The Committee engaged with the National House of Traditional Leaders (NHTL) on the state of tourism in rural areas especially in villages. The role of tourism in each village would be assessed. This was all part of the bigger picture of transformation. Transformation was not really taking place in the sector as it should be. A parallel system of village tourism was needed. The Chairperson elaborated on his own philosophy of simple economics which he aptly named Supranomics. The essence of which was on how development and empowerment could take place in villages. The NHTL invited the Chairperson to address the NHTL’s House on his economic philosophy of Supranomics. The NHTL proceeded to provide the Committee with a broad overview of what should be happening. The NHTL hoped the amendment to section 25 of the constitution would go through so that more Africans could own land. The NHTL was pleased that parliament was speaking the language of Africans. In villages tourists would be given an authentic African experience. Tourists could be given insight into how Africans had been doing things for millennia. The NHTL pointed out that the ANC majority party was mostly voted in by rural persons but was disappointed that the budget never seemed to find its way to rural areas. All that was received were grants. A budget was what was needed. From a tourism perspective villages were an untapped market. The Oceans Economy was something to consider getting into but for the most part coastal rural communities were still poor at present. Along the Eastern Cape coastline villages were not seen as a niche tourism market that could be exploited. Inland there were many villages in Provinces like the Northern Cape, the Limpopo and the North West which had historical sites like the Taung Skull Heritage Site situated in Taung, North West Province. The truth of the matter was that nothing much was said about the Taung Skull but if it was located in a metro then tourists would be flocking to it. On cultural events one that stood out was initiation events for young persons coming of age. There were many aspects attached to these events. Things like gifts, blankets and food had to be sourced from somewhere. It was an opportunity for someone. The NHTL had come up with a concept called Invest Rural and had spoken to President Cyril Ramaphosa about it but as usual traditional authorities were left behind. The NHTL felt that tourism could be a catalyst for Invest Rural. With Invest Rural attempts were made to package business opportunities and tourism sites but due to the monopolistic nature of the sector challenges were being faced. From an indigenous knowledge perspective rural communities knew all about the benefits of goats milk which was now all the rave in retail outlets like Woolworths. This could be an opportunity for villages to supply retail outlets with these types of organic products. On the land restitution process1% - 30% of the land that had been claimed by communities had a tourism aspect to it. The problem was that only the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform was involved in the handover. The National Department of Tourism (NDT) was not involved at all. There were areas that had been tourism areas before and communities needed assistance to get them back to how they had been. The NHTL felt that government departments worked in silos. The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform should invite the NDT along. The NHTL had started engagements with the NDT but it was at a high level. It needed to move down to an operational level. The histories of communities like the Barolong had to be told. Access to villages was a problem as roads were often not up to scratch. Broadly the NHTL was all too happy to cooperate on various aspects of tourism. Tourism was a major job creator and could employ many people in a short period of time. Tourism was a good driver to deal with poverty, unemployment and inequality. Tourism in SA had to have a perspective of traditional cultural life. The NHTL felt that work should start immediately. The Committee should give the NHTL a chance and see what it could do.
The Committee was in agreement that traditional leaders did have a role to play with government on tourism. Tourism benefits could be leveraged off traditional leaderships and monarchs. Were tourists visiting monarchs and palaces like they did in the United Kingdom? It was an opportunity to boost tourism. There was a need to formalise these types of arrangements and structures. Members felt that tourism opportunities in SA had not been exploited to their full potential. Europeans coming to SA wished to have a uniquely South African experience. Provinces and local government needed to take tourism seriously. Some members preferred to use the term indigenous leaders instead of traditional leaders. African leaders were leaders in their own right before white man set foot on SA’s shores. What was concerning was why members of parliament were undermining their own indigenous leaders. Members felt that Chapter 12 of the constitution dealing with traditional leaders was tricky. Members also felt that Chapter 9 of the constitution dealing with state institutions supporting constitutional democracy had to be amended to provide indigenous leaders with powers. Members asked why traditional leaders were not receiving allocations from the fiscus. Members observed that there were occasions when parliament even passed laws that undermined indigenous leaders. Yet members of parliament were the subjects of the very same indigenous leaders. Members did feel the time had come for the Committee to implement on what it had suggested in its term thus far. This was ever so important as villages and small towns were often overlooked. The Committee would look into the Invest Rural Concept of the NHTL. Given that there were 836 traditional councils members asked whether each of the councils had programmes for tourist attractions in their areas. Did the traditional councils do capacity building? Was there working relationships with councillors? Members highlighted some of the cultural practises that South Africans observed that tourist might be interested in. Members stressed the importance of government taking service delivery in villages seriously. Without services tourists would not be willing to visit villages. Indigenous experiences were what tourists wanted. Members expressed sentiments that the tourism sector had been monopolised for a long time. Members were hugely concerned about the lack of transformation in the tourism sector. For one the tour guide sector was still very much White dominated. At the end of the day transformation had to take place. The imbalances of the past were manmade. The Committee was tasked with changing the status quo. Members appreciated the fact that the NHTL had invited the Chairperson to the opening of its House but suggested that the invite be extended to the Minister of Tourism as well so that tourism issues could be placed on a higher agenda. Provinces, local government including the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) should be taken on board so that tourism could be prioritised. Members also suggested that a greater focus be placed on domestic tourism. Members reiterated that it was time for implementation. The Budget Speech of the Minister should speak to issues. Allocations should be made. Members would do a follow up on whether issues prioritised by the Committee had been integrated into the Minister’s Budget Speech. The Chairperson stated that the challenge was about convincing local government to take issues that the Committee had discussed and prioritised seriously. There needed to be village development plans that should be in line with the National Development Plan (NDP). He emphasised the importance of village profiling to take place. It was a huge task but needed to be done. The Committee was assured that by the following week the NHTL would provide the Committee with a formal presentation.
The Committee briefly discussed its Draft Committee Programme for the Second Term, 2020 as well as its Five Year Strategic Plan. The Chairperson concluded the meeting by stating that figures released by Stats SA showed that SA was in a technical economic recession. He said that the issue was about how tourism could come to the rescue of SA.
Opening comments by the Chairperson
The Chairperson stated that the aim of the meeting was to have an interaction with the National House of Traditional Leaders (NHTL) on issues of development in villages.
The Committee had come to the conclusion that poverty in SA was most prevalent in villages. Villages could not be equated to rural areas. Not all rural areas were poor. Huge commercial farms were found in rural areas. The aim, after all, was to have a South Africa that was prosperous and united. Given SA’s historical past changes were needed for the future of all South Africans to be brighter. Before the Whites landed in the Cape in 1652 traditional leaders had been in control. Over time things changed in SA. Some individuals became traditional leaders under Apartheid in return for their cooperation. Huge cities were created and small dorpies sprung up. Infrastructure was provided in each small dorpie. Small dorpies became advanced at the expense of villages. The small dorpies needed a workforce and hence townships were created on the periphery of dorpies. Many people were displaced from villages when cheap labour was needed. Stats SA confirmed that poverty, inequality and unemployment were most prevalent in villages.
The triple challenges of poverty, inequality and unemployment were most prevalent in villages and thereafter townships. The Committee realised that tourism had potential to create jobs, encourage entrepreneurship, enable infrastructure to be set up etc. In order for tourism to work one needed roads, basic services and telecommunications etc to be provided. The Fourth Industrial Revolution was mostly concentrated in cities. How could it find expression in villages? Villages should be able to provide accommodation, consumables for tourists, medical services and transport etc. The Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs needed to ensure that each ward had plans for the short term, medium term and long term. The Committee felt that villages had gotten a raw deal from a tourism perspective. Townships were better off. Government had packages of funding but the funding was skewed. The funding only benefitted people in cities, dorpies and to lesser extent townships. People in villages also contributed to SA’s tax base. When they sold cattle they were taxed.
The Chairperson of the NHTL had assured the Committee that it would be provided with all the names of villages in SA. There was not a single office in government where such a list could be obtained from. All Stats SA did was to count people. Once the Committee had the list of all villages in SA it would push government for tourism to happen in villages. Poverty in each village would be tackled. The role of tourism in each village would be assessed. This was all part of the bigger picture of transformation. Villages had mud houses and the Tourism Grading Council of SA (TGCSA) was asked how it graded those homes. The Department of Health might also not give its approval to mud houses as there might be concerns around the health of tourists being affected by the materials used in erecting mud houses. Slaughtering of animals also took place in villages. These were all things that the Committee needed to discuss with the NHTL. Cultural precincts were tourist attractions in villages and their custodians were traditional leaders.
SA had the Executive, the Judiciary and the Legislative branches of government. Traditional leadership should have been a branch of government as well. Presently, traditional leadership only had an ex officio capacity. Yet traditional leadership was at the core of humanity’s existence in SA. The role of traditional leaders could not be pushed to the periphery. The history of every traditional leader should be part of tourism offerings. The Committee wished the NHTL, as the custodians of African culture, to change the status quo and to eradicate poverty, inequality and unemployment.
The Department of Basic Education should organise tours for schools to visit traditional leaders in villages so that children could be educated about cultural practices. There was no need for infrastructure. Things could be taught to kids like it has been done for eons. Storytelling could take place under a tree as it had always been done. Black people needed to create an alternative tourism market. Transformation was not really taking place in the sector as it should. A parallel system of village tourism was needed. Traditional leaders should encourage their people to become entrepreneurs. Local people should supply everything to places like Kruger National Park. In SA, there were 27 000 schools and 338 460 classes filled with possible entrepreneurs. Traditional leaders should come on board. The government had the School Nutrition Programme so there was an opportunity for traditional leaders to supply food to schools. The model currently being used was wrong. Large contracts were awarded to single companies. Opportunities had to be spread around for everyone. It was a type of a monopolistic system. He had his own philosophy of simple economics which he aptly named Supranomics. Things could be kicked off on a small scale by encouraging small entrepreneurs. Thereafter things could be stepped up from merely supplying goods to actually manufacturing them. Why could Protea Hotels not be supplied with eggs from a small producer? There were a variety of goods that could be supplied by small entrepreneurs. In this way poverty could be eradicated. He noted that poverty in SA was a designed poverty. Black people were required to be poor. He said that Stats SA on the issue of poverty could not localise it. Stats SA only spoke about percentages. In order for tourism to succeed all government departments had to do their share. The idea was likened to that of a bicycle wheel with spokes. Tourism was the cog of the wheel and the spokes attached to it were various government departments like Transport, COGTA, and the South African Police Services (SAPS) etc. He conceded that at times he became emotional but said that it was not complicated to change things. Just like the school example before the health sector too was huge. There were 32 000 consumables like syringes etc. This was 32 000 opportunities for entrepreneurs. Industries could be started in villages to manufacture syringes for instance. American companies like Aspen wished to maintain monopolies. Anti-retrovirals were produced in Europe but were mostly consumed in Africa. Things had to change. In conclusion he summarised that the Committee firstly needed to get a figure on the total number of villages in SA with their details. The Chairperson of the NHTL had already agreed to provide the information. Secondly the Committee needed cooperation from the NHTL for tourism forums that had to be established from village to village. Thirdly that there needed to be continuous communication between the Committee and the NHTL to evaluate progress made continuously. Perhaps the Committee and the NHTL could meet annually and he suggested that it be a day before the NHTL opened its House. Lastly on transformation the Committee would track progress made yearly from September to September. In September 2020 the Committee would check on progress for the last year.
Committee engagement with the National House of Traditional Leaders (NHTL) on the state of tourism in rural areas, especially in villages and small towns
Mr Abraham Sithole, Secretary to the NHTL, extended an apology on behalf of the Chairperson of the NHTL for not being able to attend the meeting. The Chairperson had however appointed Kgosi Tebogo Seatlholo to act on his behalf.
Kgosi Seatlholo invited the Chairperson to address the NHTL on his economic philosophy of Supranomics. The NHTL had been invited to the meeting with the aim of interacting and not really to make a presentation. He said that he would provide a broad overview of what should be happening. The NHTL represented 836 traditional councils which owned millions of hectares of land in SA. He hoped the amendment to section 25 of the constitution to go through so that more Africans could own land. In villages tourists would be given an authentic African experience. Tourists could be given insight into how Africans did things for millennia. For one was how time was kept by the hour by the crow of a rooster. He was pleased that parliament was speaking the language of Africans. It would give the African people more confidence. He pointed out that the majority party ANC was mostly voted in by rural persons but the budget never seemed to find its way to rural areas. All that was received were grants. A budget was what was needed. From tourism perspective villages were an untapped market. It was something that had to be looked at. Tourism was not to be found in inland rural areas and at coastal rural areas. Under President Jacob Zuma the Oceans Economy was started but for the most part coastal rural communities were still poor. Along the Eastern Cape coastline villages were not seen as a niche tourism market that could be exploited. The Oceans Economy was something to consider getting into. Inland there were many villages in Provinces like the Northern Cape, the Limpopo and the North West. There were many historical sites like the Taung Skull Heritage Site in Taung, North West. But the reality was that nothing much was said about it. If the Taung Heritage Site was located in a Metro then tourists would be flocking to it. He agreed with the Chairperson that in tourism there were monopolies. He did point out that Africans would become more confident if villages were uplifted. The Committee was informed that the NHTL had come up with a concept called Invest Rural. The NHTL had spoken to President Cyril Ramaphosa about it but as usual traditional authorities were left behind. He felt that tourism could be a catalyst for Invest Rural. A strategy could be worked on. With Invest Rural attempts were made to package business opportunities and tourism sites. Due to the monopolistic nature of the sector challenges were being faced. He pointed out that organic food was all the rave in SA. Woolworths was selling goats milk at a premium. From an indigenous knowledge perspective rural communities knew all about the benefits of goats milk. There were many healing aspects to it. This was an opportunity for villages. They could supply retail chains like Woolworths and Checkers. The NHTL was working on indigenous knowledge systems. The NHTL was working with University of Johannesburg architecture students. There were certain countries in the world whose architecture was unique to them. When you went to Russia you knew you were in Russia given the architecture. In SA the same could not be said. Everything in SA looked European. The same could be said about the food in SA. These were all things that needed to be looked at. He stated that from a practical perspective the NHTL was engaged in the land restitution process. There were many communities that had claimed land. 1% - 30% of the land that had been claimed had a tourism aspect to it. On the land restitution issue only the Department of Rural Development and Land Reform was involved. The National Department of Tourism (NDT) was not involved. There were areas that had been tourism areas before. One such place was Rooi Grond where antelope hunting had taken place. It had been designed for hunting. Land restitution had taken place but there were no antelope to be found and no tourism activity was taking place. He said that one often heard of stories about land being restituted but not being used. The issue was that the communities needed assistance. He asked the NDT to assist communities when tourism related properties were restituted to local communities. He felt that government departments were working in silos. The Department of Rural Development and Land Reform should invite the NDT along. He understood that it was not necessarily the NDT’s fault. Broadly the NHTL was all too happy to cooperate on various aspects of tourism. Tourism was a major job creator and could employ many people in a short period of time. Tourism was a good driver to deal with poverty, unemployment and inequality. He felt that work should start immediately. The NHTL had worked with the Minister of Social Development before. The Department of Social Development could access most areas in SA. The Committee should give the NHTL a chance and see what it could do. The tourism industry for the most part did not require highly skilled persons. Basic skills were needed.
Mr Sithole stated that Kgosi Seatlholo had pretty much covered most aspects around village economic empowerment. He too felt that heritage sites like the Taung Skull Heritage Site held huge potential. Not only would tourism create jobs but it would also empower young people. This would keep youngsters away from ills like drugs. SA had so many heritage sites but they were not developed. And even if they were developed they were not marketed. Nothing was done to attract people to heritage sites. There were also no tour guides. On cultural events one that stood out was initiation events for youngsters coming of age. There were many aspects attached to these events. For one gifts were given to initiates. Who supplied the gifts? It was an opportunity for someone. There were opportunities for economic development. Goats and cows were slaughtered. Blankets were needed. The histories of communities like the Barolong had to be told. He noted that elders today were not given platforms to pass on knowledge and information. He agreed that schools needed to visit rural areas so that knowledge could be shared with future generations. The request of the Committee around information of villages was being dealt with. The NHTL had started engagements with the NDT but it was at a high level. It needed to move down to an operational level. He agreed that government departments needed to work together. Economic development of villages was important. There were some areas around villages that had tourist attractions but they did not draw in communities. Other challenges were the attitudes of agencies and guides. Access to villages was a problem as roads were often not up to scratch. Tourism in SA had to have a perspective of traditional cultural life.
Mr M de Freitas (DA) felt that throughout SA tourism opportunities had not been exploited to their full potential. Europeans coming to SA wished to have a uniquely South African experience. Provinces and local government needed to take tourism seriously. The potential and impact of tourism was not fully understood. Some countries survived solely on tourism revenue and their economies flourished. He felt that greater work was needed with local authorities. He also felt that existing tourism infrastructure had to be renovated. Old mining towns and battlegrounds should be re-enhanced. Premiers of provinces had to understand the good returns on investment that tourism held.
Mr N Galo (AIC) preferred to use the term indigenous leaders instead of traditional leaders. He agreed with the sentiments of the Chairperson that African leaders were leading their people long before the white man set foot in South Africa. He asked why was members of parliament were undermining their indigenous leaders. He pointed out that Chapter 12 of the constitution which dealt with traditional leaders was tricky. Chapter 9 of the constitution which dealt with state institutions supporting constitutional democracy had to be amended to provide indigenous leaders with powers. Indigenous leaders should be given a clear responsibility to develop rural areas. Indigenous leaders also did not get allocations from the fiscus. In many instances when parliament passed laws indigenous leaders were undermined. Yet members of parliament were the subjects of the very same indigenous leaders.
Mr T Myeni (ANC) said that members had covered most of what he wished to comment on. He stated that from this day forth the Committee had to start implementing on what it had all along suggested around tourism. The economic outlook of SA did not speak to villages and small towns. More effort was needed from the Committee. He also felt that the Committee had to look into the concept of Invest Rural.
Mr K Sithole (IFP) on the 836 traditional councils that the NHTL represented asked whether each of them had programmes on tourist attractions in their respective areas. Did the traditional councils’ do capacity building? Was there working relationships with councillors? He also asked whether different areas had marketing systems.
Kgosi Seatlholo conceded that traditional leaders did have problems with councillors. Perhaps if co-operation was elevated to a higher level then things could improve. There was a lack of political education at local level. The fighting taking place was unnecessary.
Ms M Gomba (ANC) stated that the Chairperson was a good philosopher who said things as they were. The sentiments of the Chairperson needed to be shared with the departments dealing with economic development. The Chairperson could teach them a thing or two. She spoke to different experiences that tourists could have in SA. In the mid Vaal area there was a place where sheep and cattle skins were cleaned and used to manufacture things. Tourists would also be interested to observe how Africans prayed for rain. Government needed to take service delivery in villages seriously. Without water, sanitation, medical services and now the ever important Wi-Fi connections, tourists would not be willing to visit those areas. Being a frequent traveller she said that in many countries tourists were welcomed with local drinks. It should also be done in villages where tourists were offered local brews. Tourists would also be interested in seeing traditional healers at work. She also felt that tour operators and tour guides had to be trained. Traditional transport systems like donkey carts and horse driven carts should be used by tour operators to transport tourists. These were the types of indigenous experiences that should be sold to tourists.
Mr Z Peter (ANC) agreed with the Chairperson that the tourism sector had been monopolised for a long time. On a recent briefing by the National Department of Tourism (NDT) he had been displeased with the lack of transformation that was taking place in the tour guide sector. Tour guides were predominantly white. The NDT had responded that the tour guide sector was a voluntary profession over which the NDT had no control. Was there nothing that could be done to influence the processes around tour guides? At the end of the day transformation had to be encouraged. Tourism was important in the transformation of SA. The imbalances of the past were man-made. Deliberate attempts were made to divide blacks. The Committee was tasked with changing the status quo and to provide solutions. He said that in meetings it had become the norm for the Chairperson to summarise what the Committee needed to do. The Committee was after all in the driving seat and was an extension of government. He was pleased that the NHTL was committed to working with the Committee. The section 25 amendment to the constitution was expected to shake up things but in the end was a means to correct wrongs of the past. He pointed out that neither the State of the Nation Address (SONA) 2020 nor state of provinces addresses made mention of his town Riebeeck East.
Kgosi Seatlholo said that African people had been oppressed for a very long time. He felt that there was a need for name changes to take place. Places like Harrismith had to revert to their African names. Poverty and unemployment was manmade. One had to become non-conformist and be different to what the status quo was.
Mr T Khalipha (ANC) noted that the Committee had at the outset of its term identified areas of priority. Villages and small towns were two of the areas prioritised. The Committee was now in the process of implementing its mandate. He was pleased about the interaction with the NHTL. He wished to suggest to the NHTL that along with the Chairperson being invited to the address their House the Minister of Tourism should also be invited. Having the Minister present would place issues of tourism on a higher agenda. He also suggested a road-show for interaction with premiers and executive councils. The South African Local Government Association (SALGA) should also be involved. The Minister and the Chairperson whilst at the NHTL needed to interact with organised local government. At present tourism was not a priority in local government. It was all good and well for the Committee to come up with good ideas but implementation was of utmost importance. The Departments of Public Works and of Transport needed to also come on board. He emphasised that greater focus was needed on domestic tourism. The emphasis had always been on international tourists. He pointed that all the Presidents of SA from Ex President Nelson Mandela to President Ramaphosa had hailed from rural areas. He continued that close to 80% of members of the Committee were from rural areas. Members knew from experience what they were talking about on what was lacking in villages. Implementation had to take place. The Budget Speech of the Minister had to speak to issues. The Committee had agreed that the budget for 2020/21 for the next three years had to talk to issues prioritised by the Committee. Allocations should be made. The Committee would do a follow up with the Minister as to whether issues prioritised by the Committee were integrated into the Tourism Budget Speech.
Kgosi Seatlholo suggested that everyone should work together on implementation. The Committee was very progressive and said that things needed to be done as soon as possible.
Mr H Gumbi (DA) agreed with the sentiments of Mr de Freitas that local government did not take tourism seriously. Everyone was in agreement that traditional leaders did have a role to play with government on tourism. Tourism benefits could be leveraged off traditional leaderships and monarchs. Were tourists visiting monarchs and palaces? This was an opportunity to boost tourism. There was a need to formalise these types of arrangements and structures. The issue was about how it ought to be done. It should become a normal tourism activity like it was in the United Kingdom where tourists visited Bucking Palace. He pointed out that places like Sun City were surrounded by communities that were not benefitting off tourism. How could communities like these be taken on board? Traditional leaders and local government had to play a role in getting communities on board. He informed the Committee that on the South Coast of KwaZulu-Natal there was the Ugu District Municipality where there was a lack of service delivery. There had to be levels of inclusivity. Benefits of inclusivity had to be inclusivity. There was a need to build onto established tourist attractions and monarchs.
Kgosi Seatlholo pointed out that art was another way in which tourism could be boosted. Africans were by their very nature very artistic. Art could be used to leverage tourism. He undertook to provide the Committee with a formal presentation by the following week.
The Chairperson stated that the challenge was about convincing local government to take issues that the Committee had discussed and prioritised seriously. On implementation a meeting led by the South African Local Government Association (SALGA) was needed. All municipalities with the relevant Members of Executive Committees (MECs) on Tourism had to be part of the meeting. There was a need to formalise it. The Committee would work with traditional leaders to promote social cohesion. The issue of change in terminology from “traditional leaders” to “indigenous leaders” had to be addressed and anthropologists would be taken on board. On Chapter 9 institutions in the constitution the powers and functions of traditional leaders could be looked at as members of parliament were after all law makers. From a budgetary perspective efforts should be made to have direct allocations to traditional leadership institutions. Existing tourism establishments should be extended to include villages on their periphery. He was referring to the likes of Sun City. Tour operators should be brought on board to extend their routes to villages and townships. Guides for villages and townships were an issue that needed to be considered. There should be village development plans that should be in line with the National Development Plan (NDP). The plans should have goals for the short term, medium term and long term. He emphasised the need for village profiling to take place. He was aware that profiling for tourism was a massive task. Every village had to be profiled. He pointed out that the North West Province had a total of 878 villages which was an indication of the huge amount of work that lay ahead in profiling each and every village. The Committee would also look at issues that traditional leaders felt ought to be included in the budget of tourism. Geographic name changes fell under the Department of Arts and Culture. Places like Harrismith should revert back to their original African names.
Draft Committee Programme for the Second Term, 2020
The Chairperson highlighted issues that needed to be accommodated on the Committee’s Second Term Programme. Quarterly meetings with the Committee’s counterparts in the provinces should be scheduled. The Committee had a new approach on oversight. There should at least be two oversight visits per annum. The Committee would approach the Information Communication Technology (ICT) section of parliament about coming up with a Tourism Committee Oversight Application (APP). The APP would allow people to communicate with the Committee and would allow the Committee to give feedback. The Committee would also be scheduling a meeting with the Robben Island Board at Robben Island. A meeting with Brand SA should also be scheduled.
Mr Jerry Boltina Committee Secretary stated that the Committee would be having a joint meeting with its counterparts in the NCOP when the NDT came to brief the Committee on its Strategic Plan and Budget. The meeting was scheduled for 14 April 2020. A joint meeting was also scheduled when SA Tourism was to brief the Committee on its Strategic Plan and Budget. The Committee would also be developing its own Five Year Strategic Plan.
Ms Gomba felt it important for the Committee’s media team to cover issues raised by the Committee.
Mr Peter suggested that the Committee visit the Nelson Mandela Museum in Qunu in the Eastern Cape. Did previous Committee’s have a Five Year Strategic Plan? He asked that the Committee’s Strategic Plan be work shopped to members so that members could make inputs and additions to it.
Mr Sithole asked about overseas trips that the Committee could undertake.
Dr Sibusiso Khuzwayo Committee Content Adviser stated that previous Committees had had Five Year Strategic Plans. The intention was to have a two-day workshop in April for members. The first day on the Strategic Plan would be a workshop type of session with outsiders like the Tourism Business Council of SA (TBCSA). The second day was about the Committee’s new philosophy and whether issues of the Committee were covered in the Plan. By the end of the second day the Committee would have a draft document.
The Chairperson pointed out that it seemed as though the Committee never featured on the parliamentary channel. He observed that other committees were covered seven or eight times. What criteria were used to determine which committees would be covered? Who made the decision? He continued that Stats SA had released its Fourth Quarter Report for 2019. There was a 0.2% decline in SA’s economy. SA was in a technical economic recession. The issue was about how tourism could come to the rescue of SA’s economy.
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.