SA Institute for Drug-Free Sport, Boxing SA& SA Roller Hockey Federation Annual Reports 2006/7: briefing
Sport, Arts and Culture
23 October 2007
Meeting Summary
A summary of this committee meeting is not yet available.
Meeting report
SPORT AND RECREATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE23 October 2007
SA INSTITUTE FOR DRUG-FREE SPORT, BOXING SA & SA ROLLER HOCKEY FEDERATION ANNUAL REPORTS 2006/7: BRIEFING
Chairperson: Mr B Komphela (ANC)
Documents handed out:
Boxing South Africa Annual Report 2006/7
Boxing South African presentation
South African Roller Hockey Federation presentation [Part1][Part2][Part3] [Part4] [Part5] [Part6][Part6][Part7]
South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport Annual Report 2006/7
Department of Sport and Recreation Annual Report 2006/7[available at www.srsa.gov.za]
Audio recording of meeting
SUMMARY
The term of the current Board of the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport was coming to an end. An international conference was scheduled for November 2007 where an amended World Anti-Doping Agency Code would be adopted. This would give some discretion in the imposition of penalties. There would be more emphasis on blood testing, which would incur greater costs and more elaborate procedures. There was a need to conduct more testing out of competition periods as only foolish athletes used banned substances during competition.
A major problem for the organisation had been the longstanding vacancy of a Chief Executive Officer, as the post had not been filled since the previous incumbent’s contract had expired. There were possible legal consequences. The Auditor General had issued a qualified report on the basis of an unsatisfactory asset management register. Accounting functions had been outsourced and unsatisfactory service had been rendered.
Members asked for more clarity on the testing process, particularly the need to test more out of competition. They were concerned about the prevalence of banned substance amongst the youth. The number of positive tests was about 1% of all tests, which reflected international norms. There was concern that national federations were biased in their hearings, which echoed the Institute’s desire to see an independent national tribute being established.
The status of the South African Roller Hockey Federation was discussed. They had been a member of the National Olympic Committee of South Africa, but with the creation of the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee their membership had not been renewed. Although they were privately funded, they requested the support of the Committee and the Department of Sport and Recreation. They had won the bid to host their World Cup in 2008, and were also looking to grow the sport. At present they had 300 members in Gauteng and Cape Town. Stumbling blocks included the high cost of equipment, although some equipment was now being manufactured locally.
Members stressed the need for proper procedures in the tendering of bids to host major international events, as the country had been embarrassed in the past by poor organisation of high profile events. The contents of a letter from the Department were also discussed in which it was suggested that the Federation was not officially recognized and had no right to approach Parliament. This was a misinterpretation and the issue was resolved.
Boxing South Africa reported that it had enjoyed a successful year. They had received an unqualified report from the Auditor General. The number of tournaments, both domestic and international, had increased. The Baby Champs league was producing national and even international champions. Women’s professional boxing had been started. However, sponsorship revenue was down. Boxing South Africa had made a loss of R2.4 million, and owed creditors R2,3 million. Accelerated funding from the Department would help to address this problem. Much of the money owed was due to the National Treasury.
Members raised questions on the training being given to boxers. Although some life skills training, including HIV/AIDS awareness, had been given it was not reflected in the Annual Report. There had also been problems with funding this training due to a requested lottery grant not yet having being paid. The audit committee was now running properly after some problems during the year covered by the report. The question of a single national sporting emblem was also discussed, as Boxing South Africa had its own symbol.
MINUTES
Opening remarks by Chairperson
The Chairperson congratulated the delegation from the South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport (SAIDS) on a good budget. He announced that the Committee would be meeting with their counterparts in the South African Development Community (SADC) towards the planning of the 2010 FIFA World Cup. They wished to see what the understanding was within SADC to the concept of an African World Cup. They would also discuss the extent to which the South African government was involved.
He questioned what was on the national agenda. There had been no objections at the Groote Schuur talks, the Congress for a Democratic South Africa and the Constitutional talks. Nobody wanted to keep Apartheid. The ANC was not apologetic in its support for the Springbok team. It was not the fault of the team that transformation was lagging. He questioned whether the leadership of Rugby had bought in to the transformation process. He had been at a sports shop in France and noticed several South Africans buying England shirts. The Committee’s goal was change in sport. All supported the Springboks, and he wished that the leadership would continue with the unity process.
He said that this was the third year in succession that the delegation from SAIDS had requested to leave the meeting early due to staff shortages. This matter should be addressed.
The Chairperson said that an addition to the agenda was a meeting with members of the South African Roller Hockey Federation (SARHF). This body had successfully bid to host their World Cup during 2008. He had been shocked to receive a copy of a letter sent to the South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee (SASCOC), dated 22 October. He read the letter to the Committee. According to the letter, the SARHF was not part of Hockey SA, and was not recognised by SASCOC. It must affiliate to Roller Sport. It had not considered hosting legislation in bidding for the World Cup. It would not be funded by the Department of Sport and Recreation (SRSA). They were taking a chance. It would not be a good idea for them to pursue their presentation to Parliament.
He said that the impression created by the letter was totally wrong. In terms of Rule 138, any citizen had the right to approach Parliament. The SASCOC statement had not been discussed with him, and was completely wrong. They could not stop the work of government. He did not understand where Roller Hockey fitted in, and how it was different to other forms of the game. There was roller sport, roller hockey and Hockey South Africa. He needed to feel comfortable with the issue.
Ms Alison Burchell (Chief Director, SRSA) said that the letter had come from her personal assistant and she therefore took responsibility. The final line was addressed to Mr Tubby Reddy, and was actually a request to Mr Reddy to confirm the contents of the letter. The intent of the letter was to clarify the status of roller hockey. SASCOC was requested to confirm the status of the sport for presentation to the Committee. She understood the misinterpretation which had resulted from this.
The Chairperson apologised to SASCOC, but still took exception to the issue. There must first be clarification from SASCOC. He then turned his attention to SAIDS. SRSA was funding SAIDS.
South African Institute for Drug-Free Sport presentation
Dr Shuaib Manjra (Chairman, SAIDS Board) thanked the Committee for its support. Their presence at this meeting was a sign of their commitment to account to the Committee. He apologised for requesting to be placed first on the agenda for an early departure, but he had only been given three days’ notice of the meeting and had to manage a full diary. This was the last Annual Report (AR) that he would be presenting, as the current Board was nearing the end of its final term. He thanked the Committee for its interest and support.
He said that the report looked at critical events during the five year term of the Board. The main events were the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) congress and code. The United Nations Education and Scientific Committee (UNESCO) convention was a means of enforcing legal compliance. There would be a WADA conference in Spain during November 2007, at which the amended WADA code would be adopted. This would bring an enormous burden of compliance. The Minister would sign the amended code. Another highlight was the formation of a regional body.
The Chairperson asked about the contents of the amended code. The Minister would be appearing before the Committee in two weeks, and that would be one of the questions. There were financial and political implications.
Dr Manjra said the code had been adopted at Copenhagen in 2002. There was a process of consultation with international federations and governments. A number of lessons had been learnt, particularly regarding the attitude of FIFA. They had been reluctant to agree to the code initially due to the penalties imposed on individuals. They had wanted to see penalties being imposed on the merits of individual cases, not as blanket penalties. The amended code would have two categories of penalty. One would be a mandatory penalty for offences related to the use of steroids and other performance enhancing substances. The other category would be for different offences such as the use of recreational drugs. There would be some leeway in sentencing for these offences, which would be determined by individual factors. At the same time, the penalties for the abuse of certain substances would be increased from a two to a four year suspension.
He said that the area of therapeutic use exemptions (TUE) was an enormous burden. At present, every athlete using some form of chronic medication must apply for a TUE. This totalled approximately one thousand athletes in South Africa annually. The amended code would provide for a retrospective TUE. If an athlete tested positive, then there could be a review of his or her case in retrospect.
Dr Manjra said that there was a registered testing pool of athletes, the number of which was also approximately one thousand. These athletes had to inform the SAIDS of their whereabouts for every hour of every day so that they could be tested at any time. If there were three transgression of this regulation it would be treated as a contravention of the code and the athlete was liable to a two year suspension. This requirement also entailed a huge administrative burden, and there were also financial consequences. There was a need to increase the ration of out of competition to in competition testing. This was a WADA imperative.
He said that there was a need to establish a national tribunal, which would hear all cases. At present hearings were held by a tribunal convened by the athlete’s national federation but SAIDS found this unsatisfactory. The federations seemed to be interested to impose the lightest possible sentences in order to keep the athlete available for competition. The establishment of such a tribunal would have cost implications, and the buy-in of the federations was needed.
Dr Manjra said that another element of the amended WADA code was the introduction of blood tests. At present the standard test was done by a urine sample. This would increase the burden on SAIDS, and would make matters very difficult. Drawing a blood sample was an invasive procedure. There were implications regarding training of personnel, transport of samples and the testing facilities. There was as yet no accurate test for human growth hormone.
Discussion
The Chairperson asked about the cost implications. A professional nurse would be needed for the drawing of blood, and this must come from the SAIDS budget. There must be a strategic intervention, and the budget matters would have to be sorted out. He did not understand why FIFA preferred out of competition testing. He asked what the difference was between that and in competition testing.
Dr Manjra said that there were different views of doping. Most athletes knew that they would be tested during events. It was more a test of the intelligence of the athletes. They would be stupid if they were caught using illegal substances during competition. They therefore used such substances out of competition and stopped before the event.
Mr D Lee (DA) asked if this is what had happened with Marion Jones.
Dr Manjra replied that it was. Lance Armstrong had boasted of never having been tested positive, but at the same time did not say that he had never used performance enhancing substances. Marion Jones had been caught out of competition. Intelligent tests were needed to catch the drug cheats.
Mr L Reed (ANC) asked about the readiness of athletes to undergo tests. He asked if this was the case with the cyclist Rasmussen, who had been missing from the place where he said he was.
Dr Manjra said that Rasmussen’s team had ejected him after his failure to appear for a test. False information had been given, and this was considered a violation. In his case he was in Mexico when he said he was in Europe, but even if an athlete was not in the place where he said he would be at that hour, it was still a violation.
Mr D Dikgacwi (ANC) asked about out of competition doping. He asked what period must pass before a drug could no longer be detected in an athlete’s body, and how long these substances remained in the body. He also asked if the substances still enhanced performance even after they had passed through the athlete’s body.
Dr Manjra replied that it depended on the substance. In the case of EPO, which was the enhancement of red blood cells, the effects were undetectable 24 hours after use. Such persons needed to be caught at the time. With other substances, the tendency was to use microdoses. The signs of these disappeared rapidly, but athletes had to use these more often. Anabolic steroids lasted for longer periods, but were also used in microdoses. A window of three to four days was available to detect these substances. They were still effective even after these detection periods had passed.
The Chairperson said this was very useful information.
Mr Lee said that the crux of the matter was that the amended code would increase the administrative load on SAIDS. Therefore more money would be needed. The Committee should not shy away from this, as there was an increased chance of athletes getting away with these illegal activities if it was not done. He pleaded for the budget to be increased to cover these extra costs.
Dr Manjra said there were two or three areas where additional funding was needed. There were burdens imposed by the amended WADA code. A second area was the administration of SAIDS, for example with the maintenance of the database of athlete whereabouts. Fortunately the burden of maintaining the TUE database would be reduced. A third area was in personnel. Increased training and awareness programmes were needed. There was a plan for a new structure over five years. Two new people would be appointed to manage the training and awareness programmes. This was part of a deterrent function, and scholars had to be targeted.
The Chairperson said that South Africa was a signatory to the WADA code. The country must honour its obligations fully. This was a pertinent point. Only two people were being appointed to manage the training and awareness programme. This would not help a lot. Of the eighteen major national federations, some did not know about WADA. SAIDS must set the standards for training, even if the training itself was outsourced. This was being done with Parliamentary training.
Dr Manjra said that SAIDS had engaged in a full day strategic planning exercise. They had looked at their challenges and responsibilities, and had come up with a very much revised strategic plan and budget. This had been submitted to SRSA.
The Chairperson reminded Dr Manjra that SAIDS still owed the Committee a workshop. There had been an exodus of people. SRSA was deteriorating constantly. There was a lack of capacity which would impact on SAIDS as well.
Dr Manjra acknowledged the lack of support from SRSA. It received funding, but nothing else. There had been very little communication with SRSA before the appointment of Ms Burchell. SAIDS had not had a CEO for the last ten months. SRSA had taken nine months to approve a simple job regarded function. This had been brought to SRSA’s attention and had finally been resolved.
He said that the formation of the Regional Anti-Doping Agency (RADA) had created a single regional body, which would help to pool resources. It was accredited with the International Standards Organisation (ISO), and its members had been part of a number of international events. Testing had been done at all events without problems. Control officers were of a high standard and had participated in international events. Traditional methods of testing were not necessarily bearing fruit. Tests were based on international standards.
Dr Manjra said that SAIDS needed the support of various agencies to stop the flow of illegal substances. A total system of law enforcement was needed. The American Drug Enforcement Agency had recently raided a hundred laboratories which had led to the Belco prosecutions. Similar action was needed in South Africa. Sports drugs were the gateway to other drugs.
He said that the support of national federations was needed to establish a national tribunal. Analytic methods had to be developed. New substances had to be combated. Traditional medicines were leading to inadvertent doping. There was a huge strain on resources. SAIDS wanted an integrated database with results, whereabouts of athletes and TUE information. He hoped this would all be streamlined.
Dr Manjra said that the ideal was to have a ratio of in competition to out of competition testing of 50:50. SAIDS had not yet met this, and the current ratio was 66:34. Officials were well trained, and the percentage of errors was low. There had been a target of 2 500 tests for the year discussed in the AR, but budgetary constraints had limited the number of tests conducted to 2 345. Another complicating element of the WADA code was the testosterone testing procedure. If the ratio of testosterone was greater than 4:1, then the sample had to be sent to Cologne in Germany for further testing.
He said that SAIDS had met its targets with the training of doping control officers. It had however fallen short of its educational targets due to a lack of resources. Research was one key topic for the coming year. Three focus areas had been identified, namely supplements, traditional medicines and Ritalin.
Dr Manjra said that the number of positive tests was in line the tendency of the last five years. In the year under review there had been 23 positive tests, which represented about 1%. This was in line with international benchmarks, but he believed that more doping was happening. This was the first time that all substance abusers had been named in the AR. This was required by WADA. The audit report had been qualified for the first time due to the lack of a proper asset management register. They had a register, but it had not met requirements. The issue had been carried over. He acknowledged the gap that existed. There had also been some problems with financial statements.
Mr Lee said it was a pity that they had received a qualified report. The issue was very important. He wondered if performance enhancement was associated with senior codes. Many things were happening at the schools, and the raids envisaged by SAIDS might be taken there as well. Offenders had to be caught when they were still small. He said that it was a pity that he had only received the report on the morning of the meeting and could not interact with it properly.
The Chairperson said that the meeting had been postponed for two weeks to enable Members to interact with the report. He wondered what had happened. He would check with the storeroom staff. Members liked to compare the current reports to those of previous years. He asked if SAIDS had had an asset register the previous year. If not, then the Auditor General (AG) should have issued a qualified report then as well.
Mr J Masango (DA) said that R133 000 had been budgeted for training development but nothing had been spent the previous year. He noted an item of irregular expenditure, and asked why the Minister had not given permission for an overseas trip. He asked why the contract of the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) had not been renewed, as she had been doing well.
Mr Dikgacwi compared performance to objectives. He asked why there were 70% unannounced tests. He noticed that some offenders had been warned while others had been suspended for what seemed to similar offences. This was inconsistent.
Mr Lee observed that all the offenders were South Africans. He asked if there were any foreigners that had tested positive, as several international events had been staged.
Mr Reed noted that 369 rugby players had been tested. He asked if these tests were done at provincial level only, or also at club level. There had only been one positive test, which was down from the previous year.
Dr Manjra said that SAIDS had always had an asset register. This did not fulfil requirements. He did not know why, as this had been satisfactory in previous years. However, the latest audit had been more intensive than in previous years. SAIDS did not want to hide anything. It was disappointing, but was a matter of administrative rigour.
He said the doping situation in schools was a serious concern. In the United States and Europe the problem existed already, and it was probably a problem in South Africa as well. It occurred mainly in the richer schools. He recounted the story of the tribunal held with a schools player on which he had sat. The tribunal did not want to ban the player for two years, and had been prepared to invoke a whistle-blower cause. The player’s father had been present with legal representation. There was so much pressure on the player from the school that he refused to provide any information and had therefore accepted the two year suspension.
Dr Manjra said that unannounced tests at schools were not allowed. The age of consent was a legal issue. SAIDS had made an application in terms of drug testing regulations which were currently used to police the use of recreational drugs. They had made a submission that sport drugs should be included in the provisions.
The Chairperson said that the people were being punished for being South Africans, while foreigners got away with everything through plea bargains. He had no problem with plea bargains being used to enhance prosecutions, but hated the trend. This was his personal view.
Dr Manjra said that plea bargains would be used for the greater good. They would rather nail the support structure. They would rather prevent a hundred youngsters being exposed to doping than punish one individual. SAIDS had no jurisdiction over foreign athletes, but had conducted about 200 tests on foreign nationals. Where positive tests were returned, these were referred to that athlete’s home body. These tests were not conducted at South Africa’s expense.
Mr Lee said that if the tests were done with South African funds then he wished to know what the results were.
Dr Manjra continued that the training costs were budgeted towards a doping control officer workshop. This had not been done the previous year. The CEO had been appointed on a limited, fixed contract. The term had ended, and the Board had not been keen to renew it. They felt that Ms Bradbury had taken the organisation to a point but could not take it any further. Some aspects of the Institute’s work, such as education, had fallen flat. There was a lack of relationships with national federations and a lack of innovation. She had shown good administrative characteristics but lacked leadership. SAIDS did not have permission to appoint a new CEO. Ms Bradbury had been offered an extension, but had declined it. Mr Fahmy Galant was the acting CEO.
Ms N Ntuli (ANC) asked what the team spirit within the organisation had been, and if there was any support for her.
The Chairperson asked if she had been left to swim or sink. This was often the case with female leaders. He asked about the nature of the relationship between the Board, staff members and the CEO.
Dr Manjra believed that the CEO had the ultimate responsibility for the success of an organisation. The Board played an oversight role. There were five staff members in the office. The Board had given all its support, and members had even taken on some executive functions to ease the pressure. Relationships had become strained, and there was a lack of delivery. Education and awareness was a key element of SAIDS’s work. The Minister was concerned that this was not being taken forward. There was a strained relationship between the CEO and the staff. One had resigned. The Board had intervened, and there had been an improvement in working relations. They had had to terminate the services of one staff member. This person had been absent without leave for six weeks, and had already been on a final warning. There was a need to build a new team. This was not a pretty picture, but was the honest truth.
He said that the irregular expenditure item had been carried over for three years. At the time, no ministerial permission was needed for overseas minutes. The dispute had arisen in the interim. The CEO had needed to request a condonation. This had only been done recently.
Dr Manjra said that tests were done at all levels of rugby. The South African Rugby Union had provided funds for additional tests. Schools were included, but only at the annual Craven Week.
He said that 70% of in competition tests were unannounced, while all out of season tests were unannounced. They were trying to increase the number of unannounced tests to 100%. Penalties were imposed if an athlete was not present where he or she had indicated he or she would be. Where national federations held their own tribunals, there was more likelihood of a biased finding. An independent body was needed. SAIDS had appealed against some of these decisions and in cases had even taken their appeals to WADA. One case had occurred with hockey, and there was another case pending with ice hockey.
Mr Lee noted the lack of a national tribunal. He wondered if there was an international tribunal.
Dr Manjra answered that there were a number of levels. If there was a positive finding, the athlete’s federation was informed. Their finding was then conveyed to the responsible international finding and WADA. The Council for Arbitration in Sport was the ultimate appeal body.
Mr Dikgacwi presumed that if a national federation needed the services of a player then it was likely that he or she would get off with a warning. He therefore could not understand the lack of an independent body.
Dr Manjra said the WADA code required an independent body, but that resources were needed. SAIDS was consulting with the various national federations on the issue. In should be included in the Act to give it the force of law. Resources would be needed to maintain such a tribune. It would be an expensive affair, and there was no budgetary provision at present.
Mr Masango asked what was used before the national tribunal. He asked what had been done about the missing statements alluded to in the AG report. He noted that the allowances for Board members had doubled. He asked Dr Manjra what his own fees were, as these had also doubled.
Dr Manjra said that if a positive test was recorded, then the appropriate national federation was advised. A tribunal would consist of three members, namely a doctor, an administrator and a legal person, who would be in the chair. It was held within the federation, but an independent tribunal was needed.
He said that the missing statements were the result of shoddy accounting. It had been recommended that SAIDS appoint a Chief Financial Officer (CFO), but the organisation was too small to justify this. They had advertised the position, but response had been poor. The function had therefore been outsourced to an accounting firm by the name of PKF. A junior clerk had been seconded to handle the SAIDS account, but this person’s work had been shoddy. Corrections had been done, and this was reflected by the AG. An independent chartered accountant had now been engaged to do the Institute’s books. An item of doubtful debt was attributable to an unpaid debt incurred by Nigeria for laboratory fees. They owed R200 000 and SAIDS was struggling to recover this. The honoraria had been increased by the Minister, and even these were not in line with market prices.
The Chairperson reminded Dr Manjra about the workshop. Of all the African countries, only Tunisia and South Africa had doping control agencies. He asked how many conferences had been held in South Africa.
Dr Manjra replied that this was only the third world conference. The previous conferences had been held in 1999 in Switzerland and 2003 in Denmark. It would be attended by representatives of governments, the International Olympic Committee, international federations and national anti-doping agencies. No conferences had been held in this country, but Africa would be represented. Many African governments were signatories and were members of the RADA. The Minister would attend the conference together with someone from the department. SAIDS had held a conference in 2006 to try to increase the number of agencies on the continent, but attendance had been poor. Training would be done at the next workshop. SAIDS was working incredibly hard to develop African capacity.
The Chairperson countered that the view of the West was arrogant. There were only three organisations, two of which were African. However, the conferences were all held in Europe. It would be correct to have the conference in South Africa. This country was not just a small player, and there must be a deliberate effort to boost the country’s status. Recognition must be stressed by SAIDS and government representatives.
Dr Manjra agreed. SAIDS had made efforts to support Africa. There had been inter-government meetings while Ngconde Balfour was still the Minister. Africa would only come right when all countries were working together. During the All-Africa Games in Nigeria all samples had been sent to England, and during the same event in Algeria the samples had been sent to France. African countries were not supporting their own.
The Chairperson warned that the African institutes would be forgotten one day. It had taken nine months to sort out the matter of the CEO, and the matter had still not been finalised. The Committee had a view on why the matter was not closed. SRSA had not helped. He did not think the Department was working in the interests of the people of South Africa. He asked what the reason could be. Without support SAIDS should rather be shut down.
Ms Burchell said that the appointment of the CEO was a legally complicated issue. When the post became vacant it had to be submitted for a job evaluation. A quality assurance process would then follow, and this had been referred to the Department of Public Service Administration (DPSA). This process had dragged from March to October. It had been upgraded to a Level 13 (Chief Director) position. There had been many follow-ups, and she shared the Committee’s concerns.
The Chairperson had written a humble message to the Minister. He had met with the Minister of Finance on the subject of the concurrent powers relevant to the appointment of the CEO. Mr Komphela had asked that the Act could be amended to simplify this clumsy situation. The Minister had assured him that the post would be filled. He was not happy, and would include the matter in the Committee’s report to Parliament. A CEO was needed, and an attractive salary was needed to get the right person. There must be a closer understanding on these issues. When needed, all departments must co-operate. Combating substance abuse was not the sole responsibility of SAIDS, but Home Affairs and SAPS also had a role to play. He asked if there were ever discussions on the matter.
Dr Manjra responded these issues were clearly outlined in the strategic plan. There had been some discussions and the issue of coordination had been put on the table. SAIDS was suspicious of the ability of these other departments to curb the flow of illegal substances, and cited a case of Indian athletes who had brought substances into the country.
Ms Burchell added that the initial strategic plan had been referred to the Minister but he had declined to approve it. Aspects of the work between SAIDS and other departments had to be clarified. She did not want to assume that it was an issue of funding requests. The Minister saw the proposals as a change of mandate which would require Cabinet approval and an amendment to the Act. Legal opinion had been sought on the national tribunal and the cooperation of law enforcement agencies. The opinion was that this mandate was already in place. There was provision for cooperation with SAPS and customs. It was a two-fold view. SAIDS was concerned about trafficking in sports related drugs, but these were not necessarily banned. Offence regarding sports drugs would be referred to the tribunal and criminal cases to SAPS. The next step was to put the other components of the strategic plan to the Minister and ask for condonation on these. There would be consequences if this was not done. The original budget figures would be affected.
The Chairperson said that SRSA and the Minister must know what was happening. The Minister must give wisdom on what was happening. The different issues should have been highlighted. He asked if this was now law. The Committee would work closely with SRSA, but would not be nice guys.
Ms Burchell said she might be misinterpreting the Minister. The Committee seemed to have the impression that SRSA was implementing the law in the incorrect way.
Mr Lee asked why SAIDS could not catch the Indian athletes. This was about banned substances. It was illegal to bring in drugs. Vaseline could perhaps be a performance enhancing substance. He asked how this could be prosecuted.
Dr Manjra said that WADA had commissioned SAIDS to conduct tests on the Indian athletes. The first time the doping control officer went to the hotel, but the athletes ran away before they could be tested and the mission was aborted. The next time they entered the country, SAIDS requested customs to search their baggage.
Mr Lee found this interesting and informative.
Mr Masango asked if they had the names of the athletes.
Dr Manjra replied that they had names, but the athletes all looked the same. They needed photographs with the names when given a mission to prevent this confusion.
The Chairperson returned to the disclaimer issued by the AG. Regarding audit problems, he asked what was the communication between departments. He asked if letter were being conveyed, or if there was an exchange of memos.
Dr Manjra replied that they problem had only being uncovered when the audit had been down. The company was aware of the requirements. An experienced PKF accountant had handled the account for many years, but had been replaced by an inexperienced person on leaving PKF’s employ.
Ms Masango raised a question about audit committee meetings. He asked what role was played by the audit committee. He had not been able to pick this up.
The Chairperson said that when SAIDS presented the workshop to the Committee, the issue of the various roles played must be discussed. If the audit committee was up to standard, it would have picked up the problems earlier.
Dr Manjra agreed. The audit committee had been ineffective. There had been a number of resignations.
The Chairperson told the SRSA representative that the Committee would require Parliament to say that SAIDS had contravened the Public Funds Management Act (PFMA) by being without a CEO for nine months. Only a Head of Department or a CEO could be held responsible as the accounting officer, and this office had been absent. SRSA had been ineffective. SRSA knew this was an offence. The Department could not contravene the law. Nobody else could control public funds. Immediate attention was needed. It was not the Board that would go to jail if criminal charges were pressed.
Dr Manjra outlined the process of the selection of the new Board. The current Board’s term ended at the end of October. Advertisements had been placed in the Sunday Times. The public had been given thirty days to nominate new Board members. The Minister would then get the nominations, and pass them on to SAIDS and SASCOC. SASCOC would make recommendations within thirty days; whereafter the Minister would appoint the new Board members. Nominations were now with the Minister and needed to go to SASCOC. He thanked the Committee for their efforts. He had experienced great fun and enjoyment, but there were still challenges for SAIDS.
Mr Lee asked if advertisements had been placed in other newspapers.
Mr Manjra was not aware of any other newspapers.
The Chairperson said that in terms of the law, advertisements had to be placed in all national newspapers. He assumed that this had been done. He would ask Ms Burchell to check on the correctness of the process. New advertisements would have to be placed if the process did not comply with the law.
South African Roller Hockey Federation presentation
Mr Butityi Konki (CEO, BK Investment) said that he was a businessman interested in sport. Up to now sport had been for the select few, but sponsorship was making sport affordable. He was financing a roller hockey team to fly to Brazil. He asked the Committee to investigate the letter alluded to earlier by the Chairperson. The SARHF had felt threatened by the contents. The President of roller hockey owned speed and artistic hockey, but roller sport was affiliated to SASCOC.
The Chairperson said that Ms Wendy Van Heerden, Roller Sport South Africa President, mentioned in the letter could not say that SARHF was wasting its time by coming to Parliament. Many people thought that hockey was an entity like rugby. The context in which the remarks had been made had to be considered.
Mr Konki said that SARHF had not come to the Committee to ask for money. He would fund the sport. In the same way his company had bought a bank, and then given control of it to the people.
The Chairperson said that the letter had come from Ms Burchell’s office. The Committee had to deal with an anarchic situation. He mentioned the case of a leading official who had recently come to the Committee to answer charges of misleading Parliament.
Mr Konki replied that SARHF had been told that they would not be included on the presentation list. A video was presented of roller hockey. He said that the sport had started in 1965. It had been for the privileged, as only those who could afford it could play. Personal kit alone cost approximately R3 500, and until recently everything was imported. A massification project had been launched, and recently local manufacture of boots and sticks had started. The national team was 25% representative of the demographics of the country.
He said that SARHF had a five year plan to develop the sport. The international community had embraced the federation. The international body, CIRA, and individual countries were all supplying assistance. Spain was helping with coaching. An African confederation was being set up.
Mr Konki said that roller hockey was an exciting, fast game. It was an Olympic demonstration sport in 1992, and was re-applying for Olympic status. It was played on all continents. South Africa had a good ranking. The sport played a role in integrating the youth. Players had to start between six and nine of age to develop the necessary skills.
He said that the World Cup would involve South Africa and fifteen other countries. There would be a lot of marketing involved. The tournament would last for ten days and some 15000 spectators were involved. It was a significant opportunity to market the game. It would be the first World Cup to be held in Africa, and South Africa had a responsibility to lead. Alliances had been formed with African, European and South American countries. There would be significant international exposure.
Mr Konki said that the sport had grown by 30%. There were 25 teams representing nine clubs, and some 300 playing members. The SARHF was striving to increase this number to 500 players. The sport was not represented in all nine provinces due to a lack of funds. There was a big challenge in integration. They wanted to develop the game, and business would be asked to assist. Brazil had invited to take part in the Copa America tournament. He invited the Committee to send a member to attend the tournament. He said that he would engage with Mr Moshishi. The position would be reviewed only in July 2008 and they could not go on without support. SARHF had been part of the National Olympic Committee of South Africa (NOCSA). They wanted the Committee to show them the way and take leadership.
Discussion
The Chairperson asked what was being done.
Mr Konki said that their efforts were being blocked. They had liaised with ms Van Heerden from Roller Sport from the beginning. If they had realised they could approach Parliament directly they would have presented two years previously.
The Chairperson commented on the role of Parliament in sport. People needed to be educated that they could approach the Committee with presentations and submissions. In terms of Rule 138 the recourse of ordinary people to approach Parliament was stipulated. SASCOC was exploiting their ignorance by saying the only way to Parliament was through them. It was not fair that they had been kept in limbo for so long.
Mr Dikgacwi asked what the difference was between field and roller hockey. He asked how many clubs had been formed since 1992, and what the provincial spread was. He also asked what facilities were available.
Ms Ntuli said that there was a requirement for equipment and rinks. She asked if there had been any attempt to introduce the sport into the townships. She asked if they had looked at facilities in the townships. She asked if there was any way of obtaining equipment except by importing. If a local company was able to manufacture equipment it would lead to job creation. They had worked successfully to win the World Cup bid, and were to be commended.
Mr Masango said the sport was established in 1965, but was only seeking recognition in 2007. He asked what the situation had been while the Sports Council had still been in existence. He asked about the national, provincial and local structures.
Mr Joaquim Coimbra (President, SARHF) said that there were a lot of varieties in the sport. Inline hockey was a different game. Roller hockey was not as extreme as ice hockey. The start up costs for a player were high. A good pair of skates could cost between R3 000 and R4 000. The Federation was trying to make basic kit as affordable as possible. To play the game an enclosed rink was needed, and the size was approximately 20 by 40 metres. SASCOC had tried to put all codes on roller skates into one body.
He said that the footprint of SARHF was that there was a national body. There were clubs throughout Gauteng and in Cape Town. A field was sublet as a facility. There were regional councils and various tournaments, culminating in a national tournament.
Mr Coimbra said that boots were now being manufactured locally. Most components were available locally except for the chassis. The mould to make the chassis costed about R500 000. Fibreglass sticks were being produced. Some kit was being borrowed.
He described the picture in Africa. A confederation of African roller hockey was being established. There was a lot of money in Angola, and they had even built a stadium. They might finance the establishment of equipment factories in South Africa. Every effort was being made to make the game affordable.
Mr Coimbra said that roller hockey had been played at the Masakhane Games in Soweto. Children had been bussed in to take part; however the interest had fizzled out. A new initiative had been launched, and children were coming in. Marketing was needed, and there would be exposure for the game if there was television coverage.
He said that SARHF had been recognised in 1992 by Mr Gilberto Martins as part of NOCSA. They had attended the World Cup in Andorra that year. They had re-applied to SASCOC for membership in 2002, but things had fallen apart and they had been left out. They had come to this meeting to seek the blessing of the Committee.
The Chairperson said that it was this Committee that appropriated money. The best approach for SARHF, if they were frightened of the letter, was to approach the Committee. Parliament and the Committee appropriated money. If the Committee approved a request, they would get it despite opposition by SASCOC.
Mr Masango asked if there were factions in the sport in the same way as had been experienced with karate.
The Chairperson said that there was a similar pattern. Since the advent of SASCOC it had tended to play a gatekeeper role. This was not the intention of its creation. One submission had been that SASCOC must take charge of sports facilities and funding, and this was emerging through this issue. SARHF was not a new organisation. There had been some structural adjustment and things had gone wrong. Children playing sport should not be punished. The pattern of division must stop.
Ms Burchell said that karate was still not working despite the interim committee which had been established. The Transplant Games had required a new body to be formed. All federations had had to apply anew for membership of SASCOC. Similar sports had been grouped together. A function had been held to recognise the Special Olympics participants. The Special Olympics was not a SASCOC affiliate, but the Minister had said that they were all South African citizens and deserved to be supported.
She said that SRSA was concerned about the hosts of international events embarrassing the country. This had happened when the World Softball Championships had been held in East London. The federation could not organise the event. Federations needed to ask permission to host major events. Capacity and financial issues had to be satisfactory. Roller hockey must get back on track, and SRSA would help them.
Mr T Louw (ANC) concurred on the hosting of the World Cup, even though he had only heard about it at the meeting. Two or three years ago there had been a decision taken to coordinate the hosting of international events. Everybody wanted to host a World Cup in their discipline. He asked if SRSA had been aware of the bid, as he did not know about it. He said there were major political and other implications.
Mr E Mtshali (ANC) said he had seen the game being played at the ice rink in Durban.
Mr Masango said that perhaps he did not understand the working of SASCOC. He asked for an explanation of how federations joined the Confederation.
Mr Reed said that the event was already allocated. SAHRF had not followed the correct procedure, but should not be excluded. A follow-up meeting should take place soon. He asked if the international body had their own international sponsors. There were a lot of finances needed, and he asked if these could be generated locally.
Mr Konki replied that there was a very fundamental point regarding the meeting. They had been knocking but there had been no answer. They had sponsors lined up and had money and the capacity to handle the event. The international body would also come to the party. All they needed was the support of the Committee and of SASCOC.
Mr Coimbra said that SAHRF had interacted with Roller Sport, and did not intend to take that organisation over. They would even assist them with fundraising.
The Chairperson thanked SAHRF for coming. He asked if they had the facilities to host the event. He asked if the event would be held in various provinces or just Gauteng.
Mr Coimbra said that the World Cup was normally held at one venue. They wore looking at using venues in Johannesburg and Pretoria. The Wembley Stadium in Johannesburg was an ideal venue.
Mr Konki said that the event would only last ten days.
The Chairperson said that they should never make it an expensive sport or a white Portuguese sport. The Springboks would tour the country on their return from France but would only visit the big centres. Roller hockey must not be so selective. He accepted the principled position of the Minister. He could never say that he did not support the team. Ms Burchell was right on issue of embarrassing the country by poor organisation. He did not want so see this happening. There should be a test of the ability of the organisation to host the event. The involvement of business was good as government funds were limited. The sport needed to expand, but it must start from a small place. If it was exciting then others would get involved. SRSA would help although capacity was a problem. The South African Football Association had done this with the 2010 bid. However, all government funds were committed to developing infrastructure for the event.
Mr Dikgacwi suggested that the SAHRF should return in about six months to discuss the progress of plans for the event, although that might be too far in the future.
Mr Konki suggested a meeting in November or December.
The Chairperson said that the follow-up meeting should be held in six months time.
Mr Coimbra said that the world body would visit the country in six months. He would bring them to Parliament.
The Chairperson welcomed this suggestion, but said that SAHRF must first interact with the Committee before introducing the international delegation.
Boxing South Africa presentation
The Chairperson welcomed the new CEO of Boxing South Africa (BSA). He was pleased to see that the appointment had been made. The Members were very happy, and were not cruel people. He was glad to see that the days of bad audit reports were over. BSA always had to be given a chance. The last meeting with BSA had been in April. He assumed that the Chairperson of the Board was leading the delegation, not the CEO. He congratulated BSA on not having received a disclaimer from the AG, and also on the organisation of the events to mark Women’s Day. SRSA had assisted with the events in Durban. The 2005 women’s workshop had seen SRSA undertake to contribute to events. The Leila Ali matter would not be discussed, but it had been well organised in the end. The promoter had done well.
Dr Peter Ngatane (Board Member, BSA) thanked the Committee for its perseverance and guidelines. He introduced the delegation and apologised for the absence of the Chairperson of the Board, Adv Dali Mpofu.
Mr Bongani Khumalo (CEO, BSA) said that boxing was the only code that was regulated by Parliament. He outlined the duties of BSA, and presented the new vision and mission. These were still premised on the original objectives of the Act. He listed the sources of funding available to BSA.
Mr Loyiso Mtya (Director Operations, BSA) said that the organisation needed people to manage its affairs. There had been a delay in the appointment of the CEO, but the situation was now healthy. The AR had been compiled successfully. The awards presentation which had been held was the best to date. During the year under review there had been 88 tournaments presented, up from 82 the previous year. Of these 21 were international events, up from eighteen. The only way to improve the sport was to stage tournaments which would give boxers the maximum opportunity to develop their skills. Both quality and quantity had to be considered.
There had been an increase in the number of licensed boxers. BSA was looking to bring minority groups back into the sport. They were being successful in this quest, especially amongst the white population. A great success was the box and dine tournaments. Mr Jeff Ellis was doing good work in promoting these events. Tables were sold for between R10 000 and R15 000. He hoped to see these spread to the rest of the country as they were only being presented in Johannesburg at present. Professional female boxing was progressing well. Five women had turned professional. There were still problems in encouraging the sport in the Indian community.
Mr Mtya said that the Leila Ali bout had been a big occasion, and there had been other big events. The Baby Champs project was growing thanks to the work of the promoters. The BSA held the funds. Eleven fighters from the Baby Champs ranks had gone on to greater things, with eight provincial, two national and one international champion having been produced. The concept was still taking South African boxing by storm. There would be a program linked to the Makhaya Ntini benefit events later in the year.
He said that an agreement had been signed by the Tourism, Hospitality and Entertainment Training Authority (Theta). The agreement was worth R3 million and skills would be provided. An agent had been appointed and training had started. Management meetings had been helped.
The Chairperson pointed out that the Committee had helped BSA to get out of the mess it had been in.
Mr Jos Steyn (CFO, BSA) was proud to say that BSA had received an unqualified audit report. The financial statements were ready for he auditors. Much less had been received from sponsors, with the figure having dropped to R898 000. BSA had sustained a loss of R2.4 million in the year under review. He went through the financial status report and said that BSA owed its creditors R2,3 million. They had applied for medium term funding from Treasury through SRSA to the tune of R2 million. Fortunately SRSA had accelerated funding. BSA had also applied for a lotto grant of R1.5 million. They were speaking to potential sponsors, and there were good signs there.
Mr Khumalo said that a mandate had to be established with the High Performance Centre. The staff structure had been approved. There were two disciplinary meetings. The issue with Mr Mlabateki had been resolved and that with Mr Krish Naidoo would be completed during 2008.
Dr Ngatane said that most of the acting posts had now been settled. This had been done after the AR had been sent to the printers, as this document still showed a number of acting positions.
Discussion
Mr Masango complimented BSA on the good work it had done. However, there were still a lot of matters of emphasis. No sponsors had been found since the last meeting with BSA. A lot of money would be needed to fund the post structure on the new organigram.
Ms Ntuli thanked BSA for the work it had done.
Mr Dikgacwi had gone through the document. The AG had raised some issues of policy.
Dr Ngatane said that most policies were now in place. He would advise the Committee.
The Chairperson noted that the Deputy Minister was not included in the organigram, and advised BSA how his position should be reflected. Boxing had been established in terms of the Act, not through the wisdom of the Department. There was an obligatory relationship. BSA was the responsibility of SRSA.
Dr Ngatane said that since the last meeting, money due to BSA from SRSA had been paid.
Ms Burchell said that payments to BSA had been fast tracked. This was a voluntary decision. The AG had said that if this had not been done, then BSA would not have been a going concern and the report would have had to be qualified. She agreed that SRSA had a responsibility to BSA. The AG had asked for the approval of the fast tracked funds. BSA needed R2 million to repay its debt. Much of this was owed to National Treasury for Value Added Tax (VAT) and other taxation issues. The Minister was clear that once BSA was on its feet then more attention had to be paid to generating sponsorship income. At some stage BSA should be deregulated.
The Chairperson agreed with this summary.
Dr Ngatane was upset that these issues were being raised despite BSA receiving an unqualified report. On the question of the financial viability of BSA, he said that the organisation had taken great steps to reach its current position. It was sad that SRSA, as its mother body, was the one that wanted to dampen the mood.
The Chairperson said that SRSA had no jurisdiction over BSA. This all lay in the Act. If it was repealed it would not be because of one man’s decision. Two years ago the amalgamation of NOCSA and the Sports Commission to form SASCOC had led to the current situation with BSA. The process had not been done well, and had led to where BSA was now. Although the AG report was unqualified, there were still other matters of concern. The Committee would deal with the gist of these matters. He congratulated BSA despite the caution which was still needed.
On the question of the appointment of the CEO, he remembered that BSA had said once it had been done then they could deal with other staff positions. He asked if this had been done.
Dr Ngatane said that the office was now stabilised. There were no more acting appointments.
The Chairperson observed that a training and development session had been planned to improve the skills of all categories of people involved with the sport. The report did not reveal if uniform criteria were being applied. He asked what the standards were, and if equity measures were in place. Life orientation skills were not reflected. The issue of a basic income was not addressed. When government reneged on its responsibilities then the Act would have to be repealed. He asked if there was understanding over financial management.
Mr Khumalo said that they had the criteria and had therefore gone to Theta to implement training programmes. Pilot projects had been launched in Limpopo and the Eastern Cape. Various life and entrepreneurial skills were included. Veteran boxers were being brought back into the sport for training and empowerment, and to run the courses.
Mr Steyn said that a breakdown of BSA’s cash flow had been provided. They could afford to employ all staff until March 2008. They had budgeted for the next year, but much would depend on sponsorship.
Dr Ngatane said that sponsorship would be used to pay for the various programmes. A life skills project was being piloted at the High Performance Centre. Training and accreditation was in place in the form of wider programmes. All licensees would benefit. Boxing was the only sport that provided insurance to its participants to cover death, funeral costs and injuries.
Mr Masango asked if there were no sponsors, would government funding be requested. If there was insufficient funding, would the organogram be revised?
Mr Steyn said this would be the case. They could afford to retain staff for the mean time. They had received a grant from Theta. Of the R3 million, R500 000 would be channelled into administration.
The Chairperson noted the list of audit committee members in Chapter 3 of the AR. Members of the Board were also on the audit committee, and this could lead to a conflict of interests.
Dr Ngatane agreed that a member of the Board should not be on the audit committee. This had subsequently changed. A new committee had been appointed on the suggestion of the AG.
The Chairperson asked about equity issues. The issue had been raised by the AG.
Mr Khumalo replied that there was one female and two black members. This was in line with regulations.
The Chairperson asked about the number of audit committee meetings. This was not disclosed in the Annual Report. This might compromise compliance with regulations. This led to a lack of reporting, and needed to be addressed.
Mr Steyn said that the previous audit committee had not been functional. There had been two compulsory meetings held to sign off the financial statements. The next meeting would be held in two weeks, but the committee was now operating within the guidelines.
The Chairperson said these were the issues. If the procedure was not followed there would be problems, otherwise he would be comfortable. He noticed an expense of R18 000 for fines and penalties. He asked if these were as a result of negligence, and if so, what steps had been taken.
Mr Steyn said that some of these related to an old VAT assessment. This would not happen again. A small proportion of the amount was for traffic fines. These had been recovered from the incumbent’s salary. Two cases had occurred near Ventersdorp. A hearing had been held and these were the person’s first and second offences. A final warning had been issued, and then the money had been deducted.
Mr Louw asked what the policy was regarding traffic fines.
Mr Steyn said that at the time the AR had been compiled there was no written policy. The new CEO had written one within weeks of his appointment.
The Chairperson asked if there was any other external audit being done apart from the AG.
Mr Steyn said that during April 2007, the first month of the new financial year, Deloitte and Touche had conducted an internal audit. A proper audit had been done and BSA had been advised of its status. A risk assessment had been done. Another internal audit would be done the following month.
The Chairperson asked why the AG was making assumptions. The internal audits were not in the AR, and he asked why not. This would have spared pain and effort.
Mr Steyn apologised for this, and expressed his agreement.
The Chairperson then asked about honoraria. There were extra travel costs for which there was no obvious source. He asked if the budget was adequate for this.
Dr Ngatane said that he was partly right. Some travel costs came from the Board members’ own pockets. He told the meeting about a conference in Mexico. The Minister had written to BSA to ask them to attend, but no funding was provided. He had taken four doctors to the conference.
The Chairperson said that the Committee budgeted for travel expenses for international, national and extraordinary meetings. There was no provision in the BSA budget for travel expenses related to meetings. The Act made provision for this.
Dr Ngatane said they had done so. In the last two years BSA had been in dire financial straits. However, they could not stop maintaining their image. They had to retain contacts with the outside world. It might be stupid of them to pay for their own expenses.
The Chairperson asked Ms Burchell why this was not funded when it happened.
Ms Burchell replied that she did not know. Funding had been sourced for one air fare for this conference. She would investigate.
The Chairperson said that SRSA had sent an Orlando Pirates football team to Ghana under the disguise of being a South African representative team. This had set a precedent. The Department needed to interact with the Minister.
Ms Burchell said that expenses should be predictable. This conference would not be regarded as an unforeseen expense in terms of the PFMA. Choices had to be made.
The Chairperson said that her response did not assist him. There should be budgetary provisions for such events.
Dr Ngatane said that the conference was special. It was the first time that a similar conference had been presented in ten years. The sports ministers of Africa had agreed to it. It had been presented at the BSA conference in January.
The Chairperson noted a statement in the AR about theft and losses. The AG had alluded to it. An amount of R7 500 was reflected in the financial statement. The reasons were not reported. Although he agreed that it was not necessary to go into such detail in the AR, he was curious to know what had happened.
Dr Ngatane said that the theft had occurred while BSA had still occupied offices in Midrand. There was supposed to be security on the premises, but there had been breaches and a computer was stolen. They had subsequently moved to premises in Nasrec.
The Chairperson asked if the culprit had been identified.
Dr Ngatane replied that BSA thought it was an inside job. There had been an investigation, which indicated a breach in the security company. The landlord had refused to take any action. A computer and a cashbox had been stolen.
The Chairperson asked why there was no mention of HIV/AIDS awareness in the life orientation training.
Mr Steyn said that the request from lotto was specifically to provide funds for this training. Seven sessions had been held, but had ceased due to the lack of funding. The lotto grant had not yet been paid.
The Chairperson asked where this training had been conducted.
Dr Ngatane replied that it had been in almost all provinces. Issues addressed had included HIV, financial management and a SAIDS workshop. This was over and above the normal life skills training.
Mr Komphela said this was music in his ears. It was unfortunate that this was not mentioned in the Annual Report, as it made it hard to gauge the extent of the good work being done by BSA. He asked about the procurement policy, and if this was in force in the provinces. It should be biased towards women, the handicapped and blacks. It should be Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) compliant. A Preferential Procurement Policy (PPP) should be in place.
Mr Steyn said that the policies were being applied.
The Chairperson said that PPP was a government policy position. This was to promote empowerment and job creation. This must be reflected on the PPP, and be seen to contribute towards government policy. There was no option but to comply with the policy.
Mr Khumalo could not agree more. Policies were in place. Supply chain management was also in place.
The Chairperson said that the issue of vacant posts had to be addressed. There must be compliance with economic equity. It was a very good report and he was most excited. The big problems had been addressed and now the loose ends could be tied up. They impacted on the work of BSA. Many big time promoters had been at Parliament. There was an outcry with the South African Broadcasting Corporation’s (SABC) allocation of television coverage. Two groups were getting 80% of the work. Mr Branco was one of these. The Krish Naidoo issue was prominent. BSA had met with the boxers, and wanted to discipline them for what they had said at the Committee. However, Parliamentary privilege applied and they could say anything at the Committee without fear of repercussions. On the SABC issue, there was an equity issue regarding the big promoters. Public hearings would be held on the budget, and all stakeholders would be able to make representations.
Dr Ngatane said a letter had been written about the promoters.
The Chairperson said that the Committee had written a letter to BSA some six months previously but had yet to receive a reply.
Dr Ngatane apologised for this. There had been disorganisation in the office and some chaos due to the move. They had met with the association of promoters the previous Saturday. All issues had been raised, and the meeting was amicable. Television had been discussed. Promoters were involved in the scheduling of bouts, and had told BSA not to get involved with this. They had lost out on other things. BSA had to be there to assist the promoters, but was denied involvement in arranging tournaments. BSA now needed to push for a common front. There was a skewed allocation of dates. A proper way forward would be charted at their next meeting.
The Chairperson said that President Mbeki had spoken that morning about the need for all South African sportsmen to unite under one national symbol. He would not be happy to support teams that perpetuated the past. He had cited Bafana Bafana and the Springboks as examples. The Springboks had done well. The view of the Chairperson, which was actually a collective view, was that rugby was still dominated by white South Africans. He was sure this was the case. The President had spoken about national symbols. He noted that BSA used a stylised letter B as its symbol. He asked the BSA delegation what their take on it was.
Mr Mtya said that there should perhaps be one national symbol. He was fully agreeable.
Mr Dikgacwi said that the symbol looked more like the number 3.
Mr Mtya said that three was a very prevalent number in boxing. There were three people in the ring, the rounds were three minutes long, and there were three people in the corner, amongst other things.
Dr Ngatane said the symbol was also reminiscent of the cross section of a boxing glove. The symbol was only for BSA. They always represented South Africa outside the borders of the country and carried the national flag, not the BSA symbol.
The Chairperson said that the Committee would never change its position. Name changes were also an issue. Col Graham, after whom Grahamstown was named, was regarded by some as a butcher and by others as a hero. Opposition parties such as the DA and FF+ were glued to the issue of name changes. He asked how this could be antagonistic. He hoped the South African Football Association would show creditable administration and leadership. The President had listed the nicknames of other African teams such as the Lions of Cameroon and the Black Stars of Ghana, and felt the name Bafana Bafana was inappropriate. One national emblem was needed. The Committee would never disobey the President. The decision to ratify this position would be taken at the forthcoming ANC conference. The government would then shift to another gear and would be ready for change.
The meeting was adjourned.