2010 World Cup: Department of Transport & Airports Company readiness, & aviation fuel supply

Meeting report

Chairperson’s opening remarks about organisation
The Chairperson noted that there were problems with the distribution of minutes. She said it was important that these documents be circulated in good time. She proposed, and Members adopted, a resolution that minutes should be distributed to Members within two days after the meeting, to enable them to prepare for the next meeting.

The Chairperson noted that the presenters from the Department of Transport (DoT) had been delayed. She noted that no data projector had been arranged. This meant that the delegation from the Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) was unable to make its presentation. She further commented that the venue itself was too small and there was no audio recording equipment. A lack of co-ordination had led to confusion over the dates of Committee meetings and its programme.

Mr S Farrow (DA) said that the Committee should send a delegation to the Chairperson of Chairpersons. All the Members had busy programmes but set their schedule around Committee meetings. They had already lost four meetings that year due to a lack of quorum and unsuitable venues. Some of the Members were also serving on other Committees. He said that the Committee had a hugely pressurised programme, with just 100 days before the start of the World Cup.

Mr P Maluleka (ANC) agreed with the proposal. He suggested that the delegation should consist of the Chairperson, one opposition Member and one ANC Member.

The Committee agreed that the matter be pursued.

A Member asked that the Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) proceed to give its presentation, while the Members followed the written document.

Mr Bongani Maseko, Director: Airport Operations, ACSA, said that the written presentation distributed to Members was in fact from the DoT. ACSA’s presentation had been sent by e-mail and only five hard copies were available at present.

Ms Lusanda Madikizela, 2010 Project Co-ordinator, DoT, explained that the DoT had only received the invitation after office hours on Friday 26 February 2010.

Department of Transport presentation
Mr Pule Selepe, Co-ordinator, Aviation Sub-Sector Task Team, DoT, said that the DoT had established the Aviation Sub-Sector Task Team (ASSTT). With regard to Air Traffic Management (ATM), operational plans were in place both for major and secondary airports. There were constraints at Bloemfontein, Polokwane and the Kruger Mpumalanga International Airport (KMIA). These airports could only handle eight movements per hour. This would equate to a maximum of four take-offs and four landings. Air Traffic Navigation Services (ATNS) had sufficient numbers of staff to manage air traffic during the World Cup. No leave would be granted to air traffic controllers (ATCs). Wage agreements had already been finalised. All flights would be slot co-ordinated. ATCs would receive training. No-fly zones would be established around the stadiums on match days.

Mr Selepe said that operational plans had been developed. A particular problem was the lack of a taxiway at KMIA which meant that all aircraft had to make use of the runway to get into position for take-off or to proceed to the terminal building after landing. There were terminal constraints there and at Bloemfontein, Polokwane and Port Elizabeth. Temporary infrastructure would be provided by May 2010. There was sufficient ground handling capacity. The small airports would be serviced by larger aircraft than normal. The DoT was investigating the possibility of using military aerodromes for parking and refuelling. The La Mercy airport in Durban would be opened on 1 May 2010, and all commercial operations would be relocated there.

Mr Selepe said that no major demand was expected on international routes. Operators would increase their capacity if a demand did arise. FIFA's logistic company, Match, had signed contracts with 113 tour operators in all their regions. Charter flights would bring in the majority of incoming spectators. There was an estimate of 450 000 international spectators.

Mr Selepe said that the domestic market would be able to cope with the internal movement of spectators. There were no problems on the trunk routes between Johannesburg, Durban and Cape Town. There might be problems on routes involving smaller centres, such as those between Cape Town and Mpumalanga. Some airlines had already loaded seats into the system. South African Airways (SAA) was making provision for 16 000 seats. Some of the smaller carriers were also increasing their capacity. There seemed to be enough supply. Issues of over-pricing and collusion were under investigation by the Competition Commission (CC). He hoped that their investigation should be concluded by April.

Mr Selepe said that international involvement was far below expectations. The matchvilles – where spectators would be accommodated in remote centres and transported to games – had been reduced to five, with plans for George, Mauritius and Port Elizabeth being cancelled. Most teams had chosen to make their bases in Gauteng.

Discussion
Ms P Ngwenya-Mabila (ANC) asked why the number of matchvilles had been reduced. She asked when the temporary infrastructure would be ready, and what type of building would be used. She noted that the ATCs would not be on leave. She asked if any additional staff would be employed.

Mr Selepe replied that MATCH had identified George, Mauritius and Port Elizabeth as matchvilles. At the most recent ASSTT meeting MATCH told ACSA that this arrangement had been cancelled due to low demand. The room reservations had been cancelled. More details on the temporary infrastructure would be given later. ATC training was being conducted at various points. He did not have the figures for this.

Mr E Lucas (IFP) asked if the military airports being considered were adjacent to civilian airports or were some distance away. The effects of the alleged collusion were being felt widely. He quoted the example of a school group in Durban that would be visiting New York. Their ticket prices had increased by R5 000 each, forcing a reduction in the size of the travelling party.

Mr Selepe replied that DoT was looking at the Air Force bases close to civilian airports.

Mr de Freitas asked how inefficiencies were being resolved. Three airports had insufficient capacity. He asked what wage agreements had been made. He asked if these were for new positions or new terms, and what changes had been made. He asked if the no-fly zones would only be around the stadiums or would be elsewhere as well. He asked what alternative was in place in Mpumalanga, given the constraints of the KMIA. He asked why there was less overseas interest than expected. He asked if this was due to the distances involved or other reasons.

Mr Selepe said that there were three problems at KMIA. There was no taxiway firstly. Secondly, the apron area was lacking. The terminal buildings were small. The plan would be to get the aircraft in, offload the passengers and then fly the aircraft to Air Force Base (AFB) Hoedspruit. The CC was busy investigating allegations of collusion between the airlines and should report by the end of March. On face value it seemed that collusion was taking place.

Mr Selepe continued that insufficient ATM capacity was due to airports not all having the same infrastructure. There was a restricted radar capacity at Polokwane. If there was not enough equipment then aircraft had to observe a greater following distance. This meant that at Polokwane, Mpumalanga and Bloemfontein a fifteen minute separation was required. Airport operators had not invested in the required capacity. They could cope with normal traffic but did not have the funding for expansion. Government would not fund expansion at privately owned airports.

Mr Selepe said that if there was not enough capacity for air transport, land based transport would have to be used. Johannesburg would support four or five areas. This would include Gauteng, Bloemfontein, Mpumalanga, Limpopo and Rustenburg. The no-fly zones would be security related. They would apply during match days in the area of the stadiums. He could only guess at the lack of interest overseas. He thought that two factors were at play. The first was crime and the other was the expensive prices for accommodation and transport.

Ms Madikizela added that the feedback the DoT had received indicated that expenses were a factor. Another was the accessibility of South Africa, being a long-haul destination for most countries. The press in Germany and England had published negative reports about South Africa.

Mr Selepe said that more tickets had been sold in the United States of America than any other country.

Ms N Ngele (ANC) noted that the runway and taxiway at Mpumalanga had been built to handle small aircraft. She asked if South African Airlink was part of the air transport plan.

Mr Selepe said that ATCs could not go on strike. ATNS had been pro-active with wage negotiations. These had been concluded during 2009 already. Wide-body aircraft could land at KMIA, but the restriction of eight movements per hour would remain in place. SA Airlink's licence had never been revoked. Specific aircraft had been suspended pending a technical investigation of engine problems. Some had already been allowed back into service by the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA). Serviceable aircraft would be used during the World Cup. Some had already returned to service while others were still grounded.

Mr Farrow asked what the implications were of fuel supplies. He asked if the DoT could assure Members that there would be no shortages. A number of tankers were available. Charter flights would be landing at any hour of the night. Internal flights would also be increased and airports would have to maintain a 24 hour service. He asked if the airports at Mpumalanga and Polokwane had let-down facilities and adequate lighting to enable night operations. With just 100 days to the start of the tournament, private airports were being told to put in hard stands without any funding. The Committee had supported the spending programme, but with only 150 000 spectators now expected the volume of traffic would be considerably less than expected. ACSA had requested a tariff increase of 133% to remain sustainable. Beautiful airports had now been built, but would not be sustainable if there was no revenue generated. Mr Farrow asked if there was any offset of costs.

Mr Selepe replied that after the fuel shortage at Oliver Tambo International Airport (ORTIA) in 2009, the Minister of Energy had appointed the task team. This team had to investigate the reasons for the shortage and to ensure that the problem did not recur. The investigation was ongoing. The DoT and ACSA were participants. ACSA had installed two more storage tanks at ORTIA, and the storage facilities should now be adequate. All major stakeholders would be expected to maintain a 24 hour service during the World Cup, especially on match days. Everybody was committed. All of the airports associated with the host cities had adequate lighting for night operations. The previous Director General had decided that no government funds would be given to a private airport like KMIA. At one time the Mpumalanga provincial government had wanted to buy the airport and had requested the National Treasury (NT) to assist. This request had been declined. The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) undertook regular inspections of all airports. While all were not at the same level, there was no question that all operated within safe standards. He could not give an answer as to whether the DoT should cover debts incurred by ACSA. This would have to be addressed in a subsequent presentation.

Mr Farrow said there was an international perception of rampant crime in South Africa. A message should be sent to the outside world that the situation was under control. He felt that the DoT should be able to intervene to control the alleged collusion between airlines. South Africa must not be seen as an unaffordable destination. Operators were busy pricing themselves out of the market.

Mr Selepe replied that the allegations of collusion were very important. The Competition Commission (CC) was co-operating in this matter. They would ensure that the situation would not recur.

Mr J Maake (ANC) asked why the DoT was assuming that the majority of incoming spectators would be on charter flights.

Mr Selepe admitted that there were genuine concerns over the final number of incoming spectators. The figure given was the current projection, based on FIFA's expectations. The DoT was basing its plans on the worst case scenario. FIFA was planning on 350 000 spectators. The aviation sector could handle this number. Information from FIFA, MATCH and the Local Organising Committee (LOC) was coming in dribs and drabs. The Department was unable to finalise its plans.

Mr N Duma (ANC) asked what plans were afoot for moving spectators between games and on their eventual departure. Plans were not finalised yet. He asked when they would drill into the plans. Flights were being delayed due to training. He asked when this training would be concluded. People in many of the service industries were getting greedy. The CC needed to act. This Committee should meet with other Committees, such as the Portfolio Committee on Trade and Industry. Even the cost of building the stadiums had been inflated.

Mr Selepe relied that he could not provide detailed movement plans. The DoT had not been advised of the airlines' schedules. He could only offer a broad overview. A detailed operational plan was in place. Airline schedules would be up to the minute. He undertook to supply the information.

The Chairperson countered that the minutes reflected what information was needed. The DoT should prepare the information that was required.

Mr M Sonto (ANC) said that the Department was being careful on the numbers of spectators who had lost interest. He thought that the presenters would have come to the meeting with hard intelligence and not just speculation. He had thought that the fifteen minute separation was the time that the airlines would be given to offload their passengers. There was no parking space at the smaller airports. He asked what volumes were expected.

The Chairperson wanted to see a detailed programme with dates, times and numbers of movement. She wanted to see a comparison of current against expected loads. This would enable the Committee to formulate the ideal response to the challenges. When the World Cup was over they would need to revisit the development of the country in terms of infrastructure, investment, future development and adjustments. She asked if there was enough communication. The DoT should be aware of the resolutions taken at previous meetings. This meeting should have been a progress report rather than a series of new questions.

Mr Farrow asked what alternate arrangements had been made in respect of buses and trains. He asked if the number of 150 000 spectators was a projection or a final figure. The previous estimate had been between 350 000 and 450 000. He asked if the numbers included the family members of ticket holders. He understood that there would be a large number of visitors. He asked if visitors from other African countries were included in this estimate.

Ms Madikizela replied that various sources had been used in developing a model four years previously. They had drawn on the experience of the World Cup in Japan and Korea, also a long haul destination. Most spectators would attend four to five matches, and be accompanied by four to five family members who would not necessarily be attending matches themselves. The figure of 150 000 was based on confirmed ticket sales overseas. The main interest thus far was from the United States of America, Australia, Germany and the Far East. The estimates had been adjusted downwards. The projections had initially looked at a figure of 400 000 but were now expecting approximately 300 000 visitors. It now seemed like that there would be more South African than foreign spectators. Their assumptions had a scientific basis with an error factor of between 10% and 20%. The figures did include visitors from other African states.

The Chairperson said that the DoT could not come to the Committee with speculation. The presentation had a sense of being in doubt. It should rather have been expressed as expected figures.

Ms Madikizela agreed that the wording was regrettable.

Mr Lucas asked if the current Durban International Airport or La Mercy would be used. The roads around the current airport were being upgraded continuously.

Mr Selepe said that La Mercy would come into use at the beginning of May. He said that the communication with the Committee had been a problem as the DoT had not known what was expected of it. The DoT had the highest regard for Parliament.

Mr Maluleka asked if the road between ORTIA and Pretoria would be finished in time.

Ms Ngwenya-Mabila asked what the status was with Wonderboom Airport.

Mr Selepe replied that Wonderboom had been re-opened in 2009. It was largely used for general aviation and there were no scheduled flights. This would not change for the World Cup. For many years the city of Pretoria had wanted to upgrade Wonderboom to international status.

The Chairperson asked if this intention was in response to a need that was felt or if it was just a case of being a good thing to do. She asked what the perceived need was. She pointed out that an airport was an inanimate object and could not want to do anything.

Mr Selepe replied that the airport wanted to get international status in conjunction with the municipality. It was owned by the Tshwane Metro. The management of the airport and the metro wanted it to be designated as an international airport.

Ms Madikizela added that the intention was to develop Wonderboom as a freight hub. The city wanted to make the best use of the facility.

Mr Selepe said that Cabinet had taken a decision in 1998 to reduce the number of ports of entry. This was due to security concerns. Their decision was that the number of international airports would be kept to ten, with two in Gauteng and one in each of the other provinces.

The Chairperson said that more information was needed on other forms of transport which were part of the plan.

Airports Company of South Africa (ACSA) Presentation
Mr Maseko said that the majority of teams would be based in Gauteng, with the rest making use of bases in KwaZulu-Natal, Western Cape, North West and Mpumalanga. ACSA was able to go into detailed planning now that these locations were finalised and the final draw had been made. It now had the likely movements, and slot times for flights could be allocated. ORTIA would be handling 6 000 arriving and departing passengers per hour. ACSA had the numbers for the other airports.

Mr Maseko said that some aircraft operators were booking slots which they could not use. This was called slot hogging. The regular airlines were limited. More and more charter flights would be coming in as the tournament drew closer. He had received requests from Mexico and Portugal the previous day. He presented a planned schedule for Bloemfontein on 22 June, which had 100 applications for business jet-type aircraft. Planned movements at ORTIA were within the capacity of sixty per hour. The daily passenger movement at ORTIA was 35 000.

Mr Maseko said that bi-monthly meetings were held with the Local Organising Committee (LOC). There were ongoing discussions on the handling of VIP passengers. ACSA was working with the volunteers. They were looking for exemptions regarding the extended hours.

Mr Maseko said that the venue transport operational plans (VTOPs) had been finalised.  The concern of ACSA was more with the transport between airports and the venues than between cities. The plans were by and large complete, especially those for Cape Town and Port Elizabeth. There were concerns over the situation regarding Johannesburg, Pretoria and Rustenburg.

Mr Maseko said that the airport operational plans were 95% complete but still needed to be signed off. This should be done by late April. ACSA was a member of the Department of Energy task team dealing with fuel supplies. Stocks at ORTIA had been upgraded and there was no concern with the storage capacity. The concern lay with the supply of fuel. The daily requirements would be updated. There were capacity constraints at Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth.

Mr Maseko said that many of the airlines, particularly the charter airlines, had made agreements with the South African Air Force (SAAF). The SAAF bases would be used for parking and diversions.

Mr Maseko said that temporary buildings had been acquired for Bloemfontein and Port Elizabeth. These facilities had been used at other major events. The contracts had been signed and the structures were now being shipped for construction. They should be erected by the middle of May.

Mr Maseko said that the base camp arrangements had now been made. Ticket sales and accommodation were being monitored.

Mr Maseko identified some risk areas. These included the supply of fuel. Land transport arrangements still had to be finalised. ATNS still were now committed to a 24 hour service. There were security risks.

Mr Maseko concluded that the ACSA airport operational plans were 90% complete. There was a major concern regarding the air/and interface in Gauteng where the three major metros were not co-coordinating their efforts. ACSA was trying to discourage slot hogging. Perhaps ACSA should charge a deposit on booked slots. There was still a lack of information on ticket sales and the home countries of the purchasers. He could provide the Committee with more detailed information.

Discussion
Mr Farrow thanked ACSA for a thorough and professional report. He asked what the cost implications were for the temporary facility at Bloemfontein. He asked if the structure that had been used at Cape Town could not be used. He asked if there was a back-up plan in the event of the ship carrying the structures sinking. The Committee's visits to the host cities had shown the lack of co-ordination in the Gauteng metros. A report had been made to Parliament. He could not believe that this problem still existed. The Committee should find solutions. Money was coming from the national government and there should be an oversight role.

Mr Maseko assured the Members that there was a contingency plan. The cost of the structure in Bloemfontein was R3 million. The initial price had been sky high but had been reduced.

Mr de Freitas said that the presentation was a broad summary management report. He asked if the workers would have enough rest when the extended hours were implemented. There were no problems with the issue and stocking of fuel. There was still a question of the logistic capacity. A lot of road tankers travelling between the refineries and Gauteng could damage the roads. Surely ACSA could speak to Gauteng on the question of the land transport. The situation was absurd.

Mr Maseko said that the DG had been involved with the three metros. Plans were in place. There was interaction, but not to the same degree as in Cape Town or Port Elizabeth. A meeting was scheduled for later in the week. The workers would have enough rest time, as they changed to a twelve hour shift. The law required ACSA to obtain an exemption for this change. There was nothing to indicate a fuel supply concern. ACSA did not make use of road transport at present but relied on rail and pipeline supplies.

Mr Selepe said that fuel supplies would not be jeopardised. The storage capacity was larger than what was needed. The average stock levels were sufficient for sixteen days.

Ms Madikizela said that Gauteng had run the transport services during the Confederations Cup. This had covered Johannesburg, Pretoria, Ekhuruleni and the West Rand. Pretoria had already made arrangements. The main rail station would be the hub. Johannesburg had already made arrangements as well. Transport was a direct service from the DoT. The Gautrain was also a factor. There would be a hub in Sandton. The Johannesburg municipality was uncomfortable with the links. Pretoria needed confirmation from Gautrain management. A tender had been issued. The process had to be finalised and it was up to Gautrain as the operator. There was not enough space for a transport hub at ORTIA but private land would be used. There would be a smaller site at Lanseria airport. Numbers had not been finalised but a lot of work had been done.

Mr D Kganare (COPE) said that baggage theft created bad publicity for the country.

Mr Duma said that the temporary structures would be gone after the World Cup. It was too late to give local business a chance to be part of the deal. He felt that it was too easy for airlines to talk to the SAAF. He felt that this was a security problem. He feared that the land transport would be congested between that going to the public viewing areas and that going to the match venues. Workers might still up the stakes. He asked what plans there were to deal with unresolved disputes.

Mr Maseko replied that ACSA had taken an early decision on the temporary structures. It had wanted to source the equipment from a supplier that had done this for previous major events. The supplier had to be tried and trusted. ACSA had stipulated a requirement that local partners be used.  There would always be industrial disputes. The World Cup was a national imperative, not an ACSA issue.

Mr Maseko said that ACSA could create a dashboard summary of the movements plan. He would need guidance from the Committee on what information was required.

The Chairperson said that the Committee had met with the Portfolio Committee on Energy. Flights had been cancelled on 5 August 2009 due to problems with the supply of fuel. There had been insufficient storage capacity at ORTIA at the time. Consideration had been given to using Zimbabwean airports as refuelling centres. She asked if this process had been aborted and how the problem had been addressed. The pipeline from Durban to Gauteng was used for all fuel types. It took time to clean it before a different type of fuel could be pumped. She asked if there would be a negative effect on the delivery of other fuel types if the pipeline was prioritised for aviation fuel.

Mr Maseko said that much more land transport would be in use as well. Other types of fuel would also have to be stored.

The Chairperson had been present at an earlier meeting. There had been negotiation on an understanding regarding fuel storage in Zimbabwe. Aircraft would fly to Zimbabwe to refuel. She asked if the DoT was planning in silos or as a team. They should all be addressing the same project.

Mr Maseko did not dispute that the Zimbabwe option had been discussed. ACSA had no mandate to negotiate with Zimbabwe.

Mr Selepe said that it had never been planned to go outside South Africa. This was the first time that he had heard of this arrangement.

Mr Farrow noted that the Department of Energy was engaging on the issue. Diversions were part of the plan. Two tanks had been installed at ORTIA, and he agreed that fuel supply was more of an issue than storage. Other fuel types would also be needed in greater quantities. He asked if the pipeline would have the capacity to deliver. He asked if Transnet was involved, and if there had been any approach to the Department of Public Enterprises. Transnet had made provision for 72 extra rail cars.

The Chairperson said that the shortage of jet fuel was not an issue. The issue was the transport of fuel to Gauteng. She asked how Transnet had responded. If there was a plan, the Committee also needed to know what the impact on other petroleum products would be.

Mr Maseko said that ACSA would need to make a joint presentation on the subject. He could not answer for Transnet. When making plans for the base camps the final list had not been available, but this information was now known. The transport arrangement for public viewing areas was a responsibility of the host cities. This was not part of ACSA's plan. However, the concern over traffic congestion was legitimate.

Ms Madikizela said that there would be one fan park in each host city. The public viewing areas were a separate issue and would be established at the discretion of municipalities. Satisfactory arrangements had been made in cities such as Port Elizabeth, Cape Town and Mbombela. There was a possible conflict in Rustenburg where traffic management was an issue.

Mr Farrow suggested that this was a function for each city. The other issue was transport between airport and hotel. This was giving him sleepless nights.

The Chairperson asked how seriously the DoT was taking the budget. There were concerns over the road infrastructure. The Department knew where the base camps could be. Teams would need to travel between their bases and the host city for their next match. There was no mention of these arrangements. In the case of a team based near Margate, she asked if the airport and roads in the area were suitable.

Mr Maseko said that over fifty sites had been identified as potential base camps. Each team had been given until the end of February to confirm their choices. The process was driven by the LOC. This meant that the fifty original options had been reduced to 32. These were generally places where ACSA had no presence, and were at best served by a municipal airport. South Africa was still one of the fastest growing destinations.

Ms Madikizela said that there had been a proposal in the early planning stages that a separate Department be established to co-ordinate all 2010 planning. This was an attempt to avoid a fragmented approach. The Special Measures Bill had made provision for a single authority to co-ordinate World Cup transport matters. There was no single budget for 2010-related infrastructure. ACSA had its own projects. The funding had been channelled to the Municipal Infrastructure Grant (MIG), and the DoT had not had access to this funding but served only as a conduit. Provinces had been left out as they had no role to play. The host cities had signed agreements at local government level while national departments had signed guarantees with FIFA.

Ms Madikizela said that the DoT was concerned with road maintenance. It had looked at the roads leading to the proposed base camps. Transport was only one of the priorities, and was near the bottom of the list at that. Some roads fell under one of the spheres of government while others were privately owned. Road priorities were informed by provinces and were financed by the Provincial Infrastructure Grant. There was no allocated budget for 2010 projects. Public transport was supported by some 2010 projects.

The Chairperson said that the point was taken. This was not an issue for ACSA. Potholed roads were a challenge. All spheres of government should take responsibility, as should all state entities. There was an inter-government framework in place. The plan should not have waited for the identification of base camps. Even though the base camps were identified in March there was room for the DoT to be proactive. Even if resources were deployed at sites which were not chosen then the upgraded infrastructure would stay in place. There was no excuse for this not being done. There should be co-ordination between the different spheres of government. There were forums such as the MinMEC meetings.

Mr Selepe said that was a pity that there had not been better co-ordination, particularly at the level of departmental officials. People responded in different ways. There was perhaps merit to moving towards establishing a unitary state, but this was not in the hands of the DoT. Such a development would remove artificial obstacles. He led a task team which included all players.

The Chairperson noted that there were still unfinished matters. She needed to know what the challenges were. There would be in depth discussion at the Committee's next meeting on 9 March. The Committee also needed to undertake a study tour during the year to examine the deterioration of the country's road system.
 
The meeting was adjourned.