A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
SPORT AND RECREATION PORTFOLIO
27 March 2007
SPORT BUDGET: INPUT BY SA HOCKEY, SARU, CRICKET SA, SCHOOL SPORTS FORUM
Chairperson: Mr B Komphela (ANC)
Documents handed out:
Presentation by Showtime Boxing Promotions
Presentation by South African Hockey
SARU, Cricket SA, School Sports Forum did not submit documents
Audio Recording of the
Meeting (Part 1), (Part 2), (Part 3) and (Part 4)
The presentations by Boxing SA, SA Hockey Association, SA Rugby Union, Cricket SA and the Sports Forum all had the common theme that not only were clubs under-funded and struggling, but amateur sport itself was neglected by sponsors. The driving need was for mass participation programmes to be utilised in a more constructive manner, and ensure that discovered talent be nurtured. Unfortunately there seemed to be some discrepancies between the National department programmes and what the provincial department did to implement these. The School Sports programme had been well received. However, it was noted that facilities were under-used. The Committee had also agreed to support all school sport programmes and encouraged the different sporting codes to approach the Department of Sport and Recreation with their development plans.
The Chairperson said that before they heard from the sport bodies on how the Department of Sport and Recreation (SRSA) budget should be handled, there was a matter to be aired by some Committee members.
He handed over to Mr R Bhoola (MF) who said that he had visited rural areas in Kwazulu- Natal the previous week to evaluate mass participation programmes. He had found great support. However there was also a considerable amount of negative propaganda circulating on the discussions of previous Committee meetings. These matters were discussed in the media. He believed that it was imperative to take a formal decision with regard to this discourse in the media.
Mr B Dhlamini (IFP) agreed. It was a fact that the federations wanted to remain untouchable. He felt that the Committee should be more specific and call for a judicial commission of inquiry into soccer. The past three years had been an attempt to get the South African Football Association (SAFA) to give an account of their activities. SAFA did not take the Committee seriously. He formally requested that the Minister ask the President to set up a commission of inquiry into SAFA..
The Chairperson agreed. Previously when he had appeared on the television series Interface, it was clear that there was a general view amongst white people in the country that the Committee had made rugby into a punching bag. It was illogical that here was a country with 46 million citizens and yet there was a Norwegian Chief Executive Officer (CEO). The Minister supported his view. When he was engaging with the Premier Soccer League (PSL), Mr Trevor Philips had stated that he was going to retire and provide a succession plan. It was a serious indictment of this country that it seemed that only white CEOs could bring money in from white-owned businesses.
Mr D Lee (DA) stated that his view had always been that sports people should solve sport issues and the government should not get involved. It should be the sports people who remove the bad administrators. It should however remain the responsibility of the sport administration to clean up their act.
Mr T Louw (ANC) said that the Committee had to be clear on whether they wanted a soccer indaba or a judicial commission of enquiry. His view was that they should decide on a commission of enquiry.
Mr M Dikgacwi (ANC) said that what was needed was a commission. It should also be noted that it was not coming from the ANC but from the Committee as a whole. He agreed with the statement that the sports administrators should sort out their mess. However, if they failed to do so then the Minister should intervene.
Mr C Frolick (ANC) seconded the proposal that the Committee propose a commission of enquiry into SAFA.
The Chairperson stated that the resolution would be formally taken at the next meeting, and it would be stated that the decision was taken collectively. The Chairperson then went on to state that those representing cricket were there to give a broad overview of how the budget would affect them. He felt it was prudent to state that Mr G Majola never strayed from his commitment to present a cricket team which represented the demographics of South Africa. He said that there were critical issues that should be braced and that the South African Broadcasting Corporation (SABC) was at the meeting to speak about the specific issues of the PSL and SABC, where it looked as if PSL wanted to sell their rights to another broadcaster.
Mr M Mbebe, Group Executive of SABC Content Enterprises, stated that the court case itself was a symptom of a larger problem. The rights with the PSL had been the main issue of the case. SABC had had the position of being the first to negotiate with the PSL regarding broadcasting rights but they could come to an agreement. He also stated that they had not even reached the pricing stages as yet. He commented that the public should force the two parties, SABC and PSL, to go back to the negotiating table and find common ground. The perception seemed to be that SABC refused to pay fair value for the broadcasting rights. It was unthinkable to assume this, as it would destroy football. They had a vested interest in local football, but they were not prepared to enrich individuals, but would rather enrich the clubs.
Mr Mbebe also stated that broadcasting local soccer would be a perfect build up to the 2010 World Cup. The South African public needed to see better local football so that the interest in the football by the government could be illustrated. He also stated that there was no other broadcaster who was able to reach the rural areas where soccer had such a huge following and be able to broadcast in their own language.
Mr Louw asked that if the court should decide that the PSL broadcasting rights had to go to ETV or SuperSport, how would it affect the rights of the SABC being able to broadcast 2010 World Cup.
Mr Mbebe stated insofar as the World Cup was concerned, the SABC had already received the rights, as FIFA believed in public service. The PSL was the SABC’s showcase for local soccer talent.
Mr Dikgawci stated that he agreed with the SABC saying that it would be too expensive for the average South African to watch local soccer if the broadcasting rights were to move. However he wanted to know how far had they progressed.
Mr Mbebe reiterated that the public should force the two parties to go back to the negotiating table as their interest lay in public service.
Mr Lee remarked that although they had heard only one side of the story, he asked why the SABC did not go public with the names of the people who were delaying this process, thereby naming and shaming them.
Mr Mbebe stated it was necessary to build football and to do so would require that an amicable relationship existed between the SABC and football administration. Nursing that relationship was important therefore it would be better to engage behind close doors.
The Chairperson stated that the Committee would support the SABC in their endeavour because they were biased towards the poor and their interest lay in public service.
The CEO of Cricket South Africa (CSA), Mr Gerald Majola, stated that they had to look after their finances. Winning did not just involve the game itself, but other aspects such as ensuring that the game could be played throughout the country. Winning also included sustainability as well as governance, which meant that there had to be sustainable development programmes.
He went on to discuss their revenue generation stating that international broadcasting rights were the majority of their revenue. When games were played domestically, CSA owned those rights. He also stated that in order for their vision to achieved there was no other platform besides SABC to hold them do so. However, he did state that there were some contracts with SuperSport that were signed before he had taken up his position at CSA that only expired in 2012. Other revenue generators were sponsorships, gate revenues, Internaitonal Cricket Council (ICC) allocations, government grants and the Lotto.
Cricket South Africa was highly dependent on the Future Tours programme. However, the majority of their revenue was based on exchange rates. As the Rand weakened and strengthened so their revenue fluctuated. Different opponents also influenced the revenue achieved. They had then taken a four-year plan based on television rights and exchange rates. Their main challenge thus far had been balance. Cricket had grown to be the second most popular sport in South Africa, however the resources remained the same. CSA needed assistance because of this. They had budgeted with the exchange rate of R6 to $1 as a basis. With the taxation of sporting bodies they could easily be taxed R20 million, and they hoped that the Amendment Bill would change that issue.
Sponsors also had to be forced to involve themselves with development, as they were only interested in professional sport. Cricket South Africa had been more intelligent in their dealings with sponsors and had found a way to link development with professional contracts. They had decided to force sponsors to give money by instructing them that professional contracts come with the condition of inputting money into development programmes.
The amateur cricket budget had been sorely lacking because of the reluctance of sponsors this had resulted in a void between amateur cricket and professional cricket. A breakdown of the amateur budget revealed that as a whole it added up to R80 – R90 million. Only R25 million was sponsored, the Lotto had reduced their contribution to R1.8 million from R2.5 million; government grant had increased from R2.4 million to R4.7 million. The downfall was covered by Cricket South Africa, which was taken from the professional funds thereby depleting their reserves, which they would like to build up to at R120 million. In conclusion they would appreciate assistance regarding the tax legislation and funding for amateur cricket.
The Chairperson stated that the 2010 Special Measures Bill had made it possible for the Committee to pass the expenditure of R10 billion for the 2010 World Cup. The critical issue was that the money that would be appropriated for the world cup had gone up to R25billion, which had to be approved by the Committee. The Chairperson wanted a clarification on the R120 million and in which account it was held.
Mr Majola stated that it was placed in an account that would yield maximum returns and the interest was utilised annually.
The Chairperson asked how would CSA benefit if the government gave R20 million towards amateur cricket.
Mr Majola responded that R20 million would greatly benefit the amateur level of cricket.
SA Hockey presentation
Mr G Dolley, Youth Manager for South African Hockey Association (SAHA), began the presentation with SAHA’s vision for hockey, which was to create a single integrated system that would be centralised. Their key areas of focus were, mini-hockey or entry level hockey which was their mass participation profile. The second area was the schools programme where they had adopted the national approach. The third area was club level where there was a serious lack of funds for clubs who were struggling to sustain themselves. The final area was the high performance programme. He noted that there was a need to have a balance between mass participation and international participation. There should be a centralised academy system, as their current system was not working. They did have partnerships with other service providers such as Lotto and the current corporate sponsor, SPAR, for the ladies team. However, the men’s team had no corporate sponsor. SAHA’s programme was driven by good structures, not money, and they aligned themselves with SRSA.
He said that they had targeted 200 new schools that were situated within the hubs and identified for mass participation programmes. There had been a challenge to engage the provincial departments to SAHA’s contribution. It was also noted that it should be critical that SAHA had a say in the appointment of officials as there seemed to be a lot of duplication. It seemed that things would differ on the local level compared to the provincial or national level.
Promotion of participation within the life orientation curriculum was suggested, so that more schools could be reached. The infrastructure levels should measure input. Presently SAHA had only three full time people in its employ. All coaches were part-time employees. This presented quite a challenge to compete internationally and more of a base had to be built.
Mr Dolley felt that it would be prudent to work with other sporting codes to build strong relationships. SAHA should also have strong links with schools and clubs. Their programmes were driven by volunteers, which once again illustrated that their programmes were driven by passion and commitment and not money.
Mr Frolick stated that it was commendable to see the output of the meagre budget that SAHA had The fact that it was not the amount of money but the level of commitment was admirable. He wanted to ask Mr Dolley to explore the relationship of the mass participation programmes with the provincial departments. It was the quality that was worrisome to the Committee. The programme envisaged by the national department was somehow not reaching the provincial level. This begged the question of what the money was being utilised for.
Mr B Dhlamini (IFP) said that Mr Frolick had raised most of his issues. There did seem to be a problem with the hubs which were areas identified for mass participation programmes. He stated that he did not see hockey anywhere besides on television when the national team played. He enquired about the strategy employed around schools to interact with the school authority.
Mr Dikgacwi stated that in the presentation only showed cities. He wanted to know about the places outside the main cities.
Mr J Masango (DA) wanted to know about the challenges from the provincial department and if there were children identified that could progress to professional levels.
Mr Dolley replied that the funds were not reaching the appropriate level. They were going straight to the federations. SAHA had adopted the Department’s vision of mass participation programmes and had made some inroads even though they were struggling with a small budget. The presentation provided proof of what they had done. There was a serious challenge though as there was a major dropout from school level to professional level and an intervention was needed. He hoped that his presentation was able to answer the other questions.
Mr Louw asked about the disbursement of funds and how specifically how it was done, because there seemed to be a disparity.
Mr Dolley replied that it was the hockey demographic in South Africa, and that it was categorised in particular regions.
Mr Frolick wanted to know about the current status of the Olympic games and the interaction with SASCOC.
Mr Dolley responded that they endorsed a target. By 2010 they wanted to reflect the SA demographics. However they needed more coordination with a high performance strategy.
The Chairperson stated that hockey had a history of non-transformation and that they needed to put more resources towards effecting change in hockey. They needed to work on the stigma that hockey had obtained. The Department had to come closer to becoming more involved with hockey.
Mr Louw stated that they needed further interaction with hockey and that he was not satisfied.
Mr Frolick stated that it was important to look at the budget of the department. The mass participation programmes had taken quite a chunk out of the budget and that such an opportunity could not be allowed to pass by.
School Sports Forum presentation
Mr B Petersen, Chairperson of Schauder and Korsten Sport and Recreation Forum, began his presentation by stating that the Committee was aware of the vibrancy of rugby in the Eastern Cape before unification. After unification, however, government placed more emphasis on school rugby, which resulted in junior rugby losing its vibrancy. Community sport was an all-inclusive programme. However there was not any tangible programme, which accommodated community sport in its totality.
The sports forum was established because of concerns regarding the total demise and the lack of participation in rugby as well as social factors such as drugs and alcoholism. His said that it was much more difficult for young people to grow now than it was for his generation, because of the peer pressure and social issues. That made it difficult and problematic to get scholars involved.
The sport forum was proud to state that they had an excellent sports programme for the people from the area. They realised the need to organise the mass participation programme and get the scholars involved. The metropolitan Sport and Recreation departments played a major role in helping the sports forum.
He also stated that it was very difficult for clubs to survive since they lacked capacity. The sports forum engaged with schools on a regular basis but the schools were quite conservative. They would eventually have to convince them that the sports forum would not take over but merely supplement and provide other assistance as needed. Their programme was simple in structure, both conclusive and inclusive with its core function being to implement government policy into schools on both primary and secondary levels as well as maximum participation and facilitation and coordination of sporting events.
The use of and building of school facilities had been brought up with the Department numerous times. They also had to find a way to utilise the existing school facilities to the optimum level. They need to look at incentives as well as identifying contributors, which could be vital to development.
The Chairperson stated that he appreciated the input from community sport and then opened the floor for questions.
Mr R Reed (ANC) enquired of Mr Petersen if, when he made mention of the previous interest in rugby, he meant to revert back to having several unions within one province.
Mr Petersen replied that he did not had a personal view on the re-introduction of sub-regional unions. He thought that trend of the government seemed to be moving toward total removal of provinces. It might be an ideal situation though.
Mr Louw advised caution as there had been fighting amongst the provincial unions in the Eastern Cape for years. The question of coordination would go unanswered as they reverted to the old problem with too many provincial structures.
Mr M Ncula, Deputy CEO of the South African Rugby Union (SARU), provided more insight into the character of Mr Petersen, stating that he was the captain of the last non-racial rugby team. He also said stating that Mr Petersen communicated well with all communities and that he knew what he was talking about.
Ms M Ramakaba-Lesiea (ANC) asked about the structure of community sports.
Mr Petersen answered that community sport was defined by different role players and that intervention programmes ensured that there were other structures. Mass participation was also defined as a community attempt at sport.
Mr Louw thought that he should mention that government was not doing away with provinces.
Mr M Ncula, Deputy CEO of SARU, began his presentation by openly admitting that the relationship between SARU and government was not healthy and needed to be corrected. At the last SARU Presidents’ Council meeting it was decided that it should be corrected or rugby would suffer.
At the moment rugby was facing two major challenges. These were transformation, which he did not want to elaborate on, and the Super 14 franchise in the South Eastern Cape region, where they were trying to establish a proper foundation. In order to address these outstanding issues they had appointed a project manager, Mr Godfrey Afrika. His brief was simple, namely to implement an establishment of Super 14 franchise by 2010. They believed that the budget allocated should help them address the key factors, namely the Southern Spears, capacity building issues such as training and equipment and mass participation programmes. They took advantage of the mass participation programmes and displayed a keen interest in involving provinces so that they could be visible. Thus far the biggest challenges to South African Rugby were the development of good leadership skills from the grassroots to the professional level. They had recently completed an audit on the state of rugby. This should assist in addressing the gaps that had been discovered.
Mr Dikgawci agreed that the relationship should improve. He also wanted to know if the subject of the Vodacom Cup was ever brought up, as it was a platform for black players to demonstrate their skills.
Mr Ncula responded that it was true that initially the competition was established to give exposure to black players. Things changed, however, when Brian van Rooyen removed the quota system. Quotas did help with ensuring that black players received playtime, now however the number of black players had dropped. The transformation committee was currently working on a system that would reward those teams which included black players and penalised those which did not.
Mr Louw asked what SARU intended doing to help fix the relationship with between SARU and government.
Mr Ncula replied that they had decided that a committee should be set up to address the relationship with the government. It had been realised that more communication and interaction needed to occur.
Mr Petersen asked what impact Mr Afrika’s presence would have in the South Eastern Cape, considering the result after SARU intervened previously and were resultingly greeted with hostility.
Mr Ncula stated that it was a different situation. The issue then was between SARU and the Eastern Province, this, however, was now the South Eastern Cape, and they were addressing a particular commitment made to government. There had to be a franchise set up in the Eastern Cape, as it was a home to black players.
Presentation by Boxing Promoter, Mzimasi Mgumi
Mr Mzimasi Mgumi (Boxing promoter) began by stating that although there was a lot to be said about boxing he would restrict the presentation to policy and legislative framework, institutional capacity and the boxers themselves. The promulgated new Boxing Act had been provided for the establishment of a more centralised form of governance. A new functional structure was conceived. However, there were negative elements, such as leadership gaps which had left decision making in the hands of a few. Transformation in the true sense of the word had not taken place. There was a framework put in place but the philosophy had not changed.
Although the board was well presented, none of them really had their hearts in boxing, but they did attempt their best to develop boxing. Stipulations were abused and exact application of the act was not heeded. Promoters were given live television coverage, there was a speedy formation of a stakeholders association as well as a capacity building programme that targeted all stakeholders. All boxers were encouraged to take life insurance.
Mr Mgumi said that the current regime had lost more than three sponsors and had yet to replace them, which resulted in the promoters having to raise the funds. Boxing, it seemed, was dependent on the government for survival.
The administration of boxing had been without proper control for over four years. The Leila Ali drama had damaged the reputation of many. Boxing SA should shoulder the blame for this.
Boxing did not have the attendance as it did internationally and this was because it did not provide excitement and quality. Boxers themselves had been in the decline, as they had only recently begun to pay boxers a respectable salary. There were also diseases affecting boxers, namely HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis. South Africa needed to be forced to look after their boxers. For this they required guidance from the Committee, as the environment was not conducive to growth.
Mr Mngumi proposed that boxing be re-introduced into schools. He requested assistance on policy development, and suggested that it be left to those who had an active interest in boxing. He stated that boxers should take precedence over all decisions and that a sound establishment of administration be created.
Presentation by Showtime Promotions
Ms M Zantsi said that she was the leading female boxing promoter in the country and that it came about through hard work and dedication. She also suggested that an academy be established in each province in the country
Ms Zantsi suggested that government level the playing field to support aspiring promoters and that more emphasis be given to female development. Boxing should be a give a daytime slot on television as it only had the late night slot at present (see document).
Ms Ramakaba-Lesiea stated that it was commendable to see a woman in such a male dominated field. She wanted to know how Ms Zantsi intended to draw women into boxing.
Mr Louw enquired from Mr Fredericks about the appointment of the CEO. He enquired whether or not there was a forum for male and female boxers. He also stated that there should be more interaction with SABC regarding boxing.
[last hour - done by Mandy - still to come]
Mr Mgumi said that there had been insufficient time to interact with the Department. Regular interactions take place with Boxing South Africa and were regarded as a government department.
Mr Mgumi answered that the starting times of boxing event had been debated during the term of the late Mr Steve Tshwete as Minister of Sport and Recreation. These events could not start at ten o’clock at night as the safety of spectators needed to be assured. The timing of these events was critical for the survival and popularity of these events and the promotion of the sport. The hosting of boxing events on Sunday afternoons would be considered.
Mr Mgumi answered that the match making followed specific policy guidelines. This was necessary to ensure that matches were not manipulated.
Ms Zantsi answered that her concern with the public relations officer and the Board was his or her volume of work. The capacity of the board was thus overextended. Absolute power was always dangerous and accountability of the board would be elusive.
Ms Zantsi affirmative action and equity policies allowed women, like herself to access opportunities and become successful in male-dominated industries such as boxing. Boxing South Africa did not employ a woman as merely a front, but was a genuine attempt to transform the sport and boxing promotion. This was not merely an attempt to comply with the Employment Equity Act. Ms Zantsi committed herself and took initiative to transforming the boxing industry. She stressed that she deserved to be there.
Regarding statements made about female curtain raisers, Ms Zantsi explained that there were few female professional boxers in South Africa currently. Most were mainly involved in amateur boxing. The inclusion of these boxers at tournaments was always stressed and promoted.
Ms Zantsi said that the recognition of the association proved to be very difficult. The written resolutions made by the Promoters’ Association were not being made useful.
Ms Zantsi explained that she was requested to promote boxing in KwaZulu Natal. A presentation was made to highlight the need for boxing promotion in this province. There were no recognised promoters in the province to promote national title fights. This would also champion female boxers.
Ms Zantsi explained that the development tournaments held formed part of the social responsibility programme. These tournaments were financed by the association and not funded by government. Mr Mgumi added that the development shows were non-profitable and focused on the development of new boxers.
Mr Mgumi explained that funding for the association was sourced from club members. It was therefore important to ensure that the spending and planning of the budget was closely scrutinised and properly accounted for.
Regarding the levelling of the playing field, Ms Zantsi explained that shows were dependent of sponsors. Sponsorship was very critical, but white promoters were the main recipients of sponsorships. This was problematic, as talented boxers could not be promoted. Mr Mgumi had to finance a world title fight from his own pocket the previous year. She added that dates for fights needed to be fairly allocated. SABC was trying to improve on this matter. Supersport was also problematic in the coverage of these events and did not even attend the association’s conventions. Their criteria for selecting promoters were not known.
Mr Mgumi stressed his concerns over how boxing should be developed in South Africa. Boxing South Africa needed to provide the Committee with the relevant details of their development programme for boxing. He was not convinced of the effectiveness of this programme, and greater clarity about the estimated costs involved was needed.
Mr Frederick apologised for his late arrival and the confusion this had caused. The CEO had been appointed as from the 1 March, but given his hospitalisation he would only resume his duties in May. Regular meetings between Mr Mgumi and the Department were held at the Associations’ conventions. Unfortunately, the Department did not take part in the last few conventions held. It was suggested that the Department meet regularly with boxing South Africa and to workshop with them on issues such as the responsibility to organise ‘Baby Champ’ tournaments. The Department believed that boxing South Africa were the regulators of the sport rather than the organisers of tournaments. This was the responsibility of the promoters. The allocated budget of R1.9 million for the organization of Baby Champs necessitated intensified interactions with the relevant role-players. It was clear the professional female boxers dominated female boxing. The amateur side of female boxing needed to be promoted.
Mr Solo expressed his disagreement that boxing in schools was promoting violence. Greater investigation into the purpose and aims of certain research findings were needed to ensure that these were not purposefully opposing the aims of government policies.
The Chairperson’s closing remarks:
The Chairperson asserted that the Committee was not intending to introduce policies and legislation that impoverished people. This legislation aimed to help people enable themselves to enhance their own lives. The Department had been consulted about the appointment of the CEO, as this appointment had been cumbersome. The disclaimers on the work of the Annual report, indicated to the legacy of non-compliance and lack of accountability. The department should take responsibility of the CEO, as this official was the director-general and thus accounting officer of the Department. This official should be fairly remunerated.
Issues around capacity building of programmes such as life orientation and skills development, needed to be resolved. Further discussions with the Department needed to be held. The Sectoral and Education Training Authority (SETA) stressed that the relevant bodies needed to consult them regarding funding and assistance with the development of workshops. Additional issues were also highlighted during the country wide public hearings. The Department had the resources to provide the necessary financial support.
The policy on black economic empowerment in the boxing industry needed to be focused on how wealthier boxing promoters and clubs were interacting and incorporating less privileged boxers and boxing associations. Funds and sponsorships needed to be equitably distributed. This principle was also constitutionally protected.
Much work needed to be done to create an enabling environment for boxing to be more representative and further transformed. Further interactions were necessary.
Regarding the difficulties in implementation and interpretation of the Boxing Act, the Chairperson stressed that government had a responsibility to assist any state entity in the establishment of proper procedures and systems that would ensure compliance with the relevant legislation. The reasons for the development of the Act also needed to be properly understood and communicated.
The Chairperson informed members that the net Committee meeting was scheduled for ten o’clock the following day.
After thanking the all present for their inputs, the Chairperson adjourned the meeting.
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.