Budget; SA Sports Commission; Broadcasting Sports Events of National Interest: briefing

Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report


21 June 2000

Documents handed out:
Draft budget of National Department of Sport and Recreation
National Department of Sport and Recreation presentation on 2001 budget (See Appendix 1)
Report by South African Sports Commission (See Appendix 2)
Committee Report on Broadcasting of Sports Events of National Interest (See Appendix 3)

A committee delegation will meet with the NOCSA president and the Minister on 26 June 2000. Both the Department of Sport and Recreation and the newly formed South African Sports Commission complained of inadequate budget allocation to perform their mandates. The Committee Report on Broadcasting of Sports Events of National Interest was approved.

A joint meeting of this committee with the Portfolio Committee on Communications is scheduled for 2 August before a public hearing takes place.

Committee Progress Report
- It was ascertained that the Committee [Mr Frollick (UDM) and Mr Clelland (DP)] had responded to correspondence from the South African Rugby Football Union (SARFU) - It was decided as an urgent priority that a delegation of the Portfolio Committee meet with Mr Sam Ramsamy the following Monday 26 June 2000 when he would be meeting with the Minister for Sport and Recreation in Pretoria. The Committee agreed that Ms Bhengu (ANC), Mr Mlangeni (ANC), Mr Swart (DP) and Mr Morkel (NP) would make up the delegation.

Budget Briefing by Department of Sport and Recreation
Mr Denver Hendriks, a director of the National Department of Sport and Recreation, presented a draft budget proposal for 2001 to the Portfolio Committee. He said that only after further consultation with the macro sports bodies and federations could a final draft be drawn up. He assured the Portfolio Committee that the final budget would be ready for the 30 June 2000 submission date to the Treasury.

Mr Hendriks stressed that if his department is to address the backlog in Sport and Recreation in disadvantaged areas and increase competitiveness at an international level there would have to be a greater allocation of resources to Sport and Recreation. He described the current budget as falling well short of current requirements. He expressed hope that additional funding would accrue from the proceeds of the national lottery. Mr Hendriks detailed the priorities of the National Department of Sport and Recreation. He explained how the likely social outcomes could serve as motivation for securing greater funding.

A brief synopsis was given of the proposed three-year budget (Medium Term Expenditure Framework). The inadequacy of the MTEF budget allocation for achieving the objectives of the Department was noted as expensive events such as the Commonwealth Games 2003 in Manchester and the All Africa Games 2004 in Nigeria have to be incorporated into the proposed three-year budget. Coupled with this, a new function of promoting sport at school and tertiary level in partnership with the Ministry of Education was added. The figures presented were not final and were liable to change before the final submission.

Questions and comments
Mr Ferreira (IFP) commented that the budget report was depressing and that he did not dispute that Government funding was not sufficient. He went further to say that the Committee had been far too silent on the matter despite the moral dilemma of Government allocating funds to other causes. Mr Ferreira asked the question as to what money the National Department of Sport and Recreation and the Sports Commission would be receiving as a beneficiary of the National lottery.

Mr Frollick (UDM) inquired as to how priority areas for funds from the Lotto would be decided and by whom.

The Department replied that it was not clear as to what percentage of Lotto proceeds would be allocated to Sport and Recreation. Further the lottery proceeds are not meant to be budget supplementing. The Director added that it seems as if the high salaries that sports stars command was being equated to relative prosperity in Sport and Recreation which was clearly not the case. He stated that the majority of the budget is allocated to the bigger federations like soccer, cricket and rugby while the rest of the sporting codes often have to support themselves to be able to represent South Africa. It was noted that the lottery agency would have their own distribution agency and that the Department or Sports Commission would not have much influence in directing that funding. Mr Mlangeni (ANC) added that the Committee should look to other countries that had National lotteries to assess their methods of distribution.

Ms Xingwana (ANC) asked how much the Ministry of Education was contributing to the task of improving school and tertiary level sport from their budget and whether sport formed part of the curriculum.

The Department said that the Ministry of Education was making no contribution from its budget to the initiative of improving sport and recreation at school and tertiary level. He hastened to add that this function fell to the Provincial Governments as well and as a result did not have a uniform practice throughout the nine provinces. He agreed that budgetary allocation should be made from the Ministry of Education.

Mr Morkel (NP) raised the question as to how funds from the public and private sector were distributed for the various sporting codes and whether these figures had been quantifiably collected and were available.

It was agreed that some form of analysis was required. It was however clear that private funding for Sport and Recreation did not occur as a result of social responsibility but rather that it was motivated by advertising, market share and profit. It is for this reason that the larger sporting codes receive sponsorship from the private sector while the smaller codes suffer.

South African Sports Commission
The CEO of the South African Sports Commission, Dr Phahla presented an overview of the Commission’s formation and progress thus far. He explained that the Commission had been established in the second half of 1999 after the election of the current Minister of Sport and Recreation. In line with the Sports Commission Act nine members were elected to the Commission while an amalgamation of staff from the National Sports Council in Johannesburg and the Department of Sport and Recreation in Pretoria made up the remaining members. The CEO explained that a building had been occupied in Centurion to house the Commission since April 2000 as it proved a viable area for staff travelling from both Johannesburg and Pretoria.

The function of the Sports Commission is the planning and development of sports priorities overall and the driving force to make South Africa a world class competitor. Dr Phahla stated that the Commission’s current budget allocation fell well short of the funds needed for achieving these mandates. He also stated the difficulty the Commission was experiencing in freeing up funds earmarked for start-up expenditure that had been rolled over to the end of the financial year by the Department of Sport and Recreation. The CEO explained that the Commission should find partners in the private sector to make its plans work but this too required an investment on the part of Government.

Questions and comments
Ms Xingwana (ANC) asked whether the vision and projected budget were viable for the South African Sports Commission in light of the lack of public sector expenditure.

Dr Phahla replied that it was a National body and that the Provinces would play a co-ordinating role in the organisation of sport. He explained that fundraising was a separate sub-unit of the Sports Commission and would provide attractive incentives to the private sector in the form of community based projects.

Ms Xingwana (ANC) inquired as to the representivity of the Sports Commission.

The CEO stated that of the ten core personnel, seven were women.

Broadcasting of Sports Events of National Interest: Committee Report
The Report was approved by the Committee. Page six of the report was corrected to read "three hours delay between live and delayed broadcasts".

The report received the full support of the IFP (Mr Ferreira) and the ANC (Mr Chauke).

Mr Clelland (DP) expressed support for the document with reservation:
- the report omitted any reference to the relevant act.
- the recommendation that the pay channel should have a repeat
Broadcast during the open time of events not broadcast by any of the other broadcasters (point four in the summary of recommendations).

Mr Morkel (NP) expressed similar concern about point four of the committee recommendations. He gave the report his support subject to further discussions with the sporting federations and major broadcasters. Mr Morkel added that the summary of proposals at the end of the report did not amount to consensus but were a collection of the different views of the parties to the Committee.

Mr Frollik (UDM) recommended that highlights packages be considered as an option for pay channels. He accepted the report.

The Chair, Ms Bhengu, voiced her opinion that the report did not concern the Act as mentioned by Mr Clelland (DP). It rather concerned the impact of what selling the rights to broadcast sports events has on the poor masses and that its relation to the Act was secondary.

It was agreed that at the next committee meeting on 1 August 2000 the Sport Commission's CEO and Directors of the Department be present. The meeting is scheduled for 1 August 2000. A joint meeting of this committee with the Portfolio Committee on Communications is scheduled to reach common understanding before targetted stakeholder hearings on broadcasting sporting events of national interest begins on 8 August.

The report was accepted and the meeting was adjourned.

Appendix 1

21 June 2000

Thank you for the opportunity to address you here this morning, and thank you to the Chairperson for the one day postponement that has allowed us a bit more time to complete this presentation. We received inputs on the MTBF from certain, but not all of our clients on Monday afternoon only, and while we understand that you did not necessarily require the exact detail of figures at this presentation, it did allow us to give you a more complete picture of the financial state of affairs in Sport and Recreation. Allow me to stress, therefore, that the picture that I will present is by no means the final one. I undertake, however, to provide the Chairperson with a copy of the final draft on or before 30 June when we have to submit our proposal.

· We have been complaining over the years of the limited budget that we have been receiving from treasury which. this year, amounted to 0,025% of the total national budget. On a per capita basis, that translates into an expenditure of some R1.20 for the year. Even when taking into consideration the allocation to Sport and Recreation in the provinces it is abundantly clear that government can hardly make an impact in this domain with such limited resources. It is unlikely that we will make any impact on the backlogs in Sport and Recreation in disadvantaged communities in particular that will have to be addressed. Moreover, it places us at a severe disadvantage with regard to our competitiveness internationally. In a country such as the Netherlands, for example, a budget of R625 million is available for Sport and Recreation in a country with some 19 million people.

· In our discussions with Treasury recently, we have become aware of a recognition of our plight and have seen the first signs of a willingness to consider proposals for increasing the baseline. We trust that our hopes will not be dashed again, and that the Portfolio Committee will be able to assist us in securing the additional resources.

· Hopefully the national lottery will also contribute to providing some relief.

· We are of the opinion that the objectives that we have set for ourselves as Sport and Recreation in our White Paper are as relevant today as when they were first drafted two years ago, namely:
· Increasing levels of participation;
· Raising the profile of sports in the face of competing priorities, especially amongst decision makers;
· Maximising the possibility of success of our athletes and teams internationally;
· Putting sport and recreation at the forefront of efforts to address issues of national importance.

Our priorities, similarly, are as relevant. In particular the following correlate well with government priorities:

· Providing funds for the upgrading of basic multipurpose sports facilities in disadvantaged areas;
Alleviating poverty
Ö Providing a safety net for the most vulnerable in our society
Ö Rural development and urban renewal strategies
Ö Strengthening social partnerships and community participation

Developing the human resource potential
Human resource development

Motivating the community to develop active lifestyles;
Mediating the impact and slowing down the rate of spread of HJV/AIDS

Developing a high performance programme to prepare our athletes for major competitions;
International co-operation and the marketing of South Africa

To ensure that sport and recreation bodies meet their affirmative action commitments;
Eliminating all forms of discrimination against women;
Ö Combating racism

To develop a code of ethics for sport and recreation in South Africa;
Combating corruption
Ö Combating racism

To develop an international relations policy, concert with national government policy.
Regional integration through the institutions SADC as a platform for launching the Renaissance
International co-operation and the marketing of South Africa

In order to deliver on the above mentioned needs, Department of Sport and Recreation (DSR), now designated Sport and Recreation South Africa (SARSA) established various programmes and projects. The creation of the South African Sports Commission (SASC) however, resulted in a re-definition of the role of SARSA and the relocation of the majority of its programmes, primarily related to the delivery or line function responsibility, to the SASC

Accordingly, the DSR has been reduced to two programmes namely:
· Programme 1: Administration: that is responsible the overall management of the Department;
· Programme 2: Sport and Recreation: that renders support service to the SASC, the SA Institute for Drug Free Sport, the National Olympic Committee of South Africa, National Sport and Recreation federations other service providers. It is also responsible International Sport and Recreation inter-government relations, policy formulation, monitoring evaluation, and for rendering administrative support services.

· The DSR is wary of duplicating the roles of other structures. The SASC, in particular, was established V a view to eliminating the duplication of roles of the former DSR and the National Sports Council.

· The DSR is aware also of the need for establish additional programmes and or projects, the location which will be discussed and clarified with the SASC These include, amongst others:

Facility provision: The facility creation program that came to an end on 31 March 2000 was funded through the RDP. Scant provision is presently being made to address the backlog in facilities that amount to some R5 billion. In various fora, including this one great concern has been expressed about implications of ending this programme, the most visible contribution, limited though it may have be( by the DSR to date. Moreover, the project can contribute directly and indirectly to poverty alleviation and various other government priorities.
· School and Tertiary sport: The DSR and the Department of Education have held discussions about the revival of school and tertiary sport and physical education that have both been left "homeless" as it were in terms of a relationship with a national government department. Broad agreement has been reached, the details of which is in the process of being finalised. It is widely believed that the revival of school and tertiary sport as well as physical education in our institutions of learning will contribute considerably toward addressing various Departmental and national priorities.

· New DSR proposals
· The needs of the SASC, Drug Free Sport, Macrobodies, and Sport and Recreation service providers:
As outlined in the Sport and Recreation White Paper, the DSR has only been able to meet the needs of Sport and Recreation service providers, its delivery agents, in a ratio of less than R1 for every R8 requested. We trust that with the allocation for the coming three years, this ratio will improve. Moreover, the DSR, and now the SASC as well, has generally had to operate on a crisis management basis when it comes to supporting federations wishing to host international, continental, or regional competitions in South Africa. To assist us in solving the problem, we have requested these clients to provide us with realistic proposals for the following three years that include budgets for the
hosting of such events locally. This we have built into the MTEF budgets that will be presented to Treasury at the end of this month and that we would like to discuss with you today.

· We are in the process of compiling the MTEF schedules that have to be submitted to treasury by the end of this month (30 June). I would like to make use of this opportunity to give you an indication of what we shall be presenting to them, and request not only your inputs and advice, but also your support in ensuring that we do increase our resource base to enable us to make the impact that we believe we are capable of making through the medium of Sport and Recreation.

Appendix 2

Sports and Recreation Portfolio Committee
Report on Broadcasting of Sports Events of National Interest
13 June 2000

The poor masses of South Africa who have supported sports for a number of years are finding it more and more difficult to see Sports of National Interest due to the fact that most of these are broadcast on the pay channel. Only those members of our society who can afford decoders and subscription fees are privileged to watch important sports events. Spectators no longer fill stadiums. Young people who have an interest in sports are denied the opportunity to watch their heroes and heroines and roles models. The Portfolio Committee is of the opinion that the country runs a risk of promoting class division within the sports fraternity by allowing the trend of selling broadcasting rights of sports events to develop.

South Africa has a non-discriminatory Constitution and the Portfolio Committee on Sport and Recreation has a responsibility to influence the implementation of changes that are in line with the Constitution.

The portfolio committee has made an observation on the power of TV. The SABC does not prioritise sports as they should and does not budget enough for sports. There was also a delay in getting the broadcasting rights for the test matches in India. Sports federations are also inconsistent on development and selling of broadcasting rights.

The main objectives
The Portfolio Committee wants to find a solution on the matter in order to bring about a balance between the interests of the public and the financial interests of the broadcasters and sports federations. The interest of the Committee is to develop the children of South Africa.

No particular broadcaster is supported by the Committee, but would like to facilitate a situation where broadcasters would reach an agreement on a fair range of events to broadcast.

The Process
The Portfolio Committee had the initial discussion on this issue on the 8th February 2000. The Committee agreed that this was an issue which they have to deal with and come up with a recommendation to the Minister of Sports and Recreation. In addition, the Minister of Sports and Recreation also held meetings with the three Television broadcasters, namely, the SABC, M-Net and e.TV. The Ministry is now convinced that they are willing to collaborate on the issue of broadcasting rights of Sports Events of National Interest. While M.Net is beginning to see the benefits of what is being raised, the SABC agrees on paying for broadcasting rights.

The Committee then invited submissions from all parties on this issue. Written submission made by:

- The African National Congress
- The Democratic Party
- The New National Party
- The Inkatha Freedom Party
- The United Democratic Movement

Inputs submitted to the Committee can be summarised as follows:

1. The African National Congress

The ANC proposes that:

- Sport Events of National Interest be broadcast by Broadcasters (M-Net, SABC, e.TV AND radio Stations)

- The pay Channel, M-Net, should broadcast these events during open time

- Radio stations should also broadcast the Sports Events of National Interest.

The ANC has identified 3 different categories of sports events which they feel should be included in the list of sports Events of National Importance.

Category 1
All pool games, quarter-finals, semi finals and finals of:

- Rugby World Cup
- Cricket World Cup
- Soccer World Cup
- International Women Soccer World Cup
- International Paralympic Championship
- International Netball Championship
- International Basket Ball Championship
- Summer Olympic games
- Commonwealth Games
- All Africa Games (at least opening and closing events)
- Africa Cup of Nations
- Athletics, including Comrades Marathon
- Rothmans July Handicap
- J & B Metropolitan Handicap
- Super 12 Rugby Championship
- International Boxing

Category 2
Events involving the following S.A. National Team events:

- The National soccer teams including women under 23
- The National hockey team
- The National Rugby team
- The National Cricket team
- Paralympics
- S.A Open Golf Champions
- Tennis events played internationally and in South Africa in the Davis Cup for men and the Federation Cup for women

Category 3
Domestic events:

- The Bobsave cup
- The Rothmans cup
- The Currie cup
- The Standard Bank Cricket

2. The Democratic Party

The DP believes that everyone should be afforded the opportunity to view sport events of national interest.


- Commercial broadcasters have a right to purchase broadcast rights on the open market. The party believes that money spent on broadcast rights is used in some cases, to finance much needed federations, and in other cases, to finance development programmes.

- Sports events of national interest should be broadcast by a national broadcaster as either a delayed broadcast or a "highlights" package and that the holder of the primary broadcasting rights should be compensated.

- Channels should still compete for primary broadcasting rights and where possible, and by mutual agreement, sports events of national interest should be shown by the public broadcaster. This could be done through highlights or a delayed broadcast.

The list of events
The list of such sports events should be made in consultation between the broadcasters and the Minster of Sports and Recreation and the Minster of Communications.

3. United Democratic Movement

The UDM supports the principle that all South Africans have the democratic right to benefit fully as a collective viewer-ship in the broadcast of sport events.

- The UDM believes that the broadcasters should reach a consensus and strike a balance between financial considerations and the responsibility towards social transformation in the country.

- The party proposes that Primary-broadcasting rights should apply during quarterfinals, semi-finals and the final stages of tournaments involving South African teams.

- Secondary broadcast rights should apply to all pool games involving South African teams. Delayed broadcasts or highlights could be considered when it is impossible to show live events.

List of events of national importance as identified by the UDM
The UDM suggests that the Rugby Vodacom Cup, Cape Argus Tour and the Professional Soccer League (PSL) should be included in the proposed list of events of national importance and development nature.

4. Inkatha Freedom Party

The IFP supports the increased access for communities that cannot afford subscription broadcast services to television and radio broadcasts of national sports events.

In its submission, the party refers the committee to Section 30 (7) of the Broadcasting Act of 1999. It stipulates that

"subscription broadcasting services may not acquire exclusive rights for the broadcast of national sports events, as identified in the public interest from time to time by the Authority in consultation with the Minister and the Minister of Sports and in accordance with the regulations determined by the Authority through a public process".

The party believes that the use of the term "national interest" is technically incorrect and should be replaced by "national sporting events in the public interest".

The IFP is of the opinion that the Portfolio Committee should play a non-partisan and independent role as a facilitator for the process of consultation between various stakeholders.

The Party believes that:

- The issue of broadcasting rights can be solved through consultation and negotiations between the Ministry and the relevant broadcasters without infringing the constitutional and commercial rights of any of the stakeholders and the Portfolio Committee should play a non-partisan and independent role as a facilitator for the process and should limit itself to that role at this point.

- Regarding the principle of primary and secondary broadcasting rights, a system and procedure should be designed whereby subscription broadcasters would make secondary broadcasting rights in relation to national sporting events available to non-susbscription broadcasters.

- A fair and reasonable compensation to be paid to subscription broadcasters for secondary rights. This would however not guarantee that non-subscription broadcasters would always show the events in question. The IFP also believes that all non-subscription broadcasters should compete equally for secondary rights based on their financial ability, broadcast requirements and target audience.

List of events
The IFP believes that the decision on the list of sporting events should be left to a public process of consultation and negotiation between the Minister, the IBA and the broadcasters as provided for in Section 30 (7)of the Broadcasting Act of 1999. However, this should not preclude the Portfolio Committee from making certain recommendations to the Minister.

5. The New National Party: Preliminary position

The NNP believes that:

- The SABC as a public broadcaster has not been able to offer sports federations as much revenue as private broadcasters to secure broadcasting rights for certain sports events of national importance.

- With only limited resources allocated to the Budget Vote for Sport, which is partially at their disposal, sports federations cannot meet the resource needs of their development programmes.

- An accurate needs analysis, which takes into account the extent of private funding, (including the sale of broadcasting rights), has not been undertaken to determine a means test of sports federations, especially their development programmes.

- There is no definition of what exactly encompasses the term "sport events of national importance".

- The broadcasting industry convention of selling exclusive rights has not lent itself to facilitate universal access to sport events of national importance

- In an attempt to balance the social and economic imperatives of all stakeholders in sports, free-market principles with social conscience have not been applied throughout the broadcasting industry.


- Delayed broadcasting
The NNP believes that the holder of secondary broadcasting rights should have the opportunity to broadcast an event of national importance at a later time as determined by the outcome of negotiations with the primary holder of the right. The party believes that there should be between 12 and 48 hours delay after the live transmission of the event.

That the holder of the secondary broadcast rights should be charged a fee by the holder of the primary rights as determined in consultation with the sport federation, acting as organiser of that sport event.

- Responsibility of the Public Broadcaster
The NNP is of the opinion that it is incumbent upon the public broadcaster to maximize participation of all South African license holders and that the government has a core responsibility to ensure that the public broadcaster is adequately funded to extend the universal service to them.

- Responsibility of private broadcasters
The Party believes that it is incumbent on the private broadcaster that has secured the primary broadcasting right, to make at least a highlights package of events of national importance available to the public broadcaster at a negotiated fee, to promote universal access.

- Encouraging of Private Broadcasters
The Advertising value attached to the broadcast time of a sports event of national importance will continue to supplement the government funding allocated to the resource needs of such sports federation selling the rights to broadcast that sport event.

Summary of Recommendations
It is widely acknowledged that everyone should have the opportunity to watch sports events of national interest on TV or listen to it on Radio

- Broadcasters should collaborate to find a win-win solution.

- Broadcasters should compete for broadcasting right for sports events of national importance.

- Primary and Secondary rights to be used to make sure that everyone sees the Sports Events of National Interest.

- The pay channel should have a repeat broadcast during the open time of events not broadcast by any of the other broadcasters.

- The holder of Primary rights should be able to sell secondary rights to other broadcasters

- There should be a delay before the holder of the secondary broadcasting rights can show highlights or a repeat of a match.

List of events to be shown
Consensus has to be reached between sporting federations, the broadcasters, the Portfolio Committee and the Minister of Sports in terms of which events has to be shown on TV and the times that they can be shown.

Appendix 3

22 June 2000

The process of setting tip the Commission stated in the 2nd half of 1999 after the elections and the appointment of the new minister of Sport and Recreation.

In line with the provisions of the South African Sports Commission Act, a General Assembly was held in September 1999 in which the Commission was formally established after the election of the 9 elected members and the nomination and. appointment of those who were to be appointed either from provinces or the Ministry and national bodies.

The process of amalgamation of staff started earlier in October 1999 with the migration of the National Sports Council staff from Johannesburg to the Department of Sport and Recreation offices in Pretoria. Following this consultants were engaged to assess the skills, profiles and do interviews with all staff earmarked for the South African Sports Commission to see where they could be placed. This ended tip with the placement of most of the staff on the organogram of the new South African Sports Commission.

A set-up budget was allocated to the South African Sports Commission and a team made up of former National Sports Council staff members started working on Logistics of setting up the Commission. A building was identified in Centurion n order to accommodate both those staying in Johannesburg and those staying in Pretoria as headquarters.

From 1st of April 2000 the work of consolidating the South African Sports Commission moved into top gear with the assumption of duty of the Chief Executive Officer and the movement of staff from the Department of Sport and Recreation offices in Pretoria to Centurion.

The first four weeks in the new headquarters were made unbearable by the fact that the building was incomplete and a lot of building work still had to be done. It again took plus minus eight weeks after moving into the building before Telkom could install telephone lines for us.

As indicated earlier the bulk of the staffing of the South African Sports Commission was done through placements by consultants into the new organogram. A number of critical posts in management and middle management remained vacant after this exercise. Some posts were advertised in February 2000 but filling of the posts had to wait until a Chief Executive Officer was appointed. The process of filling these posts is now ongoing and should be completed by the end of September 2000. The organogram had to be reviewed a few times and a number of posts abolished to stay within the allocated budget.

The work of the Commission is severely hampered by the very meagre budget allocated to it. While the Commission has the overall duty of planning developing sport priorities, seeing to the implementation of such priorities and monitoring the progress of sport development overall, its budget allocation falls far short of these mandates. We are currently also struggling to get the State Expenditure to allocate the funds earmarked for start-Lip which were unfortunately rolled over by the Department of Sports and Recreation at the end of the financial year. Budget figures will give a clearer picture.

At a recent strategic planning workshop we adopted a vision statement which says, "The South African Sports Commission strives to be the power house for developing world-class sport and recreation."

This vision expresses the view that in a few months and years to come the South African Sports Commission would really be the driving force to make South Africa a world class sport competitor. We are convinced that we have within the country enough talent to make this a reality. What is needed is proper planning, implementation of a worked out strategy and its monitoring. We believe that the South African Sports Commission is well placed to be the vehicle through which South African can realised this dream. While we accept that the South African Sports Commission should find partners in the private sector to make its plans work, we are also convinced that without a major investment in this regard by government our plans have very little chance of success.

The Commission has four business units of which one is to service the internal machinery.
1. Corporate Services Unit to look after the internal workings such as financial management, Human Resources Management and general administrative supports.
2. Strategic Support Unit-slide to explain.
3. Peoples Development Unit
4. Organisational Management Unit



No related


No related documents


  • 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.

Share this page: