The Committee was briefed on the preparation of the South African cricket team for the World Cup to be held on the sub-continent (India, Sri-Lanka and Bangladesh) during 2011. All aspects were considered, including technical aspects, skills, conditioning and mental preparation. A team ethos was being developed with the team realising the significance of the Protea badge. A public relations exercise would be launched to get the nation behind the team. The selectors had accepted the concept that players should be rotated to provide opportunities for rest. An approach had also been adopted that the best teams should be selected according to the conditions rather than use the same eleven players throughout a tournament.
Members were concerned about the slow pace of transformation. Fears were expressed for the safety of the team in
Members heard that LoveLife was a non-governmental organisation that received funding from three state departments. Its primary function was to raise awareness of HIV/AIDS amongst the youth of the country. As part of this awareness campaign, sports events were organised at various levels. Details were provided of the number of people and schools that were reached.
Members expressed their concern over the way in which spending was monitored. They wanted to see the detail of the finances of the organisation. They felt that LoveLife was not showing enough of a presence particularly in the rural areas. They suggested that LoveLife should rather leave the sporting side of their activities to the organs of the Department of Sport and Recreation. Although the reasons still had to be proved, the statistics indicated that there was an improvement in the HIV infection rate.
The Chairperson said that the South Western Districts Rugby Union and South African Rugby Union (SARU) had been invited to make presentations. SARU had requested that the meeting be postponed as many of their senior officials were overseas. It had been decided in the previous that the Chairperson should go to
The Chairperson said that the first item on the agenda was a briefing by Cricket South Africa (CSA) on the preparations for the 2011 Cricket World Cup. The team was doing well, having just beaten
The Chairperson asked what was happening in the Gauteng Cricket Board (GCB). The current persons in charge were “like jackals that would eat the sheep they were supposed to guard”. Someone had to mediate. Persons with interest could not be involved. The matter would blow up again.
The Chairperson noted that Makhaya Ntini had retired from international cricket. There was a need to find more talented players like this. He was heartened by the recent success of Lonwabo Tsotsobe. People were asking why there was still a black and white issue in cricket. Sports authorities had to look at ways to correct the past. Communities that had been left behind had to be restored to their rightful position, especially women. He wanted to see South Africans of all colours living side by side.
Briefing by Cricket
Mr Gerald Majola, Chief Executive Officer (CEO), CSA, said that one of the so-called white elephant stadiums would be put to use on 9 January 2011.
The Chairperson noted that Indians had suffered as badly as blacks during apartheid. He recounted some of his memories of discrimination against Indian people in Kroonstad.
Mr Majola stated that Ntini would play in the match on 9 January. This was the only time that he would interfere with selection policies. The situation with the GCB was only a temporary one. An interim board was running the GCB. It was a work in progress. CSA had drawn up a strategic plan to cover the period 2011 to 2015. CSA would present this plan to the Committee early in 2011. He presented a short video compiled by CSA.
Mr Majola said that the team had spoken about the significance of the World Cup and how to protect the national symbols. It had been impressed on the players that they would no longer be Springboks. They were briefed on the significance of the Protea as a national symbol.
Mr Majola said that the latest series had been used to have a look at all the available talent. A policy of rotation had been followed to give all the players a fair chance. The selectors had responded well. The aim of the strategy was to win the 2011 World Cup. The focus would be on forming the Proteas into the most professional team. He identified the key performance areas (KPAs). These areas included the team, tactical excellence, conditioning, mental strength, public relations, selection, administration and compliance. The process had started when former coach Mickey Arthur had resigned.
Mr Majola said that one of the priorities was the development of a team culture. CSA was looking at the example of the All Blacks of New Zealand. The diversity in the team should unite it and not divide it. One of the pleasing developments was that the young players now had a chance to speak their minds. The spirit in the team was much better than in the past and there was a spirit of unity. The players appreciated what it meant to be a Protea and to represent
Mr Majola said that the team was striving for tactical excellence. Batting consultants such as Kepler Wessels were being used. Some players preferred to have their own mentors. For example, Graeme Smith still went to Jimmy Cook for advice. He was confident that the bowlers would be ready for the World Cup although not all the problems had been ironed out yet. Fielding coaches such as Jonty Rhodes had been brought in. Another thing that was being realised was the importance of analysing opponents. The Indian Premier League (IPL) had shown the value of this and Ray Jennings, who had coached the Bangalore Royal Challengers, appreciated the value of integrated technology in the creation of a database on individual opponents. The PerforMAX system was being used. He presented the technical excellence briefing to the Members but said that this briefing was aimed at the players.
The Chairperson asked how Hashim Amla was coping with the terrorist remark that had been made about him.
Mr Majola said that any psychological assistance available would be used. Amla was, however, one of strongest players mentally in the world. He had been written off early in his career but was now a leading player who still had ten to fifteen good years ahead of him. Amla was extremely fit and had unchallenged powers of concentration. Amla had a particular talent for using his wrists to make possible shots that few other batsmen could play. However, the coaching staff still wanted to work on his defensive technique.
Mr Majola said that players must be open. They could discuss sensitive issues with the coaching staff in confidence. Dale Steyn had played ahead of Rusty Theron in the closing matches of the
Mr Majola said that Mr Henning Gericke, who had formerly worked with the Springboks, was working on the mental strength of the team. The 'chokers' tag would soon be ended. The team was working on “big match temperament”, dealing with pressure and having the courage of their convictions.
Mr Majola said that a public relations exercise would be launched to get the nation behind the team. CSA was in discussion with the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) to market the Proteas team. Players had to be available to the public, within reason. Some negative stories had been raised in recently published books. These matters were being dealt with.
Mr Majola said that in terms of selection, issues to be considered were consistency, honesty, selecting the best team for the occasion, giving opportunities to all players, competitiveness and team chemistry. The right combinations were needed. It was not going to be a matter of playing the same eleven players despite the circumstances.
Mr Majola stated that the administration was also a KPA. Logistic arrangements were important. The Team manager, Mr Goolam Raja, had already been to
Mr Majola said that the squad was being prepared. A conditioning camp had been held from 2 to 6 August 2010. Each player had a preparation programme. These programmes had been discussed with the respective franchise coaches. The
Mr Majola replied to a comment from a Member that the approach of the infamous “Kamp Staaldraad” had not being followed. The choice of venue had, however, being a conscious decision to expose the players to extreme heat conditions. A culture and identity camp had been held from 4 to 5 October and a skills camp had been held on 15 October. While management had planned to hold these camps in warm areas in preparation for conditions on the sub-continent, the venues had also been spread around the country for maximum visibility. The
Mr Majola said that transformation was a continuously unfolding process. CSA was working on this at all times.
The Chairperson said that transformation was not just about black and white issues. He was pleased that four of the A team players had been given a chance to boost their confidence and were making an impact for the senior team.
Mr M Dikgacwi (ANC) said that the unity of the team was of paramount importance. He felt that if the one-on-one engagements had been introduced earlier the kinds of revelations in the Herschelle Gibbs autobiography would not have happened. It was very concerning. Things were coming up in respect of transformation. What he was not seeing was black African batsmen coming to the fore, only bowlers. This was like rugby where blacks only got to play on the wing.
Mr Majola replied that there were African batsmen such as Loots Bosman on the scene. There were also promising players like Themba Bavuma and Thami Tsolekile emerging on the scene. CSA had recognised a weakness in the slow pace of transformation amongst the African population. He was not scared to reveal this. There had to be a distinction between black and black African players. The majority had been left out for a long time. The advancement of black Africans would be addressed in the 2011-15 strategy. There had been an emphasis on the Proteas and nothing was being said about the lower levels. CSA needed to address the progress being made. The Proteas were the result of the underlying structures.
Mr L Suka (ANC) was satisfied with the KPA measurements. The national symbol must transcend all codes. He asked how South African players could be shielded from the bookmakers. He asked if there would be sufficient security for the team. The same scenario currently being played out with Pakistani player Zulqarnain Haider must be avoided. He liked the visionary approach of staying ahead of the game. This was commendable. Cricket was an expensive sport. He asked about the roles played by individual mentors. Players should go to all parts of the country. The smaller provinces must not be overlooked.
Mr Majola replied that there was ongoing progress. Nothing was being taken for granted. Players were briefed by the anti-corruption unit before each series. They were given a list of dos and don'ts. Players were all accommodated on the same floor at the hotels were they stayed. Security officials were provided to watch over the players. The Zulqarnain Haider incident would never happen in the South African team. Players had a curfew time and did not leave their rooms after this. They signed a code of conduct. Cellular telephones were removed after the curfew time. He agreed that players should travel around the country when available. He had recently visited all twelve provincial affiliates. It was up to the affiliates to organise appearances in their regions.
Mr J van der Linde (DA) was happy with the presentation, especially hearing that the team would not rely on the same eleven players for all World Cup matches. This approach had led to
Mr G MacKenzie (COPE) welcomed the chance to bid farewell to Makhaya Ntini during the match planned for the Moses Mabidha Stadium. He was happy to see that the selectors had covered most bases in their preparations. The eighteen man squad was being used well. The Dolphins franchise was an excellent example of transformation at work. They were managing the process well at provincial level. The departure of Kevin Pietersen had alienated people at the time, but a lot of young talent was coming through. Loots Bosman in particular was fantastically talented. However, the
Mr Majola replied that specialist consultants had been brought in to improve the bowling and fielding. Jonty Rhodes was the fielding coach. Lapses in the field could be attributed to lack of fitness and hot and humid conditions, but these were not excuses. CSA was still worried about the injuries to Parnell, who was still getting back into his rhythm. On the subject of cliques he could not reveal certain issues. A lot had been said in confidence. The issue was being addressed.
Ms T Lishivha (ANC) said that South Africans had generally not placed much attention on sports psychology. She said that everybody was scared by the security problems in the region. The World Cup would be a challenge as many players would be in an unfamiliar environment. The public relations campaign had to take cricket and the Proteas to the rural areas. The recent books showed that relations between players and management had to improve. All squad members must have the chance to express their opinions. They had not been able to speak out in the past. Cohesion was needed
Mr Majola replied that there were characters in the team. There might be one or two players in the World Cup squad who would find themselves in unfamiliar circumstances but most of the players had spent time on the sub-continent. It was a challenging environment and could be a shock to the system when first experienced. It was up to the affiliates to organise activities in their provinces. Most of them did want to bring players to their regions but some co-ordination was needed. He agreed that there was a need to improve relations between players and team management.
Mr Suka said that Makhaya Ntini had broken the barriers and had led by example. He had transformed himself from a disadvantaged background to being an icon. He appreciated what CSA was doing. The 150 anniversary of Indians in
Mr Majola replied that there would be no benefit game for Ntini. The CSA practice was to award long serving players a benefit season after ten seasons. Ntini had already been granted his benefit season.
The Chairperson was comfortable on the point of player / management relationships. Opportunities had to be given to black players. Members wanted to see a concerted effort. The Ntini academy would be a force. People tried to compare transformation in cricket to that in football. The difference was that football had never been segregated. Dr Danie Craven had turned the Springbok symbol into a curse. The 150 year celebrations for Indian settlers would be a fitting occasion to host a match against
The Chairperson said that the unity of the team was very important. During the 2007 Rugby World Cup in
The Chairperson urged Mr Majola to guard against the formation of cliques. This could destroy the team by isolating players. He was happy that CSA was paying attention to the mental conditioning of players. Children were playing cricket on the tar roads during the last World Cup, so great was their captivation. CSA should plan on having players visiting one or two selected areas. There should be a call for a Cricket Friday in the same way that the nation had celebrated Football Friday. He would wear his Proteas blazer and tie while the Members would have to wear suitable shirts.
Mr Majola did not have a blazer himself. The Chairperson was the only person outside of the team and management to be so honoured.
The Chairperson said that marketing was important. There had been some exciting times during the 2007 World Cup in the
Presentation by LoveLife
Mr Mandla Mdluli, Chief Financial Officer (CFO), LoveLife, apologised for the absence of the CEO who was overseas on a fund-raising mission. LoveLife was a non-governmental organisation (NGO) that received the lion's share of its funding from government. The members of the Board did not receive a salary. The list contained some high-level names. There were audit and risk sub-committees. These ensured the proper accounting of the organisation's funds. The provisions of King lll had been adopted in the body's constitution. Elements of best practice had been incorporated together with the provisions of the Public Funds Management Act (PFMA). LoveLife's financial statements were transparent. The NGO was funded by three government Departments- SRSA provided R27 million, the Department of Health (DoH) R73 million and the Department of Social Development (DSD) R40 million.
Ms Lisa Adolph, Games National Manager, LoveLife, said that the focus of the organisation was on HIV prevention, media exposure and community outreach. The organisation targeted the youth and had a partnership with SRSA. Training for the games had been conducted in March and April 2010. LoveLife had launched a national outreach campaign. LoveLife attended the MinMec meetings. It had attended the SRSA annual conference and had made a presentation.
Ms Adolph said that the question for LoveLife was on how to strengthen partnerships. In the
Ms Adolph said that the objective of LoveLife was to reach the youth. This was mainly in the age group twelve to nineteen. They also trained adults, predominantly teachers and parents. There were ongoing activities. LoveLife wanted to create sustainable activities. A number of events had been held. There were four training roles. Firstly, training was held at national and provincial levels. The goal was to train the trainers, looking at parents and teachers. Secondly, all trainees were expected to serve on the local organising committees for games in their regions. Thirdly, there was the Body Y's level where the youth were taught about exercise programmes and a healthy diet. Finally there was a multilateral programme.
Ms Adolph said that 1 097 people had been trained nationally between April and May 2010. Nationally, 3 207 schools were engaged. She presented a breakdown for each province. LoveLife had established eighteen Y-Centres, with at least one in each province. These centres were used to teach the youth soft and hard skills such as computers. Debates were held and there was sporting activity. Discussions were held on healthy sexuality and lifestyles.
Ms Adolph said that 139 581 people had been involved in best practice games at the cluster level, 90 339 at district level, 34 989 at regional level and 178 at provincial level. These numbers still had to be verified. The
Ms Adolph said that there was ongoing games activity. District games were held until the end of October, regional games by the end of November and provincial games during December. There would be a national training programme during 2011. Synergy was being found.
Ms Lishivha pointed out that LoveLife used government funds. She asked how spending was monitored and to whom LoveLife was accountable. Three departments contributed towards its funding. The presentation had made reference to the innate optimism of youth. She asked how LoveLife was working to develop the youth. Some of work described was part of the work of the National Youth Commission and government departments. Was the organisation working with these bodies? She asked if the target of LoveLife's activities were the urban or rural areas. Urban areas were more advantaged. Her experience of the rural areas was that there was no sign of LoveLife. Furthermore, she asked who had audited LoveLife, how its work related to the disabled and how many offices it had. She had travelled all over the country but had never seen a LoveLife office.
Mr Mdluli replied that LoveLife had separate mandates from each Department. The focus of this presentation was how the R27 million allocated by SRSA had been spent.
The Chairperson asked who gave the mandates.
Mr Mdluli said that the mandate came from SRSA. Implementation of programmes came from the mandate. The same applied to the allocations from the other departments.
The Chairperson said that the LoveLife presentation was on what it could do. The focus was on sport and not what SRSA had said. This might have changed. The former CEO of LoveLife, Mr Harrison, had come to the Committee twice.
Mr Mdluli said that LoveLife made suggestions to SRSA based on available information.
The Chairperson said that the Keyser Foundation had made about R1.2 million available. He had told the late Minister of Health that LoveLife was having an impact on sport and she had agreed.
Mr Mdluli appreciated the robust debate. A ten year impact assessment had been prepared. This was a voluminous document. The activities report detailed what had been done. He would address the concerns raised when LoveLife next visited the Committee. The auditors were Price Waterhouse Cooper (PWC). LoveLife had an internal monitoring and evaluation unit. Data was double checked by an external company.
Mr Dikgacwi had several questions. He wanted to know with whom the outreach programmes were being conducted. Youth pregnancy was a concern. He asked where the programmes were presented. There was supposed to be 100 trainers in the
Mr Dikgacwi asked several further questions:
•which schools were involved in the
•what impact was being made on the youth?
•where the Y-Centres were were located.
Ms G Tseka (ANC) wanted to check the LoveLife organagram. She also wanted to know where the organisations offices were, particularly in
Mr Mdluli replied that the organagram was published on LoveLife's website. There were 400 permanent staff, 1 200 ground breakers and between 6 000 and 7 000 volunteers.
Mr van der Linde said that LoveLife received a lot of money. The R27 million allocated by SRSA was more than the total amount allocated to national federations. He knew the background to the organisation. He had had to respond to a last minute call for the free use of the hockey fields in Beaufort West for LoveLife games. LoveLife had no money to pay for the use of the field. The area had been left in a dirty condition. A planned event in
Mr Mdluli replied that the ground breakers were paid a stipend. Volunteers received compensation for money spent on training and transport.
Mr MacKenzie had detected an aggressive feeling towards the LoveLife presenters. SRSA had a small budget compared to other departments, and with that it had to make a difference in the lives of South Africans. He asked if LoveLife was in the business of sport or of educating the youth about the dangers of HIV. R140 million had been received from the three Departments mentioned. It seemed that LoveLife was also receiving money from overseas donors. He asked why no financial statement had been offered. Public money was being spent.
Mr Mackenzie enquired if LoveLife was monitoring the success of its activities. He asked if any of the trainers were HIV positive. He asked if the training had been updated. He asked where the business plan was. He asked what the focus of the discussion on a healthy sexual lifestyle was. He asked if the focus was on abstinence or condoms. He saw billboards at the airports and shopping malls but not in the rural areas. He was not saying that LoveLife was not doing good work. In fact he applauded the work they were doing to address the clear problem the country face with HIV. There was a department to handle sport and SRSA should rather keep this money.
Mr Mdluli replied that audited financial statements were available on LoveLife's website.
Mr S Mmusi (ANC) said the goals of the HIV prevention campaign were clear. He asked if LoveLife had any figures on the infection rate. There was nothing in the presentation. He asked if government was being serious about this issue. He had been at a school where LoveLife had made a presentation. There were games and debates for an hour. After school, the boys who had made the presentation had been like vultures stalking the girls. He asked if there were any disciplinary measures in place. The HIV status of the volunteers was a concern. The volunteers used by LoveLife had to practice what they preached.
Mr Mdluli said that the issue of transparency was being addressed. Quarterly reports were submitted to SRSA. A breakdown of the number of trainers in each province could be provided. LoveLife was very transparent at a global level. They had to submit their quarterly report before the next tranche of funding could be paid. The Keyser foundation was history. It had stopped the previous year. LoveLife was getting the national departments involved. He had met with the Director-General (DG) of the DoH the previous day. LoveLife was ready to work with SRSA on the proper delivery on their mandate.
Mr Scott Burnett, Director Programmes, Games and Youth Development, LoveLife, said that LoveLife had engaged with the Youth Commission. There would soon be a Memorandum of Understanding with the Youth Development Agency. LoveLife was considered to be part of the national youth service structure. There had been well organised events in the days of the United School Sports Association of South Africa (USSASA). The problems had arisen since the demise of USSASA. The national strategy had been changed to holding smaller, regional events.
Mr Burnett said that LoveLife's sports programmes had a specific mandate to assist with HIV prevention. Sport was used as a platform for the campaign. A number of the trainers were HIV positive and were open about this. The content of the training had to be updated continuously. There was a focus on sexual behaviour, not specifically on abstinence or the use of condoms. He asked what they were thinking about. Risk tolerance was needed. Sexual behaviour had to be put in its proper context.
Mr Burnett said that he would send Members documents relating to the impact being made by LoveLife. Studies had been done by the Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) and the Reproductive Health Research Unit (RHRU). Their surveys had shown that there had been a significant change in the sexual behaviour of the youth. The number of respondents who said they had used condoms in their most recent sexual encounter had increased from 57 to 87%. The infection rate of 13 year olds had declined from 6.7% to 4.7%. LoveLife still had to prove causation. There were other factors that could be playing a role. Young people were seeing their family members die due to AIDS-related conditions. Information might have reached saturation level. There were other campaigns such as
Ms Adolph added that the venues for games and the locations of the Y-Centres were published on the website. LoveLife was trying to reach out to the community. In KwaZulu-Natal LoveLife was working with the schools for the disabled. There were challenges in some cases, especially regarding transport. More detail could be provided. Of the 30 000 schools in the country LoveLife was involved with 5 600. It was a small percentage but LoveLife was trying to be visible. Data had to be verifiable.
Ms Gwen September, Programme Manager,
The Chairperson said that another meeting would be called to discuss the financial aspects. Members needed to see the detail. LoveLife was an albatross around the neck of SRSA. Better information was needed. The system of budgeting was changing. The budget would no longer be the prerogative of the Minister. LoveLife's income from other sources would need to be considered.
The CFO replied that the income for 2009 was R203 million. Some of this funding was specific to certain projects.
The Chairperson said that if a building was erected there was a question over whose asset it would become. He needed to know what the value of LoveLife's assets was.
Mr Mdluli said that LoveLife owned three buildings. These were its head office and two of the Y-Centres. All the other properties it used were leased.
The meeting was adjourned.
- We don't have attendance info for this committee meeting
Download as PDF
You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.
See detailed instructions for your browser here.