Public Policy Analysis Workshop

Sports, Arts and Culture

01 April 2003
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.

Meeting report

1 April 2003

Chairperson: MS RN Bhengu (ANC)

Documents handed out:
White Paper: Getting the Nation to Play []

E-mail for following documents:
Introduction to Policy Analysis
Course in Public Policy Analysis: proposed agenda

The Centre for Policy Studies presented a workshop to the Committee on policy formation and the role of the Committee in the implementation and monitoring of such policies.

The facilitators touched on a number of issues, including the goals, objectives and priorities of sports in South Africa. They considered co-operation between the various Departments and closer links on overlapping issues. The South African Sports Commission was in attendance but, due to time constraints, was rescheduled to present the following week.

Presentation by Centre for Policy Studies
Mr Job Mokgoro and Mr Chris Landsberg: Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) presented to the Committee. Mr Mokgoro said that fragmentation in the policy-making environment was prevalent and that there was undermining of government policy with relation to quotas, thus giving the impression that quotas were part of government policy. He also asked who was in charge, given the multiplicity of key role players. Mr Mokgoro said that the policy scene was fragmented and financial responsibility was an interesting aspect. The role of the Committee was to monitor and oversee, and was not a passive but an active role. He asked who was responsible for fostering healthy inter-governmental relations. He asked whether it was the responsibility of the SASC to harness intergovernmental relations for effective policy.

Mr Pango (Sport and Recreation South Africa) asked whether the time had come for deciding the way forward. Serious thought regarding legislation was necessary.

Mr Mokgoro said that the challenge was achieving political coherence for intra-departmental collaboration.

Mr Hendricks (SRSA) pointed out that it was clear the Committee should play a bigger role in policy formation. Fragmentation was a reality, considering the history of a myriad organisations. The new government had made the first attempt to address sport. He said that the White Paper served to streamline roles and responsibilities. Implementing a new dispensation would assist in this process.

Mr Mokgoro said that it was very important to ensure that the necessary institutes and mechanisms are in place to know where the Committee fitted in.

Mr Landsberg began with issues relating to policy formation, oversight and governance. He questioned the Committee's role in dealing with fragmentation. There should be a link between sports and recreation policy and national or foreign policies of government. Concerning fragmentation, he said that it was an opportunity because the government was charged with policy formation, but it remained the responsibility of the Committee to ensure that the government as well as every federation or agency executes sport policy. The Committee was responsible for finding the most coherent and tightly defined policy. Sport should be regarded as a power issue and therefore there were questions as to who was included and excluded.

Mr Landsberg mentioned state-society relations and the need to create the capacity for more people to participate in sports. He emphasised the importance of clear policy to allow the next step of implementation. Government effectiveness could be measured with plans for policy implementation as well as monitoring and evaluating compliance. He explained that there was a contractual relationship with society. Society was described as plural with the potential for violence. He questioned the role of sports and recreation in terms of stabilising society.

Mr Louw (ANC) asked Mr Landsberg to elaborate on the issue of sports and international relations.

Mr Pieterse asked about the impact of political instability on policy execution.

Dr Schoeman (ANC) pointed out that the diversity and pluralism of society resulted in policy implementation being experienced in different ways. He used the example of white people experiencing the effects of affirmative action. He understood why policy was often not very clearly demarcated.

Mr Landsberg said that the ruling party has the mandate to formulate policy. The national interest of the population, irrespective of which party they belonged to, was missing from national debate. He asked whether there was a need to redress policy. The misconception was that the economy is equipped to provide sufficient employment. Mr Landsberg said that democracy was stable and predictable, while intra-party contradictions prevented that society at large be dealt with. This created major implications for the completion of tasks.

Mr Pieterse mentioned participation and said that people neglected their responsibilities even if they received remuneration for their services.

Mr Lucas (IFP) asked if there were solutions to particularly pertinent problems.

Mr Landsberg reiterated that it should be agreed upon whether there was a clear policy or not. He said that the Committee had a constructive role to play in this. The Chair agreed.

Mr Swigelaar (SRSA) referred to Schedule 5 of the Constitution, noting that the activities of provincial structures' were taking place at national level. Mr Mokgoro responded and said that the constraints of the Constitution resulted in this.

Mr Landsberg referred to the Committee's role regarding provinces. The task of national and local government was explained as having to formulate policy, and Mr Landsberg asked where Parliament fitted in and to whom they were accountable.

Mr Swigelaar pointed out that national standards had to be upheld, and therefore the roles of the National Assembly and the National Council of Provinces should also be considered.

Mr Landsberg said that the Committee had a clear mandate to execute national policy. Sports policy tallied with national policy and it should be clearly communicated.

Mr Ncinane (ANC) said that there should be one known White Paper to be referred to and that can unify all structures.

Mr Hendricks pointed out that the revised version contained all the structural changes within the Department of Sport and Recreation and because the original had lapsed, there needed to be a rethink of the old version or an extension thereof.

Mr Landsberg mentioned the affirmative action policy and asked where there was evidence of compliance with it. A key objective was to raise the profile of the Department of Sport and Recreation among decision-makers and this indicated major policy progress. He asked about the impact of sports on society and the key position sports played in image branding. Human resource development was synonymous with job creation. South Africa had an important role in representing Africa.

Mr Mokgoro added that South Africa's role was a clear affirmation of the premises of NEPAD.

Mr Landsberg agreed and said that the challenge remained the integration into every government Department. He regarded sport as essential to moral regeneration. Sport was peaceful and could be played irrespective of fundamental differences between people. Sport should be linked to other Departments and it had a role in contributing to the well being and growth of individuals. He also asked whether the Committee was reaching out to other Committees in this regard.

The Chair commented on ambush marketing and how certain sponsors were lured from sport.

Mr Landsberg compared foreign policy objectives with those of Sports and Recreation, pointing to the correlation between the two. He touched on South Africa's role in opening markets and creating opportunities through an external outreach. Dealing with multi-lateral institutions defined the Committee's major role in increasing co-operation to maximise efficiency.

Mr Landsberg pointed out that this was also an opportunity to enhance accountability. He described sport as a unifying agent, operating in terms of common instead of individual interest. He reiterated that the Committee had the capacity to hold Government accountable.

Mr Pieterse said that sport was permanently on the agenda at South African Local Government Association (SALGA) meetings.

The Chair suggested that a cluster system should be introduced at community level for a more integrated approach so that overlapping issues can be dealt with more efficiently.

Ms Lamani said that the National Council of Provinces (NCOP should be brought on board.

Mr Landsberg explained that democracy itself occurred at local level because people want to see change. Delivery at local level should be on the SALGA agenda at all times and sport could provide assistance in this regard.

Mr Pieterse argued that those at local level had the least clout while those at national level had all the assistance required.

Mr Landsberg urged that there be a change in mindsets because delivery occurred at local level. He pointed out that Africanism in South Africa had been imprinted in the last four year and that sport will become more strategic and central in society. He described South African society as one looking for quick fixes and urged that people be realistic about where and what they are.

Mr Ncinane suggested that a meeting be convened within 30 days to review the results of the workshop and discuss the formation of policy. He also said that the stakeholders mentioned should be present. It was crucial to discuss the clarity of policy.

The Chair added that another important issue was enhancing of the process of developing the Sports Transformation Charter.

Mr Ntuli asked whether the same workshop could be conducted on Cabinet level.

The Chair answered that the workshop was more suited to Chairpersons of Committees so as to empower the underlying structures. Functions taken to local or provincial level would result in a loss of focus in terms of advancing with sport.

Mr Landsberg said that the role of the facilitator was to research issues of policy formation. The need to work with other Committees was apparent, and he suggested the drawing up of a four year programme wherein combined or individual Committees continued this kind of work in a consolidated attempt.

The Chair agreed and said there should be a close working relationship with policy-makers for the Sports Transformation Charter regarding policy formation.

Mr Landsberg said that CPS would be more than willing to facilitate such a meeting, but that it remained the prerogative of the people involved.

The Chair said that the Committee's role was clear enough and would lead the process.

Mr Mlangeni (ANC) was asked to thank Mr Landsberg and Mr Mokgoro on behalf of the Committee.

The Chair said that the South African Sports Commission (SASC) would be rescheduled to take place the following Tuesday. The Budget Vote is also scheduled for that date, after which in the following week, the workshop would be reviewed.

The meeting was adjourned.


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: