COMMITTEE REPORT

National Assembly

  1. Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on Sport and Recreation on Vote 20 Sport and Recreation South Africa, dated 8 June 2004.

Introduction

The Committee has considered the Strategic Plan for 2004/07 and the Budget Vote presented by Sport and Recreation South Africa on 1 June 2004, which informed deliberations on the Vote. The presented budget allocation is as follows:

United School Sport Association of South Africa (USSASA)

School sport programme:

Mass participation:

Comments:

The Committee would like to know the position of the agreement between SRSA and the Department of Education on school sport. The department should provide the Committee with what Education department has done and when implementation of the agreement will take place. The department confirmed that the agreement has been reached but the former Minister did not sign the decision. That decision has to be introduced to the new Ministers. A follow-up meeting should be convened involving USSASA; Department of Education; SRSA, provincial sport departments and provincial and local government sport desks that would clarify the responsibilities and resources.

South African Gymnastics Federation (SAGF)

 

 

Comments:

The 2011 Gymnaestrada should be discussed with the Minister in terms of resources in the country. SCORE, Playing for Peace and Sport for All need to be brought on board. The concern on expansion of the budget was to focus on mass participation, school sport and national academies according to the department. The serious concern of 40c per child per year was a matter for discussion during Budget Vote 20 on 15 June in the National Assembly. Children sniffing glue and some engaged in sexual activities at young ages that as a result them contaminate HIV are a result of a lack of a housing plan with sport facilities inclusive in the plan.

Disability Sport South Africa (DISSA)

Comments:

The Chairperson highlighted the concerns and areas targeted during the study tours to provinces where accessibility to facilities by disabled, as spectators were unsatisfactory. After the study tours, the Committee agreed that a person from DISSA should sit at all the Tender Committee meetings for adjudication. The facilities are also not user-friendly and disabled persons are isolated which could be a problem to evacuate them in the event of a disaster.

Special schools visited during the study tour had facilities that are not maintained by the department. Old facilities with no accessibility to toilets are a big issue. Two athletes from Ikhwezi Lokusa have been taken to Gauteng for the preparations of Olympics due to a lack of well-resourced facilities in the Eastern Cape. Deaf people cannot enjoy games because TV does not cater for them. The only popular sport in special schools is dance sport and promotion is not done for the community.

The department emphasized the importance of Safety in Stadiums Bill that will look at rectifying all problems faced by DISSA and will also look at their funding problems. The Committee was given the task of interacting with municipalities in relation to fees charged by municipalities.

 

South African Sports Commission (SASC)

The CEO of SASC, Dr. Phaahla, presented their programme and highlighted some issues of concern. He noted that all macro bodies have signed a cooperation agreement that binds them to finalizing current arrangements on what functions go to who. When the agreement is final then structures will be allocated resources according to their relevance. He mentioned that mass participation is a major challenge as SASC’s responsibility is to increase high profile by ensuring representation of SA in Zone VI games; Commonwealth Games etc.

They are also responsible for raising funds externally and private sector will come in where mileage is gained. Monitoring of development plans and transformation processes and being command of resources are issues which if not addressed will again result in a continuous need to be restructured. He mentioned a confederation that was recommended by the Ministerial Task Team that will ease confusion from federations on using same sponsors. Dr Phaahla also noted that sponsors need publicity that including live TV coverage. He also indicated that he needed to be given an opportunity by the Committee to present the Commission’s year plans in the future.

 

Comments:

The Committee wanted to know how much has SASC fund raised outside government sources. The Committee advised the Commission that foreign and local businesses should be involved in contribute to the country was suggested. Also major sponsors should maximize the money to federations. Issues of training given to local clubs and sport bodies came up especially when filling application forms for sponsorship and accessing of those forms. The Chairperson referred to requirements such as a 3 year audited bank statement that local clubs don’t have.

Hearings were also held with institutions that the Committee has oversight over and also provincial heads of department and chairpersons of standing committees on sport and recreation. The hearings took place on Friday, 4 June and Tuesday, 8 June 2004. The provinces that were present were: the Eastern Cape; Free State; Gauteng; KwaZulu-Natal; Limpopo; Mpumalanga; Northern Cape and Western Cape.

Mpumalanga: Chairperson of Standing Committee on Sport and Recreation

Ms. D Pule

Issues raised include:

Free State Legislature: Chairperson: Mr. P Maloka

 

Limpopo: Director: Sport and Recreation: Mr. S Pila

Issues raised were:

Eastern Cape: Chairperson: Sport and Recreation: Mr. D Neer

Issues raised were:

 

Northern Cape: Chairperson on Standing on Sport and Recreation: Nkosi J Galela

Issues raised were:

Head of Department Sport and Recreation: Northern Cape: Mr. H Esau

Gauteng: MPL of Standing Committee on Sport & Recreation: Ms F Mazibuko

Issues raised were:

Western Cape: Chairperson of Sport & Recreation: Mr. A Lewis

Issues raised were:

 

 

 

KwaZulu-Natal: Director of Sport and Recreation: Mr. G V Sangweni

Issues raised were:

 

Comments:

The Chairperson appreciated the presentations done by the provinces. She took the meeting as a step further towards what the Committee has been doing in the past five years. A small delegation will be visiting provinces to interact with officials and be met with the MECs on the arrival. The Committee is not certain on what level reports of the Portfolio Committee are discussed at provincial level and also by the national department for sport as well as the Sport Commission. It should be noted that when the Committee goes on an oversight visit, it is not going to provide oversight in the sense of policing but to identify and evaluate the progress that is made in terms of the changes that are taking place in the country. The Committee also has to evaluate the impact of the programmes that are involved and assess the congruence between the programmes of the provinces and the national vision as well as assess whether the resources that available match with the needs that are on the ground and the expectations that are to be met. The Chairperson emphasized the importance of the State of the Nation Address as it outlines key areas of focus of the country and each department and then gives us all the marching lines that need to be followed by departments and structures charged with the responsibility of taking the country forward.

This year the approach that is going to be followed is to do things with the new minister and new MECs in line with the direction in terms of reflecting to the State of Nation Address by the President. The address was not clouded with too much politics but more of a programme of action with time frames. If the President can address the nation in a project management format it means we are all expected to follow that direction. We are not going to talk about the programmes in general but to talk about the programmes in relation to the problems that we are addressing change that we need to see and also in relation to time frames.

Professor Hendricks, the Head of Department for Sport and Recreation South Africa took the meeting through the priority areas outlined by the President and how the department is going to be responding to them so that gaps can be identified and a follow up action agreed on for realignment with what the President wants and what the Minister in the department wants and what the provinces are going to be doing. Then the Committee will take the matter further to the local government structures so that we all move as a coordinated force in transforming sport in the country.

The Committee has also decided to interrogate its study tour reports since most of the issues highlighted by the provinces also appear in the reports. The Committee will also look at bilateral agreement such as the Cuban Model of mass participation and what assistance can be requested from Cuba. What could be learnt from Manchester United who had similar social problems like and what Sister City programmes can be developed using sport and bilateral agreements. The President offered to accompany the former Minister of Sport to the Minister of Finance to acquire more funds and the Committee will follow that offer up.

The Committee also needs to reactivate that offer since we have become aware of the fact that our budget is equal to 40c per child per year. A suggestion was that instead of study tours to provinces a workshop should be planned to decide on inputs that would be used to influence change in the budget and to make an input to the MTEF that will be finalized in August by Sport and Recreation South Africa.

The Committee wishes to thank all those who participated in its budget hearings for their valuable insights and contributions.

Report to be considered.

……………………………. ………………………..

Ms N R Ntshulana-Bhengu Date

CHAIRPERSON