How Sa’s Election Could Reshape the Semigration Landscape

The local government elections on 4 November 2026 could give Gauteng households a reason to reconsider moving to Cape Town - if political change produces credible improvements in municipal government.

“For property owners and investors, the question goes beyond who wins which metro to how quickly and how well elected leaders transform service delivery and unlock housing development,” says Renier Kriek, Managing Director of alternative home financier Sentinel Homes.

SALGA and most credible analysts expect more coalition governments after the elections. Winning votes, assembling a governing majority and running a municipality are therefore separate hurdles that will have to be cleared.

While geopolitical tensions, interest rates, and inflation do affect the housing market, local government responsiveness is critical to property availability, affordability, and desirability.  

A tale of two cities
Johannesburg and Cape Town illustrate different problems: unreliable services can weaken a city’s appeal, while inadequate and slow housing supply expansion can make a desirable city increasingly unaffordable.

Although Gauteng remains the largest recipient of internal migration from other provinces, the mismanagement of the majority of the province’s municipalities, like City of Johannesburg, and poor service delivery have weighed heavily on its appeal to property buyers and investors.

“Where basic services like water, electricity, or refuse removal can’t be guaranteed, this weighs on housing market sentiment and property prices,” says Kriek. 

Cape Town, on the other hand, has seen a significant influx of new residents thanks to superior service delivery and the semigration trend that followed. 

However, the City’s reluctance to quickly release land for development and fast track approval of new constructions has created a scarcity of property due to almost no supply elasticity, and prices have consequently skyrocketed. 

The resulting affordability crisis could encourage more households to consider Gauteng, or persuade prospective semigrants not to leave it in the first place. 

Though “reverse semigration” is a term that has been bandied about a lot recently, it fails to describe any real-world phenomenon. This may change if the relative attractiveness of Gauteng’s cities were to increase. 

“Credible improvements in Gauteng could change the calculation for households considering a move. Cape Town cannot bank on Johannesburg staying broken, or expect good services to compensate indefinitely for unaffordable housing,” says Kriek. 

Sentiment and investment choice
Ultimately, local election winners will not be able to effect changes to their municipalities overnight. As a result, public sentiment on the lack of progress always precedes any improvements that take time to manifest, and can drive property prices and investment up or down.

When a person invests in property, they effectively buy a stake in the municipality that manages everything outside their front gate.

“I always say that capital has choices; poor municipal conditions increase costs and uncertainty. Investors and homebuyers respond by forming sale transactions at lower prices, requiring a higher return or taking their money elsewhere. Strong tenant demand may still make a deal worthwhile - but municipal risk is always be priced in,” says Kriek.

A badly run municipality can make a house cheaper to buy initially and more expensive to live in over time,” says Kriek. “A lower purchase price is little comfort if the household must fund its own water storage, backup power and security, in addition to the cost pressures of all the other government services that households already provide for themselves in South Africa.  

Where housing demand persists but development stalls, tenants can also face rising rents even while investors become less willing to buy. Falling property values do not automatically mean more affordable housing.

“Housing supply shortages are the main driver of irrational and unsustainable price increases that make housing unaffordable for people in major metros, especially Cape Town. The policy failure is allowing that manufactured scarcity to persist,” says Kriek.  

For example, the country has a serious undersupply of public infrastructure, especially public transport. As its urban nodes densify, it becomes irrational to rely so heavily on automobiles and privately operated minibus taxis. Voters need to demand more public transport in all major metros despite parties with entrenched interests litigating against it. 

After the election
South Africa has entered a phase in its democracy where coalition politics have become the norm. Many are waking up to the realisation that more of the same policies and programmes is not enough to bring meaningful change.

This new era should be welcomed because it can offer better balance in governing municipalities, and involves a more diverse leadership pool to bring new ideas to the table.

The greatest evidence to watch is practical: funded infrastructure work, more reliable services, quicker development approvals and homes actually being completed.

“We need innovative policies and processes for rapid land release and development approvals, service delivery enhancements, and accelerated affordable housing initiatives, and we must hold our new leaders accountable for their performance, good or bad.”

“Gauteng’s opportunity is to give people reasons to stay. Cape Town’s challenge is to make room for people who want to come,” says Kriek.

ENDS