Hon Chairperson, hon Minister and hon Deputy Minister, the ANC supports the Budget Vote. We want to pay tribute, hon Minister and Chair, to the late Comrade Vernie Petersen, a man who had turned around our department. We speak today with pride that we have an unqualified report. This, hon Minister, is the result of the toil and sweat and late nights at Parliament by your department and ourselves, because we wanted to get things right. The department had an appetite to get these things right. We want to say to all the officials: Well done! This is exactly what we wanted from you. Thank you very much. [Applause.]
Hon Minister, before I say any other thing, I just want to remind my colleague - maybe he has just forgotten - that the question of facilities at school level is right, but I don't want him to coin it in that way. I don't want him to ask: Minister, what is the problem with facilities at schools? I want him to say: Minister, what is the problem with facilities at the majority of black schools? That is the question. [Applause.]
I have an answer here, and I am going to give him the answer. I want him to say to the Minister: Thank you, Minister, through our programme called the Building for Sports and Recreation Programme, we managed to build 444 basic facilities in a year, even in the Karoo. Hon J J, when you go home, at a place called Matjiesfontein there is a basic facility that we have put there. [Applause.]
Chairperson, hon members, I want to raise two things. Firstly, I want to raise the issue of the division of revenue grant. I am happy that our leaders and colleagues from the provinces are here. The division of revenue grant, hon Minister, if not given quick attention, is going to create a qualified report for us, because provinces report very late, and some do not report at all. The Auditor-General has already mentioned that we are going to have problems around the division of revenue grant.
The proposal that the committee is putting forward, Minister, is that there should be nine people in your department, each dedicated to a province. This will ensure that this huge amount of the division of revenue grant is accounted for, so that it grows and helps our children in the rural areas to get facilities. The second matter I want to raise is the one that was raised by hon J J van der Linde. Hon Minister, we have not yet received empirical evidence of the impact of loveLife, which gets a whopping R30,4 million. However, this department is not the only one that gives loveLife this kind of funding. It gets R40 million from the Department of Social Development; it also gets money from the Department of Health. The total amount that loveLife receives is bigger than what we are giving to these federations. However, nobody can write home about the impact of the money that is given to loveLife.
Therefore, let us discuss the issue of loveLife. Is loveLife simply a vehicle for us to make our budget look big, or should we rather make sure that loveLife has an impact on the Department of Sport and Recreation? We must shape it the way we want it or get rid of it because, to us, it has no impact. [Laughter.]
I want to raise a last point with the Minister, which concerns National Lottery Board chairperson Joe Foster. Minister, there is a problem with the lottery distribution. The lotto is a player and a referee at the same time. Joe Foster and even the standing chairperson of the lotto say that there is a serious conflict of interests. When we ask these honourable gentlemen to recuse themselves, the lottery cannot form a quorum.
We cannot go on with the situation like that indefinitely, where people are given their own federation for purposes of election but the money is still sitting with the lottery. This is an issue we must look into. I am prepared to go with you, not to be a good boy - I know you are not one - but so that we can deal with this matter. This serious conflict of interests does not do sport any good, because at times they use this money for campaigns to run over the dead bodies of other people.
Hon Chairperson, Sol Plaatje made the following observation, and I am quoting it in answer to what hon J J van der Linde is talking about:
Awakening on Friday morning, June 20, 1913, the South African native found himself, not actually a slave, but a pariah in the land of his birth.
This statement, hon members, captures vividly the pain, humiliation and distress of millions of our people who suffered through the exercise of power by the racist white Parliament that created a landless and destitute people. This understanding is as relevant today as it was on 20 June 1913. We are unable to roll out basic facilities today, hon Minister, because of the nonavailability of land to schools. You find schools occupying closed areas of land. Where could there ever be space for a yard or toilets for children? Where are you going to put sports facilities, when schools from traditional black communities are placed in such an awkward situation?
Hon members, the Natives Land Act of 1913 was not only an instrument for the creation of cheap labour, but also the basis for the erosion and destruction of family life, cultural life and the economy of African people, blacks in particular. The squatters from a particular section of the black community had no basic facilities, especially those affected by the Land Act. There is no such thing as a white squatter; I have never seen it. Although it was insisted that the law applied to Europeans or whites and natives or blacks, I want to say that the conclusion cannot be avoided that it was directed exclusively at natives.
I am deliberately drawing this relation between the nonavailability of land for facilities and the 1913 Land Act, which was a sad and unfortunate incident. That is why we are battling today to get these facilities right.
Chairperson, we had public hearings on the Budget Vote. One of the persons who made an input was a Dr Bhorat. He reminded us of our founding vision during the unity talks.
Sport, to us, plays a huge part in the history of our lives. Dr Rubusana, the first president of the Border Native Cricket Union, and a prominent church leader and political figure in the late 1800s and early 1900s, was voted to accompany a deputation of five delegates, led by the ANC president Dr Langalibalele Dube, to England to meet Her Majesty the Queen to put before her the plight of the native people who were landless in the country of their birth.
The legendary Dr Abdurahman was the president of the Western Province Coloured Cricket Board and the African Political Organisation, known as the APO, the first major coloured political organisation in the early 1900s.
Hon members, there were talks in this country to unify sport. Kimberley took a lead in the formation of the first national sports organisation in South Africa in both cricket and rugby. The association of both black and white was started in the city of Kimberley.
After the approach by the white cricket association, following the D'Oliveira affair in 1968, the African Cricket Board and the white administrators were in regular contact. These contacts developed into an alliance, resulting first in the 1969 Marylebone Cricket Club, MCC, tour and then the Springbok tour to Australia in 1972, which was cancelled because of apartheid.
Both the government and cricket bodies increased their efforts to talk to each other about issues of sport. That led to the formal meeting of the national bodies controlling cricket in South Africa in Johannesburg in 1972, and we were accepted in the international arena. South Africa celebrated a surprise win over Australia in Christchurch in New Zealand in 1992. Our own comrade, the late Comrade Steve Tshwete, hugged the South African captain, Kepler Wessels, and his tears on that occasion symbolised the huge turnabout of South Africa that all of us today have witnessed.
The decision for change by all federations led to the formation of the transformation monitoring committee. I want you to listen to this: The transformation monitoring committee was to prove the seriousness on the engagement with change by sportspeople themselves. This committee was formed in Johannesburg in 2000 by renowned sports personalities, the likes of the late Khaya Majola, Ashwin Desai, Ray Mali, Andre Odendaal, Imtiaz Patel, Maxwell Jordaan and Dr Salojee. Transformation was at the top on the agenda of these gentlemen.
In the mid-1990s, complaints began to surface about a glass ceiling and a lack of thorough change in cricket and in sport in general. Many felt that while white development was being trumpeted, black cricketers were making little headway at provincial and national playing levels.
Also, despite the fact that the administration at the cricket board was politically in charge in practice, the old-establishment officials were still running the show and acting as gatekeepers, producing the old power relations and ways of thinking, with neutral-sounding "merit" arguments often cited as justification for not selecting black people. Anybody who talks about merit rather than equality is deliberately sidelining those who do not have facilities, because the argument of merit becomes the issue rather than equalising opportunity. Let us put people on an equal footing and then ask: Who is the best of the two?
Calls were made for transformation at a more fundamental level in cricket and in sport generally. These calls were echoed in a broader demand for delivery and change after the rainbow nation euphoria that accompanied the advent of democracy and Nelson Mandela's ascension to the presidency.
Despite the new atmosphere in the country, there were and still are strong feelings within the black majority that concrete changes are slow in coming, up until today. While expectations were high, the delivery of houses, schools and economic opportunities for those who suffered under apartheid proved to be more difficult for the new government.
From 1996 onwards, there has been a clamour for transformation to be speeded up. It was on this platform of transformation and delivery that Thabo Mbeki become President in 1999. The ANC romped home in 1999, when it got 60% of the votes in the second democratic election. Our people had hope, and they are still prisoners of hope. Our people still have hope that one day these basic facilities will be delivered to them.
One of our sports codes, cricket, recognised this pressure and were ready for change. The United Cricket Board spent 18 months going through the length and breadth of this country, gauging the feelings and formulating a new strategy. To cricket, the seriousness of these workshops were linked to the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
In an emotionally charged session, cricketers from vastly different backgrounds and areas spoke openly about their anger, hurt and wishes for the future. That process culminated in a national vision conference in Johannesburg in 1998. A hundred and twenty delegates in that conference adopted the transformation charter. I want us to understand the context of the transformation charter that was envisaged by those gallant sportspeople and the charter that we are talking about today.
The transformation charter and pledge to the nation commits sportspeople to operating with a new culture and ethos, in an African context, so that cricket and sport in general can become a dynamic reflection of South Africa's young democracy. The transformation charter covers ten main strategic areas or thrusts for the future, with redress and representation being the key ones. The transformation monitoring committee was formed to ensure the implementation of the new vision for sport and to help draft a practical three-year plan and business plan from the strategic areas identified.
In conclusion, the issue of the legacy of sports facilities must be tackled head-on. Those who have the land must have the appetite to render help, so that we eradicate the remnants and the glaring symbols and signs of apartheid and the 1913 Land Act. I thank you, Chairperson. [Applause.]