal of the mayor, deputy mayor and speaker, but the motions “lapsed” during the meeting after she left the council chambers, before the motions could be called.

'Warned by political bosses'

Campbell said she took this action after it had become clear that those councillors in the ruling coalition who had promised to “support” the motions, by abstaining from voting, had been warned “unequivocally that they would be removed by their political bosses if they did not vote against the motions”.

KIM’s manoeuvre now means the top three will not have immunity from facing motions of no confidence for the next three months, as has been shown by Louw’s reinstated motion.

“Until the morning of the meeting, we (KIM) were repeatedly assured that there would be between two and four abstentions, instead of votes against the motions.

'KIM needed two abstentions'

“In addition to support from the DA councillors, KIM needed at least two abstentions for the motions to pass.

“On the morning of the meeting, I was contacted by a councillor and informed that they had been instructed by their political bosses to oppose the motions.

“In terms of the Rules of Order, if the motion was rejected by council, the top three would be protected from another motion for three months.

'Most undesirable outcome'

“It became clear to me that going ahead with the motions could have a most undesirable outcome.

“Withdrawing the motions was no option, as they could only be withdrawn if council voted in favour of the withdrawal - so the outcome would probably be the same.

“My only option therefore was to leave the meeting, so that the motions would lapse, as a motion can only be moved by the councillor who gave notice of the motion.

“The motions were last on the agenda and I participated in the full meeting. Whereas it was a difficult decision, the only way I could avoid granting three months' ‘immunity from removal’ to the top three, was to leave the meeting before the motions were called by the speaker,” said Campbell.

‘We bring you the latest Garden Route, Hessequa, Karoo news’