By Nyaniso Qwesha
Cape Town - The Tourism chief executive raises an essential consideration for the Minister of Finance when allocating his budget for the new financial year.
Specifically, the allocation of funds and the value added by the various departments and state-owned entities as considerations.
It is becoming crucial that the funds allocated to the various government entities are linked to the value-added concern and not necessarily to the need alone. The value-added thinking will help us understand if we are getting value for the money allocated in various departments or state- owned entities as citizens.
In his words, Mr Themba Khumalo, Tourism SA CEO, made a significant point that the money invested in tourism is for tourism activities, and other departments have their own money to invest in their projects. Yes, each ministry or department has its budget and performance objectives.
The critical point to consider in all these arguments by the CEO is the value of being value-added by all these projects to the country’s economic base. Would you think that investment, if you invest R1bn and the expected returns of 88bn, are to be realised?
Secondly, research has shown declining tourist numbers entering the country, and if I am in that department, it is a cause for concern. What do we do? Can I argue that the Tottenham Spurs investment is good now?
The answer will be a resounding no. I am explicitly saying this because the country faces several challenges, including unemployment and the most visible energy crisis. It is also crucial for all of us not to have a silo mindset but to think about what is good for the country.
What is the tourism sector doing to ensure that people who serve in this sector and the load shedding challenges are taken good care of so that the environment won't discourage tourists? That is the starting point of the arguments against the so-called Tottenham investment.
As the department, we can leverage other departments in how they seek to be inclusive and grow the country's economic base.
I also like the ministry of finance's initiatives. Every year, as an example, they invite submissions from students about what the government needs to grow the tax base.
Why does the tourism industry not adopt strategies similar to those? There can be many germs hidden under those interactions. Instead of throwing R1bn into this soccer team, why don't you engage students to help the department to understand what is necessary to grow this sector?
Another viewpoint will help us grow the tourism sector and put tourism professionals on a roadmap to create future strategies for the country.
Another point to consider is to go into some of the business schools and encourage students, as part of their research topics, to look into the changes in the tourism industry, how to grow the tourism industry, its contribution to the country's gross domestic product and look at actions to mitigate the perceived risks.
Notwithstanding the above, several domestic issues also need our attention. Before we look for new visitors, let us first clean our house.
It does not make economic sense to make one massive investment in one country and expect a diversity of tourists.
Investment professionals always argue against such investments. It would be best to spread the risk; you can’t put all the money in one basket.
Why don't we look at those countries with potential and invest money to improve our presence as a country?
I understand you spend money to make money, but let's first transform, refine, and improve our product and make it attractive to the buyers.
In conclusion and perhaps on a silly note; why can’t they change the name Tottenharm Hotspurs to Nyaniso Qwesha or any other student that can pursue a critical analysis of the South African tourism industry?
With a fraction of that money, I can use it for my studies and, in return, help to transform the tourism industry in South Africa.