Note to Editors: Please find attached a soundbite by Samantha Graham-Maré MP
Minister Gayton McKenzie misled the people of the Eastern Cape when, a year and a half ago, he told the media that he was not approving the name changes for Graaff-Reinet and that there were bigger issues that needed attention. He has now signed off on the change of 21 names, including Graaff-Reinet to Robert Sobukwe Town, East London to KuGompo City, Aberdeen to Xamdeboo, Adendorp to KwaMseki Bishop Limba and Nieu-Bethesda to Kwa Noheleni.
The Democratic Alliance (DA) recognises the importance of restoring historical dignity and acknowledging the contribution of liberation figures such as Sobukwe and Bishop Limba. South Africa’s past demands honest reflection, and naming can play a role in that process.
However, this must be accompanied by lawful process, meaningful consultation, and transparent decision-making. The DA is deeply concerned about how the latest round of geographical name changes has been handled.
In 2024, Minister McKenzie indicated that he had rejected the application because there was insufficient evidence that the public’s concerns had been considered. The question we are asking is what has changed since then?
While government claims that public consultations were conducted, feedback from residents, business organisations, and community stakeholders suggests otherwise. Many affected parties report feeling sidelined, unheard, or informed only after key decisions had already been made.
Public participation cannot be reduced to a procedural formality. Genuine consultation requires openness about proposals, clarity on motivations, transparency around submissions received, and evidence that community input meaningfully influenced outcomes.
Instead, the chairperson of the South African Geographical Names Council (SAGNC), Johnny Mohlala, has told communities that objections are premature until names are gazetted. This approach undermines democratic accountability and conflicts with the principles of procedural fairness set out in the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act.
These name changes carry operational and economic consequences. Small businesses must rebrand, tourism operators must adjust marketing material, and critical systems such as emergency services, postal networks, mapping platforms, and property records all require updates.
Despite this, there is no evidence of implementation cost projections, timelines, or support measures. This lack of transparency is unacceptable. Transformation should strengthen social cohesion, not create uncertainty or resentment. Historical recognition must be matched by responsible governance.
My colleague in the Provincial Legislature, DA MPL Leander Kruger, has written to the MEC for Sport, Arts, and Culture, Sibulele Ngongo; the Eastern Cape Provincial Geographical Names Committee; and the SAGNC to request the full consultation records and the decision criteria.
He has also asked they release cost estimates and implementation timelines and reopen meaningful engagement with affected communities and business sectors. We need clear, documented evidence of changes since 2024 that could justify reversing the decision.
[see letters here, here and here]
The DA continues to engage this matter through lawful channels to ensure transparency, accountability, and genuine community involvement. We will assist residents who wish to lodge formal objections once the changes are gazetted and will ensure these submissions are properly tabled within the prescribed period.
Minister McKenzie and his department have underestimated the importance of inclusive governance and the expectation of communities to be heard before decisions of this magnitude are finalised. Residents of Graaff-Reinet, and across the Eastern Cape, deserve clear answers, documented consultation outcomes, and a process that respects both their history and their democratic rights.