The assistance and support that local government needs from the other two spheres of government is, then largely not forthcoming. Since local government is the most direct interface between the government and the community, it should be the best location for the development of a grassroots, participative, deep-rooted democracy. Local government has inherited closed and undemocratic decision-making systems. There are few, if any, forums for consultation with poor communities. The system identified in the Municipal Systems Bill for public participation does not seem, on the face of it, adequate for deeping and extending democracy.
Provision is made for ward committees.
But the council makes the rules about how members of the ward committees will be appointed, how frequently the ward committees will meet and so on. The ward committees are simply seen as advisory bodies, which can make recommendations, but with no decision-making powers or veto powers. This is in contrast to systems of participative democracy which have been attempted and developed in other parts of the world. For instance, in Kerala, India, a massive system of public participation has been put in place, involving 3 million people. Responsibility for a huge amount of public money has been devolved down to local meetings, which draw up plans for how to use the money.