Far-flung ‘donation’ is far-fetched
DEAR SIR — I refer to your front page article, “Mbalula adamant payment not bribe” (June 4), in which Sport and Recreation Minister Fikile Mbalula (pictured) adamantly denies a bribe was paid to secure the rights to hold the 2010 Fifa World Cup.
The South African public is being fed a story that the $10m was really not a bribe but a donation to support football development in the Caribbean. Why is there no angry reaction to this?
The South African Football Association (Safa) is said to have approved giving 10% of the money we received to host the 2010 World Cup to a tiny soccer-playing region. Does this make sense to anyone?
Did any concerned member of the Safa executive ask why this money should not be given to our local community, as all the amateur soccer clubs and leagues are in financial dire straits, with our children playing soccer on sand and with children so poor they cannot afford boots.
In my own experience with various soccer clubs in the Alexandra region, I am horrified that teams have to be withdrawn because of a lack of funds.
Did anyone in the Safa executive question why this money, or part of the money, was not given to struggling African nations, where there is a much bigger soccer fraternity?
Did any members of the Safa executive ask for a breakdown of how the funds would be used and request an audit on the expenditure to ensure the money would not be merely squandered?
Why did Safa not let the public know about the generous donation?
Why was there no official thank you? Surely such a big donation should have been acknowledged and our country and citizens should have been be thanked for this.
The Safa executive hid the fact that they “legitimately” gave away 10% of the World Cup funds with no accountability, when this money could have been used to uplift our local soccer community — and we are not meant to be angry about this?
If this is the reason the public is being fed, should we not be calling for all of the Safa executive to resign (or #paybackthemoney)?