South African Football Association (SAFA) had been invited to the meeting to brief the Committee. It was noted that the 2015/16 Annual Report had not yet been signed off so that the results that would be presented summarised the performance in 2014/15.
At the outset, Committee Members questioned the absence of SAFA President Dr D Jordaan, pointing out that he had not attended any of the Parliamentary meetings with the SAFA delegation in the past year. When they asked why Dr Jordaan could not attend the meeting this time around, they firstly received a challenge from the Vice President who asserted that the delegation would be able to deal with any queries, but did not receive a satisfactory answer as to why Dr Jordaan was not present. As a mark of protest, the UDM and one DA Member left the meeting. Other Members later expressed their concern that this route was followed.
SAFA was essentially the master licensor for football in South Africa and its relationship with other bodies, leagues, academics, intermediaries and judicial panelists was summarised. SAFA had undergone significant reform in its leadership, governance, and participation so that the organisation was in line with the new structures and rules of FIFA. It was pointed out that FIFA was undergoing restructuring and that SAFA had made a number of suggestions for improvement, which included reforming leadership, governance, participation and promoting women's sport. Internally, SAFA had also addressed its own governance, achieving better clustering of inter-related committees to reduce overlap and it had cut down significantly on its expenditure,although this had seen a rise with the Brazil efforts.
A large part of the presentation was devoted to lack of transformation in football and in particular women's football. A women’s professional league had still not been established, which was crucial to promote it and keep players motivated year-round. A professional league would help to improve their success rate in international competitions. The full report on the performance of the country's athletes overall and in football was still awaited. SAFA was transformation as being an issue broader than racial , touching also on the economics, sport transformation by developing the game and playing, governance, administration and gender points. SAFA had recognised its failings to date in the gender area but was trying its best to transform. It would be placing more emphasis on school sport to support the Sports and Recreation Plan.
SAFA then gave a brief presentation on the Rio Games results, saying that the main aims for the Olympic Games were to survive the group stage, play the quarter final, go on to the semifinal, and at least win a bronze medal. The men's team did not make it past the qualifiers.
Members asked if there were plans for a professional league of Banyana Banyana, wanted an update on the discussions between SAFA and high schools, requested comment on the performance of the teams, and the timeframe for setting up a professional women's league, and commented that more support was needed for children in rural areas, and more support for weak infrastructure there too. . SAFA was asked why it did not employ people with disabilities. Members asked why women's football was not receiving equal finance from sponsors and why financing that SAFA received could not be split equally, and the sources of financing given in the presentation. Members asked for a comparison of the amounts paid to the women's and the men's team and an outline of where the development leagues were, and the difference in the costs for preparation for the Rio games. SAFA suggested that the Committee should assist the women's professional league, but the Chairperson countered that this was not appropriate 22 years after democracy and that SAFA itself should be more proactive.
Mr D Bergman (DA) asked why Dr D Jordaan, President, SA Football Association (SAFA) was not present with his delegation.
Mr E Shishana, Vice President, SAFA felt offended that Mr Bergman was seemingly undermining the ability of the delegation to present and answer any of the questions that the Committee would have relating to the presentation.
Mr M Filtane (UDM) agreed with Mr Bergman that t was important for Dr Jordaan, as President of SAFA, to attend the meeting, and said that when Committee members ask questions the delegation should not get offended.
The Chairperson asked the Committee Members to accept the apology from the SAFA President in the interests of proceeding with the meeting but also expressed her displeasure that Dr Jordaan was not in attendance, and hoped that this would be followed up.
Ms D Manana (ANC) asked that Members accept the apology to allow the Committee to proceed.
Mr P Moteka (EFF) asked that Mr Shishana give members the proper reason why Dr Jordaan was not in attendance.
Mr S Ralegoma (ANC) suggested that the presentation be given and if Members felt any answers were not adequate, the Committee could ask for the President of SAFA to come to the next meeting.
The Chairperson once again asked that members put their feelings aside and attend to the agenda for the meeting.
Mr D Bergman (DA) and Mr M Filtane (UDM) left the meeting, after expressing their disquiet that Mr Shishana had not given them a valid reason why Dr Jordaan had not flown down with the SAFA delegation. They maintained that they would not listen to a SAFA briefing unless Dr Jordaan was present.
Mr M Malatsi (DA) added that Mr Bergman’s question had not been answered, and that the Committee was being given excuses instead of reasons.
Mr P Moteka (EFF) asked that the meeting continue because the delegation from SAFA was already in attendance and it was not wise to waste taxpayer money.
The Chairperson said that wasting time over an apology could not continue further. The Committee was present to receive a briefing from SAFA and would not waste taxpayer money by sending the delegation away and requesting they present at a later stage.
SA Football Association 2014/15 Annual Report briefing
Mr Gronie Hluyo, Chief Financial Officer, SAFA presented the financial report of SAFA. He noted that the 2015-16 Annual Report would only be ready, audited and signed off by 24 September 2016., so this presentation spoke to the 2014/15 Annual Report.
The SAFA group was comprised of SAFA itself; the Africa Cup of Nations 2013 Local Organising Committee South Africa NPC; the SAFA Development Agency; and the SA Infrastructure Development Foundation.
SAFA's revenue decreased from R324 million in 2012 to R208 million in 2013. However, revenue had been on a rapid increase from 2014 to 2015 ,and was currently sitting at R330 million. SAFA's expenses for 2012 were R380 million and then took a drop in 2013 because the organisation realized they could not sustain the growth with that spending. It had again been slowly increasing, especially since the organisation brought in Brazil and had increased junior activity in the under 23 and 20 teams for qualifying for international tournaments. In 2012 SAFA had a deficit of -R56 million and in 2013 it had a deficit of -R46 million. In 2014 it reported a surplus of R10 million. In 2015 the surplus increased to R46 million. Currently SAFA's reserves were sitting at R52 million.
The national team expenditure for senior teams dropped from R78 million in 2014 to R74 million in 2015. Competition expenditure decreased from R25 million in 2014 to R23 million in 2015. Development programmes dropped from R52 million to R46 million. Governance expenses dropped from R16 million to R10 million. Administration and Operating costs were the highest expenditure with R112 million for the 2014 financial year and R118 million for 2015.
Mr Dennis Mumble, Chief Executive Officer, SAFA presented on the governance structure of the Association. The current governance structure of SAFA consisted of a National Executive Committee (NEC) which convened four times a year and received reports from the Standing Committees, SAFA Secretariat and the SAFA Development Agency. The SAFA administrative structure was headed by the CEO, and the Chief Operating Officer (COO) reported to the CEO on the football division; football business division; corporate services division; and the finance division.
SAFA was essentially the master licensor for football in South Africa and headed the provincial, regional, and associate members; players; clubs; coaches; referees; 11-a side leagues; 5-a side leagues; beach soccer leagues; academics; intermediaries; and judicial panelists.
SAFA statutes comprised of the national, regional and standard statutes; local structures; and provincial executive committee standard statutes. SAFA abides by the rules with regard to competitions, meetings and application of statutes.
The FIFA organisation was currently undergoing restructuring and SAFA hoped to adapt to the new structure that would prevail and be in line with their rules.
SAFA had proposed a set of principles for reform at FIFA, namely;
- Reforming the leadership of the association so that principles of leadership would affect cultural changes at FIFA;
- Governance structures had been reformed to establish a new FIFA council, establish a fully independent audit and compliance, establish a development committee to allocate funds to individual projects, set term limits for all council members and establish an independent compensation committee;
- Participation of the association had been reformed by adjusting to principles to foster greater participation of member associations and stakeholders in FIFA, including the promotion of women in football and promotion of gender and equality.
Mr Mumble also addressed the issue of transformation, and emphasised that he was speaking not only to race transformation but also inclusivity of all members of society. He said that SAFA constantly engaged in seven areas of transformation, which he summarised as:
- Sport transformation by changing the way they develop their play
- Administration, in the way they manage the association
He expanded on the gender aspects, saying that SAFA was not happy with the way it had to date managed gender transformation. SAFA recognised that it was a big organisation and it was doing its best to transform and achieve gender equality;
Finally, national priorities were outlined in the sports and recreation plan. SAFA intended to roll out schools football far more widely, instead of the previous structure and organised way that only involved approximately 6 000 schools nationwide. There was now a goal to have schools football in 24 000 schools within the next two years.
Rio Games Banyana Banyana preparation and performance
Ms Anastasia Tsichlas, Chairperson: Technical Committee, NEC, SAFA, presented on the preparation and performance of the national teams for the 2016 Rio Olympic Games. Banyana Banyana had qualified, in November 2015, to play in the 2016 Rio Olympic Games. Preparation commenced in three blocks. The first block ran from November 2015 to March 2016 for the Cyprus Cup 2016. The second block was from March 2016 to end of April 2016 for the AWC qualification. Block 2 ran from May 2016 to August 2016 for the Rio Olympic games 2016. The aims for the Olympic Games were to survive the group stage, play the quarter final, go on to the semifinal, and at least win a bronze medal.
The men’s football team qualified for the 2016 Rio Olympic football tournament ,after successfully defeating their counterparts. The top three finishers of the African continent; Nigeria, Algeria and South Africa, respectively qualified for the 2016 Rio Olympic Games. This was the first time that the men's team had qualified for the Olympic Games after failed attempts for the 2004, 2008, and 2012 Olympics.
Total costs for the national teams in preparation for the Olympic Games were R27.10 million for Banyana Banyana, and R8.97 million for the men's team.
The Chairperson asked SAFA to present on the report from the Commission for Gender equality.
Mr Mumble indicated that the report was long and very detailed and SAFA therefore provided two copies for the Committee Members to read at their leisure.
Mr Moteka said that he was not happy that SAFA had not at least summarised the report from the Commission for Gender Equality (CGE) recommendations.
Mr Malatsi said that it would be futile to engage and ask questions on the report that the Members had not had a chance to read, or engaged with. He requested that SAFA present on this at a future meeting when the questions would be more meaningful.
The Chairperson agreed and opened up the floor for Members to ask questions on the SAFA presentation but added that they could also ask questions based on the report from the CGE.
Mr L Ntshayisa (AIC) asked if SAFA had plans for what the professional league of Banyana Banyana was doing, so that money would not necessarily be wasted.
Mr M Malatsi (DA) asked the SAFA for an update on the issue of jurisdiction between SAFA and model C high schools.
Mr Malatsi also asked what SAFA’s review was of the performance of the men's team at the Olympic Games in Rio. The goal was to achieve a bronze medal yet they did not get past the qualifier stage.
Mr Malatsi asked what the timeframe was for setting up a professional women's league.
The Chairperson added that the Committee had a problem with the issue of schools sports and was glad that SAFA was talking with the Department of Basic Education. She asked why the relationship between SAFA and the Department of Basic Education was not yet fruitful.
Mr P Moteka (EFF) asked why children in rural areas were not receiving support from SAFA, because they end up paying their own way for participation.
Mr Moteka said that he was surprised that SAFA only got a report from the CGE after four years. He asked why SAFA did not appear to be paying enough serious attention to women's football.
Mr Moteka asked how SAFA was taking the issue of gender equality seriously with regards to sponsorships, because finances for football were centered more on men's football than women's football. He also enquired what the basic rate of pay was for Banyana Banyana football players, and how this compared to the pay for Bafana Bafana players. He wondered why, so many years later, there was still no professional league for women's football.
Mr Moteka asked why SAFA was not employing people with disabilities.
Ms D Manana (ANC) asked why women's football was not receiving equal finance from sponsors since the financing came via SAFA who could surely split it equally between men's football and women's football.
Ms Manana asked what SAFA was doing about the weak infrastructure, especially in rural areas. She also asked what SAFA would do to tackle its challenges.
Mr S Ralegoma (ANC) said it would have been useful in the presentation if SAFA could have indicated its sources of income.
Mr Ralegoma asked how the Banyana Banyana and Bafana Bafana players were paid after returning from Rio. He furthermore wanted to know where their development leagues were situated.
Mr Ralegoma said that he hoped SAFA was transforming in line with the geopolitical alignment as well, since municipalities had split even further.
The Chairperson said that if the Committee's questions and comments might be perceived as harsh, it must be remembered that most of the Members of the Committee had themselves been sportsmen and women and were deeply committed to seeing serious transformation in sports.
The Chairperson particularly thanked Mr Moteka (EFF) and Mr Malatsi (DA) for not leaving the meeting as the other opposition parties had done, and emphasised that, whatever their political alignments, Committee Members had a job to ensure that they oversee sports in South Africa.
Mr Mumble said that when SAFA put together the Vision 2022 programme, it had come up with many ways to change the game of football and then devised a plan. The two areas that would help SAFA achieve this were, firstly, having South Africa be in the top three in the continent, and by increasing the number of people playing the sport. This would only be achieved by expanding into schools sports. The second area was to increase the participation of women's football to reach transformation targets.
Mr Mumble said that SAFA had appointed a new marketing agent who felt competent to secure an active women's sponsor. This would take time, but was highly needed. The expenses for preparation for Banyana Banyana were much higher than for Bafana Bafana because the Banyana Banyana team do not receive enough game time exposure and therefore require more technical coaching.
Ms Tsichlas said that a professional league was an entity and SAFA was trying to gauge how this would compare with FIFA’s guidelines. The biggest problem was finances. SAFA had set out detailed plans for how much players and coaches would be paid. SAFA was trying to promote women coaches coaching women's football.
Ms Ria Ledwaba, NEC member, SAFA, said that the professional league was something that would make the Banyana Banyana team motivated, because the current situation did not see the women's team receiving promotions and delegations after playing at national level year in and year out. SAFA was persistently engaged every year in trying to secure a sponsor for women's league.
Ms Ledwaba said that SAFA had invested millions of rands in the University of South Africa (UNISA) to try and identify players from all age groups in the UNISA academy. She asked if the Committee could assist in the matter of the professional league.
The Chairperson said that the Committee could not still be asked to assist a women’s professional league 22 years into democracy. This was something SAFA need to be proactive on
Mr Shishana indicated that SAFA was doing quite a lot to assist women's football. It had even dedicated large amounts of finances in preparing the women's team for the Rio Olympics. The biggest challenge remained finances.
Mr Shishana said that some sponsors came with their specific terms for sponsorship, so monies could not be simply partitioned to fund other divisions within SAFA.
Mr Shishana stressed the importance of having a women's professional league in order to motivate players. Some of the challenges were also cultural and social, since football was generally a male sport, and not all women want to play the sport, or their parents may be hesitant to let their minor daughters play football instead of other female sports.
Mr Mumble said that the review of the report from the teams that played at the Rio Olympics would take place on 10 September 2016. He said that SAFA was not happy with the performance of the teams at the Olympics.
Mr Mumble said that most of the national teams were not sponsored ,since the sponsorship market wanted a commercial plan on development. SAFA was trying to initiate a plan that generated own revenue instead of relying on sponsors.
Mr Mumble said that one of the key challenges in the model C schools was the conduct of the governing bodies of the schools with regard to implementing football programmes in their schools.
Mr Mumble said that SAFA had been engaging the CGE previously and extended their views. The fundamental disagreement that SAFA leadership had had with CGE was when the Commission had tried to impose a member onto the SAFA organisation without following proper protocol.
Mr Mumble said that when SAFA had set targets and deadlines in the past, it had not been able to meet those targets, so it had refrained from setting further deadlines for their targets but was rather just working consistently toward the target.
Mr Mumble said that transporting players to games was another challenge that SAFA was facing. Transport was offered to national teams, but at club levels it was not possible, since there were on average 4 000 games played on any given weekend, and having a fleet of 4 000 vehicles was far too costly. Using bakkies and taxis were alternative forms of transportation.
Mr Mumble said that SAFA was now serving on the schools sports joint team.
Mr Mumble said that SAFA had reduced its committees into clusters of interrelated committees, therefore making the management of the organisation much better.
Mr Mumble said SAFA did not have a reason why it did not have any persons with disabilities employed by SAFA but it was something that management would work towards.
The Chairperson said that time was running out, and reiterated that the Committee wasted a lot of time at the beginning dealing with the absence of the SAFA Chairperson. She said that disagreements could be positive but she thought that walking out of a meeting because of a disagreement was not professional.
The Chairperson said that Banyana Banyana had shown that they were able to play football as well as the men's team.
Mr Malatsi asked why SAFA was striving for equality with tournaments that took place four years ago. He also asked why SAFA had not closed the income gap in women's teams since they did not play as many games as the men's team.
Mr Moteka said the R9 million for men's football preparation, in relation to the R27 million spent on preparing the women's team for Rio, was not a fair comparison because men's football benefits on a longer term basis, while women football does not.
Mr Mumble reiterated that sponsors had their own requirements for offering sponsorship and this was not something over which SAFA had any control.
Mr Mumble said that players did not get paid from their clubs when they honored a national call to play for the country, but rather got paid from bonuses for their performance.
The Chairperson thanked the SAFA delegation for their concise presentation, as well as the media for the role they play.
The meeting was adjourned.
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.