Tall Tales

Dissecting the Urban Legend of the Developmental Legacy of Durban's Moses Mabhida Stadium

By Aisha Bahadur

The Moses Mabhida Stadium is the stuff of fantasy. Without a doubt it is breathtakingly beautiful. Like a perfect white shell belched out of the sea, it glows with pearly promises of what it might hold. Designed to stir up patriotism, its monumental arch takes its form from the Y shape of the South African flag meant to symbolise the convergence of diverse elements of South African society.

Yet instead, the architectural grandeur serves to emphasise the deep divide between the eThekwini municipality leadership's political and economic vision of a 'world-class city' and the socioeconomic needs of the city's poor and under-serviced residents.

The most contentious issue is probably that the Moses Mabhida Stadium exists at all. As specified in the Bid Book for the FIFA World Cup, Durban was to upgrade the existing ABSA Stadium and increase its seating capacity to 70 000, at an estimated cost of R54 million,' However, the city council changed tack shortly after the bid was secured and a new stadium was proposed. With a seating capacity of 70 000 for the World Cup and a capacity of 54 000 in its 'legacy' mode, the new stadium would be built next door to the ABSA Stadium, on the site of the Kings Park Soccer Stadium, which would be demolished. This new stadium was allocated R1.8 billion in 2005,' escalating to R2.5 billion in 2007, and was finally completed in 2009 for the total amount of R3.1 billion.' The proposal for a new stadium was put forward in a confidential municipal document titled 'Durban, KwaZulu-Natal beyond 2010 strategy, of which journalist Sam Sole says: 'The document makes an unvarnished punt for a new stadium to promote sport tourism, without any analysis of the viability of the proposal.? He goes on to say that the document claims, 'the virtues of what it calls "event led development” ‘and quotes an unidentified author:

“Essentially there is only one option if we are to host a semifinal match. Currently, two options have been put forward, but we believe only one is able to meet the requirements of a semifinal for the FIFA World Cup The first is to upgrade the existing ABSA rugby stadium and the second is to build a new iconic stadium in line with the city and province's broader economic development strategy."

The decision to build a new stadium was presented as a fait accompli by the municipality's representatives. In February 2006, shortly after government agreed to foot the bill for the new stadium, Durban's municipal manager, Mike Sutcliff, was reported to have announced: "The upgrading of the existing ABSA Stadium would cost at least R500-million. It's also already an old stadium and not truly designed as a top soccer venue. When we started looking at the figures, we decided to build a new, better facility.'

Through this shift in the decision from renovating ABSA Stadium to building Moses Mabhida Stadium, city leadership put in motion plans for the city to be repositioned as 'Africa’s premier sporting destination' with the aim of securing major sports events in the future." The stadium serves as an anchor to these aspirations, and as such the developmental legacy of the Moses Mabhida Stadium is to further the sports tourism agenda. This is a particular development paradigm that many of the poor of Durban would argue they have never been consulted on.

City leadership spoke enthusiastically of opportunities this would bring for infrastructure development and investment in the city that would benefit all Durban's citizens. But for many of eThekwini's 3.5 million citizens, this is just a fairy tale told by the affluent. The eThekwini municipality has high levels of poverty, with a poverty rate of 44%. Results of the Statistics South Africa community survey conducted in 2007 show that 8.5% of households have no annual income whatsoever, and a further 9.9% of households have an annual income of no more than R9 600. For an average family of four, this equates to below a dollar a day per person. For these people it is unlikely that the municipality's development vision will change their everyday reality.

The poor get poorer

What angers communities suffering from a lack of service delivery is the fact that the municipality prioritised a new stadium at an enormous cost when a more modest expenditure to renovate ABSA Stadium would have sufficed and that this priority has diverted public spending away from other areas.

There is an argument that the money spent on the stadium would not have been available to the municipality to use on service delivery, but what the World Cup has shown is that where political will exists, the municipality can secure resources to meet its development priorities and efficiently deliver.

In 2007, Mike Sutcliffe acknowledged the city's infrastructural backlogs, saying that it would take at least two decades to address them. In 2008, parliamentary minutes reflected that Sutcliffe noted nearly 50% of the families in the municipality were 'truly poor' 13 Yet from its 2007/8 to 2008/9 financial years, the municipality halved its spending on housing.?What is missing is the zeal to pursue a pro-poor development agenda, as the municipality's leadership instead chose political prestige that Moses Mabhida Stadium would bring to their 'world -class city', regardless of the cost.

'Our government has got plenty money to renew the airport and the big money for building the stadium, no money for the poor people. But when they want the vote, where they go first is the Mjondolos (shacks],' says Durban shack dweller Mariet Kikine.?She was 54 years old when she was shot five times in the back with rubber bullets and arrested at a legal protest in September 2007, when shack dwellers attempted to hand over a memorandum demanding better service provision to Durban's mayor, Obed Mlaba.

About 17% of all those living in the eThekwini municipality live in informal dwellings or shacks. Living conditions in these informal settlements are of a very low standard, including limited access to clean water, which requires people to walk significant distances to collect water from communal taps. There is an inadequate provision of toilets, usually in the form of chemical and pit latrines that are not well-serviced, and it is common for each toilet to serve several hundred people. Added to this is inadequate refuse collection, which forces people to live in filthy and unhealthy conditions.

To Abahlali baseMjondolo, South Africa's shack-dwellers movement, there is no space for the poor in the municipality's plans for the city as concretised and illustrated through the construction of the Moses Mabhida Stadium. The municipality has become increasingly unsympathetic to the plight of its citizens living in informal settlements and has enforced provincial laws making it illegal to erect shacks and resist eviction. S'bu Zikode, leader of Abahlali baseMjondole, says of the KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) Elimination and Prevention of Reemergence of Slums Act: 'We understand that the idea is to draw more investment in the cities by chasing the poor people away.' In 2008 Abahlali baseMjondolo opposed the Act in the Durban high court, which found in favour of the provincial government, but in October 2009 the Constitutional Court ruled in favour of Abahlali baseMjondolo, declaring the Act unconstitutional and invalid.

It would appear that servicing the needs of shack dwellers is not a priority and in fact the municipality has systematically worked to remove services from informal settlements. As Zikode explains:

“There is a policy that prohibits the electrification of any informal settlements in this city. But that particular policy is a killer. So many people have been killed by the fact that they cannot access electricity. They have to use these paraffin stoves which often explode and candles.”

Zilode's words were to be proven true during the World Cup. On 3 July 2010, three days before the kickoff of the semifinal match in Durban - the match that the Moses Mabhida Stadium was built for - a shack fire in Kennedy Road serttlement killed three people, destroyed 800 shacks, and left 3 000 people homeless, Kennedy Road is one of Durban's most organised informal settlements and has been fighting for service delivery from the city for several years. Protests by Kennedy Road residents in 2005 were described by activist Richard Pithouse as 'the most militant protests to have shaken Durban in the post-apartheid era.’

Residents blamed the fire on the municipality's failure to deliver services, saying that if they had houses and electricity there would be no reason for fires.

The municipality has reneged on its promises of February 2010 that it would provide housing and electrification, and residents resumed their protests in the city's streets in March 2010, citing the skewed focus of development for the World Cup at the expense of service delivery to the poor.

Saddened by the tragedy and angered by the continued neglect of the city, Abahlali baseMjondolo took the residents' plight to the media:

“We invite all the football fans and journalists who are in Durban for the World Cup to come to Kennedy Road and to see for themselves the human cost of misdirecting resources into stadiums and so on in a country where the poor are still suffering. We are dying while you are celebrating and we are dying because of the way in which you are celebrating. This tournament should have been organised in such a way that we could all celebrate together.”

Abahlali baseMjondolo is not the only organisation that viewed the building of the Moses Mabhida Stadium as a waste of public resources that could have been better spent on basic service delivery. About 3 000 protesters organised through 26 civil society organisations representing different constituencies of the urban poor and formal, precarious and informal workers handed a memorandum to Deputy Mayor Logie Naidoo at an anti Thiefa' protest march in Durban on 16 June 2010.?The economic burden posed by the building of the Moses Mabhida Stadium, when ABSA Stadium could have been refurbished and spending redirected to erase a significant amount of the city's backlogs in housing, sanitation, electricity, health care and education, topped the list in the memorandum of grievances addressed to provincial and local government leadership. The memorandum states:

“In recent months, we have found that many of our problems are worsening, especially because of the way the World Cup has been implemented by FIFA, its corporate partners, politicians and bureaucrats. While in principle we do not oppose Durban hosting seven World Cup games, we are very opposed to many decisions made by FIFA and city, provincial and national officials.”

It detailed workers and communities under attack, including poor and unaffordable service provision as well as threats to people's livelihoods. It also listed a range of issues for immediate attention, including those related to corruption and the top-down political control of the city.

Among the protestors were traders from Durban's 99-year-old Early Morning Market who were under threat of eviction to make way for a mall as part of the municipality's efforts to gentrify the city. The traders' struggle had been ongoing for a year and a half before the World Cup. Roy Chetty, Early Morning Market spokesperson, accused the city council of using the World Cup to impose the interests of private developers over the established rights of traders. He said:

“Claims by the city that the Warwick Mall is imperative for 2010 was a lie to sway public opinion on the forced removal of traders from the market. This market is a monument to the history of indentured people of this city, we fought hard to win the right to earn a living here and will not willingly acquiesce.”

Approximately 10 000 traders depend for their livelihoods on the market, which services almost half a million commuters traveling through Durban’s central transportation link, Warwick Junction, providing basic food and other goods at reasonable prices to the working poor. There have been a number of public actions by traders and supporters, some of which have been brutally suppressed by the police. Police used pepper spray at a sit-in and rubber bullets when traders attempted to take down the market gate when police prevented them from entering the market after the high court granted an urgent injunction preventing their eviction in June 2009. Once again there was a lack of consultation with stakeholders by the city council, and this had sparked wide criticism for the granting of a 50-year lease to developers of the Warwick Mall Consortium without following legal and public processes related to tendering.

City officials feared that social movements such as Abahlali baseMiondolo and disaffected groups like the Early Morning Market traders would take advantage of media attention and seek to popularise their demands through protest actions.

The authorities sought to restrict such actions, using the excuse of insufficient policing capacity during World Cup match days to deny permission for actions on those days. By-laws were also passed to regulate individual behaviour to suppress protest actions that might tarnish the city's playground image or criticise FIFA and the World Cup. Researcher David Roberts drew the same conclusion:

‘Through the vaguely worded ban on nuisance behaviour, policing can selectively target both individuals and groups as incongruous with the idealised image of Durban's public spaces that are at the centre of rebranding the city during the World Cup.'

Alice Thomson of the Durban Social Forum had her civil rights denied through this regulation. She was apprehended for distributing anti-FIFA' material at a FIFA Fan Fest in Durban and her pamphlets were confiscated. In these pamphlets, she argued that 'the R40 billion the government has spent on the World Cup could have comfortably housed three million homeless South Africans. Soccer will not make a better life for all - it will only make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

Winners and losers

Clearly eThekwini's poor were among the losers paying the price for the externalised costs and the socialised risks of the World Cup investments of the municipality.

When handed the memorandum of grievances at the anti-Thiefa protest, Deputy Mayor Logie Naidoo retorted: ‘The legacy of the World Cup is that the country will be at the centre of world attention. It will open up marketing opportunities, bring more tourists into the country and create more jobs.’ More fairy tales really, as the World Cup itself failed to deliver these.

Durban's hospitality sector also lost out. During the World Cup, the hospitality sector had below-normal occupancy rates after FIFA's authorised operator, MATCH Hospitality AG, dumped thousands of hotel bed nights and airline seats it had reserved back into the market. Warren Ozard, operations manager for the KZN office of the Federated Hospitality Association of South Africa, reported:

“We had it drummed into us by Match for about five years that there was this golden bird that would lay its golden egg for us, urging us to sign up with Match so people did and some were very disappointed. Apart from match days which had full occupancy, the rest of the time occupancy hovered at about 30 to 40% . .. Match gave back 80% of what it had booked, meanwhile the domestic market was told that Durban was full, or very expensive, or there would be no transport, so people stayed away at a time when Durban is usually full."

Alan Gooderson of South African Gooderson Leisure Group commented on the returns: 'They've cocked everything up ... It's shocking how we have been conned by Match. Mike Sutcliffe was reported to have blamed high labour costs of hospitality workers," illustrating how the working class was once again being made the scapegoat, however unfounded. In reality, the greed of MATCH is probably to blame: MATCH has been accused of ineptitude and high prices, with their surcharge further pushing up the costs, and of making accommodation completely unaffordable and then dictating that the hotels should maintain these high prices for returned beds.

Construction workers who built the Moses Mabhida Stadium were also among the losers. A Building and Wood Workers' International (BWI) report revealed that 70% of all construction workers earn wages below R2 500 a month - that is, well under what would constitute a living wage. Many of the stadium construction workers are now without jobs. By May 2010, 27 000 jobs were reported to have been shed by the South African construction sector for the year to date - coincidentally the same number of workers who were recruited by trade unions organising the World Cup infrastructure sites during the construction process nationally. 'It was good while it lasted but now workers are without jobs, workers are disappointed,' commented Eddie Khan, legal officer of the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM). 'At NUM we campaign for decent work; that means we want to achieve long-term job security.'

Security workers who lost their jobs when they went on strike are also losers. They refused to leave the Moses Mabhida Stadium after a World Cup game on 13 June 2010, protesting low wages. They were supposed to be paid R 190 a shift that often extended beyond twelve hours. This was much lower than what they claim they were promised by Stallion Security, the company appointed by FIFA. Police dispersed the guards using rubber bullets and tear gas. The strike spread to stadiums in Johannesburg and Cape Town. Workers were dismissed and the police took over security functions for the World Cup without the South African government securing any commitment from FIFA to foot the bill for these services. The public sector paid these policemen and women R700 per shift, far more than what the security guards would have earned.

Informal traders were also losers. Forced away from World Cup sites declared by FIFA as controlled zones, which meant only official sponsors were allowed to sell goods near the stadiums and other World Cup sites in the city, these traders did not have the means to pay the exorbitant price for stands. But even some of those who did pay the R30 000 for stands at the beachfront Fan Park reported that they were poorly treated by management and were operating at a loss.

Traders going about their business selling cold drinks and ice cream as they have always done faced harassment if they did not have the necessary permit, with their goods confiscated and fines imposed. An ice cream seller, Nhanhla Mkice, spoke of the difficulties of trading legally during the World Cup: 'We are being made to jump through hundreds of hoops so we can do for a month what we have been doing here for years - and that's selling at the stadium."

Another Durban street vendor, Jabulane Nguhane, spoke to a BBC reporter about his experience of the police crackdown on informal traders just before the World Cup:

“The police chase us away from the stadium like we are criminals ... If this is the wrong way of living, then they must show us the right way because when I look for a job I can't get one and when I sell in the streets my trolley gets confiscated... I want nothing to do with the World Cup; it has caused me too much pain already. I'll be happy when this whole thing is over, maybe the police will leave us alone so we can earn a living for our children.”

Even retail tenants at the Moses Mabhida Stadium were losers, forced to close their businesses for eight weeks before, during and after the World Cup so that the stadium could be handed over to FIFA. Mohammed Razak, owner of Nino's restaurant at the stadium, said:

“I invested about R3.5 million in the restaurant and I am not going to recover it. I am expecting to lose about R3m in the eight weeks ... We were aware we would have to shut down - our lease agreement said we would have to close the day before and on each match day. But two weeks ago, we were all called to a meeting. The city told us the national commissioner of police, General Bheki Cele, had refused the application for us to stay open. We have to close until July 14.”

Durban's flailing garment sector also lost out as workers at these operations could easily have produced the World Cup 'Jabulani' ball under decent working conditions; instead, the balls were made in Pakistan using exploited labour. Durban workers could have also made the Zakumi mascot doll, which, again, was produced under poor working conditions in China. These products retail in South Africa at prices well beyond the means of average South Africans.

Fisher folk who make their living fishing off Durban's piers were also losers. They were forced off the beachfront during the World Cup, denied the right to make a living. Essop Mohamed, chairman of the KZN Subsistence Fishers' Forum, commented on the unfairness of the city ruling: 'They let FIFA come here and do what they want, but they won't let us fish.’ Subsistence fishing off Durban's piers is a historical right that was hard fought for during the oppressive apartheid regime and a much-celebrated victory, but it was suppressed during the World Cup.

The city's street children and the homeless were losers too. The Durban Social Forum reported that they were among those who were removed from the city 'so tourists won't be "offended" by the sight of the less fortunate, or they prove an embarrassment to our government'. Over 1 600 people had been dumped at a camp established to temporarily house 400 people as part of the 'Cleaning up the city' drive. This took place after city officials assured the public that no street children would be removed from the city during the World Cup.

Ratepayers are still waiting to find out what a fairy tale costs these days. The lack of consultation regarding the cost of the stadium is listed in a grievance to municipal authorities by the Combined Ratepayers' Association of Durban, submitted in June 2008 together with a formal declaration of dispute calling on members to withhold their rates until issues were resolved. The document is reported to state: This extraordinary action was a vote of no-confidence in the competency and quality of the administration at the municipality by the public."

While ratepayers have footed a portion of the city's World Cup infrastructure costs and seemed doomed to foot its ongoing maintenance costs, the total bill is unclear. A summary of a parliamentary meeting held after the World Cup reports:

“Dr. Sutcliffe eThekwini municipal manager] stated that the National Fund had a responsibility to contribute to making the stadiums sustainable and could not walk away. He also commented that the taxpayer should not have to pay for the stadiums. Dr. Sutcliffe responded by saying that stadiums very rarely made a profit and that the assistance of the National Treasury was paramount to ensuring that the stadiums became viable business entities. He added that the ratepayers should not have to bear the brunt of maintaining the stadiums.”

Sutcliffe fails to recognise that monies from the National Treasury come from taxes and that ultimately, he is asking South Africans to continue paying opaque costs which the municipality have not defined to keep the stadium sustainable. It would seem that in Sutcliffe's mind rates and taxes must have a different developmental potential.

Who won?

The construction companies won. The main contractors of the Moses Mabhida Stadium were Group Five and Wilson Bayly Holmes-Ovcon (WBHO). Group Five's pretax profit increased from R373 million in 2007 to R666 million in 2008 to R782 million in 2009. Pretax profit for WBHO increased from R446 million in 2007 to R1.081 billion in 2008 to R1.36 billion in 2009. The chief executive officers (CEOs) of these companies collected huge bonuses - the Group Five CEO took home a bonus of R6.5 million and WBHO's CEO received a bonus of R8.1 million in 2009 - while workers had to resort to strikes to secure bonuses. There were two strikes in 2007 at Moses Mabhida Stadium to secure a R6 000 bonus, a third of what workers had initially demanded. 'We know that the government is paying R2,6 b (for the construction project). We want to get a share in that,' said NUM regional organiser Msi Poswa. A third strike took place in 2009, when workers embarked on a national strike to secure a wage increase only marginally above inflation. 'Workers made gains on their demands made during the three strikes. They achieved improvements to their wages, secured bonuses and got a full-time health and safety representative. They had to fight for this but ultimately, they have lost because these jobs were not sustainable,' said Eddie Khan, legal officer of NUM.

Other companies in the construction consortium - such as Ibhola Lethu, which is full of politically well-connected individuals - also won. It did not escape the attention of Durbanites that among the politically affluent plugged into the consortium was Craig Simmer. Simmer was involved in the disastrous attempt to privatise the municipal bus service under Remant Alton and a former director of the failed Dolphin Whisperers development on the Point. Both of these failed projects raised public outrage and ratepayers ultimately paid the price.

There are other individuals and businesses that benefited from outsourced functions during the World Cup. Events company Black Pepper Events and Media Corporation was a winner as the company was awarded a R65 million entertainment contract while offering local musicians a mere R2 000 as the performance fee for providing entertainment at the Fan Park.

Most of all, though, FIFA was the winner. FIFA generated R25 billion in revenue, 50% more than from the 2006 World Cup in Germany. Gate revenues accounted for only R5.1 billion, with the balance derived from sponsorship, media rights and merchandising. FIFA has become ruthlessly efficient at closing every gap to maximise profits and build in protection for its revenue streams in the initial agreements with host countries. FIFA sucks up all the meaty profits and then holds on to the bones, so it is no wonder that there are so many losers.

Kick-starting the legacy

All fairy tales have happy endings. Now that the World Cup is over, will the city live happily ever after with its new stadium? This possibility does not look promising.

For starters, the management and maintenance costs of the stadium have not been made public, a glaring omission in eThekwini municipality's presentation to the parliamentary Sports and Recreation Portfolio Committee hearing on stadium sustainability held in August 2010. At this meeting, Julie-May Ellingson, head of the municipality's Strategic Projects Unit and 2010 Programme, proposed that National Treasury 'set aside funding for structured maintenance of stadia so as to ensure stadiums remain world class facilities able to compete for global events'. Such appeals stand in stark contrast to earlier public relations messages by bureaucrats to the media prior to the World Cup that the stadium, as an asset, would pay for itself. Ellingson, for example, had earlier reported that R5.5 million had been generated by the stadium in the five months up to May 2010, noting that 'Durban said it was comfortable that it would be able to generate enough money to maintain the stadium'.

Then there is the divergence of interests that exists between city management scrambling to secure sustainability of the stadium and sport stakeholders who were not consulted or involved in the project, despite its intended use as a mi purpose sports venue. In 2006 Logie Naidoo, in attempting to justify a new stadium as opposed to a refurbishment, stated: 'People should understand that the stadium will not be a facility for the World Cup only. It has been designed in such a that it will be used after the soccer tournament.

Yet the heads of national sporting associations claim they were not consulted in the design phase on sustainability of the World Cup stadiums as multi-sports venues and that several stadiums, including Moses Mabhida, are unsuitable for their needs. South African Rugby Union President Oregan Hoskins told the parliamentary hearing on sustainability: 'What we are discussing today should have been discussed before we built the stadiums . .. It's tragic for us as a nation that we now have to act in reverse gear. ?The lack of consultation and engagement with all stakeholders clearly shows up the lack of social legitimacy to the construction and prioritisation of spending on the Moses Mabhida Stadium.

At the parliamentary hearing, Ellingson proposed that while other municipal stadiums' rental should be based on 10% of ticket revenue, events held at Moses Mabhida Stadium would require a minimum of 50% of ticketing revenue to go towards ensuring sustainability. In addition the stadium should take a share of other match income.58 She also proposed that security costs for matches, which she estimated would run about R300 000 a match, be paid by teams.

Given that the municipality also retains all the proceeds from the private suites, these costs would put the need to maintain infrastructure ahead of the need for sporting bodies to generate income and affect their potential revenues, with downstream impact on sports development.

Leslie Sedibe, CEO of the South African Football Association (SAFA), spoke of the lack of consultation and pointed out that SAFA pays for stadium hire through ticket sales as it has no legitimate right to the revenue generated by the leasing of suites or outsourced activities relating to food and beverage, match concessions and parking.?Ticket prices for SAFA soccer games have always been relatively low priced for affordability, and adopting the municipality's proposal would probably impact on ticket prices for matches played at the Moses Mabhida Stadium.

Overcapacity at the stadium means that local soccer events will not always be able to fill the stadium. Trevor Phillips, former head of the South African Premier Soccer League (PSL), questioned the motives behind the stadium's development: The arch on the stadium being built in Durban is bigger than the one at Wembley. It's monumental. But it makes no sense. What the hell are we going to do with a 70 000-seater football stadium in Durban once the World Cup is over?'

The first game ever played at the Moses Mabhida Stadium was a PSL points match between AmaZulu FC and Maritzburg United that could only muster a crowd of 22 000. Apart from popular matches between Kaiser Chiefs and Orlando Pirates, local soccer matches do not draw in capacity crowds. Phillips argued that 'Durban has two football teams which attract crowds of only a few thousand. It would have been more sensible to have built smaller stadiums nearer the football-loving heartlands and used the surplus funds to have constructed training facilities in the townships.' Even when there is a Kaiser Chiefs versus Orlando Pirates match, only 50 000 tickets are available, with the organisers directing fans to contact the municipality for private suites.

Rugby and cricket are thought to be more likely to be able to afford the new Moses Mabhida Stadium, as they have large fan bases with the ability to pay higher prices for tickets. But the field is too small for cricket and organisers had to get permission to hold a once-off game between South Africa and India at the stadium in January 2011. Cricket South Africa's CEO Gerald Majola stated:

“We saw an opportunity, but unfortunately we were not part of the design if the stadiums. If we had met before the time and considered the issues we would have known stadiums would have been accommodating other sports as well... Unfortunately we are compelled by the size of fields. When these fields were built, we were not part of that."

With modifications to the stadium, it may be possible to make the field suitable for cricket, but it remains debatable whether pitch requirements for cricket can be met on a field designed for soccer.

Rugby is the only sport that could generate enough revenue to sustain Moses Mabhida Stadium. An inadequate number of hospitality suites and problematic suite configuration are the most contentious issues for the local rugby team, Natal Sharks, which is being pressured to move from ABSA Stadium to Moses Mabhida. It seems that city officials forgot that they initially set out to support soccer, not rugby. In 2005 Durban Mayor Obed Mlaba stated:

“ABSA Stadium is a rugby stadium, and we need a specialist soccer stadium for 2010 and beyond ... We, as a city, are grateful to ABSA Stadium for the way they helped us clinch the right to host the World Cup finals, but they will appreciate that Durban needs a new home for soccer.”

Yet the position of the Sharks on Moses Mabhida has remained unchanged since Moses Mabhida was proposed some years back. In 2006 Brian van Zyl, CEO of the Natal Sharks, warned: 'It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that the city cannot afford it, particularly for an event which will span only six weeks.' He went on to explain that staying at ABSA Stadium is a business decision:

“Although the ABSA Stadium is not new, it is fully paid for . .. Our first priority is the sustainability of the Natal Sharks (Pty) Ltd. Unless the city can guarantee the income we are currently receiving, based on an escalation of 5 per cent a year, we will not consider moving to the new stadium.”

Should the Sharks move to Moses Mabhida, the ABSA Stadium would be made redundant and it would be a waste of resources to maintain both, given that the maintenance costs of ABSA Stadium are currently about R 10 million per annum.

Echoes of the points made by Van Zyl can be found in a heated response to a newspaper article written in 2009 by Doc Louw, vice president of the KZN rugby union and director of The Sharks (Pty) Ltd. He tells of the bullying tactics employed by the municipality to force the rugby team to agree to occupancy of the new stadium:

“Instead of co-operation and transparency, there have been threats (which were not even veiled) of roadblocks after every game (which have become a reality), withdrawal of traffic department support on match days, undercutting of hire charges for the stadium for non-rugby related functions, e.g. concerts, rallies, etc., no guarantees that ABSA Stadium would not be affected by electricity loadshedding on match days even if there was a Test or Super 14 final on, and more.“

There is also the impracticality of having two stadiums in such close proximity. ABSA Stadium, belittled and butted up against the Moses Mabhida Stadium, is separated from it by a narrow road. In 2006 journalist Lungile Madywabe made a valid criticism of having two stadiums directly opposite one another, the proximity making simultaneous functioning of both venues quite impossible:

“Durban, however, is a prime example of competition between the sporting codes showing a victory for politics over sense. The King Senzangakhona Stadium [later renamed Moses Mabhida] will be built for close to R2-billion [actual cost is R3.1 billion] on the site of the existing King's Park soccer ground opposite the ABSA stadium. This means that there will be two 50 000-plus-seater venues across the road from each other. Infrastructure limitations, such as security and parking, means it will be nearly impossible to host major rugby and soccer matches simultaneously. So one of these giant venues will perforce stand empty when the other hosts a game.”

The fact that sustainability by its very nature requires prior precautionary principles to be employed seems to be lost in the stream of justifications and grandiose plans for an Olympic bid which, it must be assumed, are meant to deflect attention from the real issue of socially neglectful planning in deference to prestige mega-developments. The numbers simply don't add up. That it is taxpayers who will directly, and the poor indirectly through opportunity costs, subsidise FIFA and other private interest coffers seems all but lost on those at the helm of the municipality.

A demand analysis conducted by Economic Research Associates for the eThekwini municipality illustrated that the Moses Mabhida Stadium would not be economically viable. The findings of this study are significantly weightier when one considers that they were premised on the 2006 estimated cost of R1.9 billion and not the realised cost of R3.1 billion. The report's calculations were as follows:

? Net World Cup revenues would amount to R27 million, based on an estimated eight matches to be played.

? After 2010 the stadium and allied facilities would generate annual revenue of about R24.5 million, assuming that rugby moved from the neighbouring ABSA Stadium and that other functions took place there.

? Annual operating costs would be about R15 million.

? On this basis, net annual income would be R10 million a year.

? The project's rate of return is virtually zero per cent and it can sustain only about R44 million of debt funding.

? The level of risk capital that the project could carry ranged from R39 million to R82 million, depending on whether it fell under a tax-paying or a non-tax-paying entity.

The report stated: 'It is evident ... that the project is not financially viable nor is it financially viable without very significant public finance support.'

Durban's long-term strategy for Moses Mabhida Stadium

The powers that be have ultimately set their eyes on hosting the 2020 Olympic Games in Durban. While hosting the Olympic Games is the holy grail for those seeking to maximise sport tourism potential, one wonders whether South African citizens and Durbanites in particular, are being duped. The South African Sports Confederation and Olympic Committee seem to have made the most of the social cohesion brought about through the euphoria of nationalism during the FIFA World Cup, announcing two days after the final game that South Africa would bid for the 2020 Olympics, and has accepted Durban's expression of interest, which is expected to be rubberstamped by government. According to Sutcliffe, Durban would centre its bid on Moses Mabhida Stadium.

Understanding the immediate environment of the stadium is necessary to contextualise the vision that the municipality has for the city and the role that it expects the stadium to play. The eThekwini municipality has pinned its hopes for local economic development on tourism, and sports tourism in particular is a key strategic area that has been given a distinctive locality to brand the city. Ellingson explains that 'the initial goal when constructing the stadium was never that it should be a solely soccer-orientated facility, but rather that the stadium was intended to play a role as core structure of a complex that would supply other services and facilities of a sporting nature'.

Moses Mabhida Stadium has been designed for an expandable capacity to 85 000 seats to meet Olympic criteria. Yet the exorbitant costs of the stadium cannot be justified based on a medium-term strategy to secure the 2020 Olympics. There is no guarantee that the bid would be successful, and even were this to be the case, recent history of destabilising infrastructural debt linked to the Olympic Games, such as in Greece, should be sounding a warning bell. But according to Ellingson: 'The thing is, these days you must have 40% of your infrastructure in place before you can bid for the Olympics.

Efficient Group economist Marina Willemse is reported to have warned that the perception that the cost would be low because infrastructure was already in place, was false'." Located north of the central business district and central beaches, the stadium is in an area referred to as Durban's Kings Park Sporting Precinct, which the city hopes to develop further. Apart from the Moses Mabhida Stadium, other infrastructure that exists in the precinct would probably not be suitable for the Olympics, requiring a rebuilding of the area.

The suitability of existing infrastructure in the precinct for the Olympics raises many questions. If the Sharks move across to Moses Mabhida Stadium, would the ABSA Stadium be kept to be used for the Olympics? This would incur maintenance costs for years before the extra capacity would be required. If Moses Mabhida Stadium is to be used as the athletics stadium in Olympic mode, then could Durban be looking to lose permanent athletics infrastructure if the site of King's Park Athletics Stadium is to be developed to meet other facility requirements? Despite its Olympic-size pool, are other aspects of the Kings Park Aquatic Centre adequate to meet Olympic standards or would this facility need to be renovated? Would the municipal-owned golf course located in the area be redeveloped into other necessary facilities? This would make the sport of golf more inaccessible as affordability of private clubs is an issue. It seems unlikely that South Africa's top-rated golf course, the prestigious Durban Country Club, shrouded in colonial grandeur and the pomp of exclusivity, in close proximity to the stadium, would be sacrificed. It would be interesting to see how the city would deal with private investment in the area as there is a large private gym franchise directly opposite Moses Mabhida and in between ABSA Stadium and Kings Park Athletics Stadium. One also wonders how the city will get around a historical building which is the headquarters of Natal Mounted Rifles and situated diagonally opposite the Mabhida Stadium.

An African member of the International Olympic Committee, Nawal El Moutawakel, believes it will be another twenty years before Africa is ready to host the Olympics. He notes that the Olympics are a different ball game from the 2010 FIFA World Cup . . . Africa has many unique problems and other priorities to handle at the moment. An Engineering News article reports:

“El Moutawakel claims that an Olympics poses far greater challenges than a soccer World Cup. While the 2010 FIFA World Cup required football facilities and related infrastructure in nine cities, the Olympics needs facilities for 10 500 athletes taking part in 300 events and 28 different sports in one city, significantly increasing the possibility of redundant facilities after the event.”

Development of the Sporting Precinct would not be the only infrastructure cost. Durban would need to spend money on transport, communications, and dedicated housing infrastructure. Past experience of Olympics host cities show that there are a number of risks which include 'inaccurate budgeting, public debt, inappropriate?transport infrastructure, construction of "white elephant" facilities and the uneven allocation of benefits'.

According to Mike Sutcliffe: 'Cities often struggle to secure proportional infrastructure expenditure from national government. The hosting of the Olympics allows host cities to claim a larger budget from the National Treasury.' What this implies is that Durban would get allocations that would otherwise be spread over other cities, which would have implications at a national level for public delivery.

Simply put, if Durban gets the Olympics, the rich in Durban will get more and the poor elsewhere in the country will get less. It would seem that the academic pursuits of self-proclaimed Marxist geographer Mike Sutcliffe did not omit Privileged Enclave Development Theory 101. But doesn't the state of the city ultimately reflect the state of the nation?

Sutcliffe guesses that the expense of hosting the Olympics would be in the region of R40 billion. His guess must be met with skepticism given the enormous difference between the estimated and real costs associated with just one World Cup stadium. The total 2010 capital budget for eThekwini was reported to be R5 billion. Yet Sutcliffe continues to give empty assurances, such as: 'It's very early to say how much it would cost for Durban to host the Olympic Games but I can guarantee that Durban will give South Africa the most cost-effective Olympic Games.

If Durban is successful in its Olympic bid, debt, and skewed developmental priorities could cause irreparable harm to the economy and further set back delivery of services and infrastructure to South Africa's most needy. It would be unforgivable if the gluttony for political prestige is put before the social development needs of South Africans, further impoverishing the nation.

Happily never after

The Moses Mabhida Stadium is like an alien spaceship in Durban's front yard. While there are those who are taken in by its grandeur, for most the stadium is far removed from the reality of their everyday struggle. Ironically the stadium is named after a working-class hero, Moses Mabhida, who dedicated his life to the struggle for a free and just South Africa. In a tribute to Mabhida, Zwelinzima Vavi, general secretary of the Congress of South Africa Trade Unions (COSATU), the country's largest trade union federation, described this hero as follows:

“As an all-round revolutionary comrade, Mabhida was a communist, a trade unionist and a radical African nationalist. To him, there was no contradiction between the struggle for national and economic emancipation and for better working conditions. These were part of the same stream for defeating colonialism of a special type and capitalism to build a better society free from national subjugation and free from class exploitation and patriarchal oppression.”

The eThekwini municipality has acknowledged the man but not what he stood for, embracing instead prestige and the neoliberal vision of development by veneer masking through the vanity project of the stadium while failing to provide basic infrastructure and services in areas such as housing, health care, water, electricity, and sanitation.

Yet city politicians do not recognise the glory that could be achieved by standing at delivery sites for sanitation to proclaim that 'they have done it, they have delivered' as they did with the stadium. Instead, they seem determined to constantly seek political prestige through tourism ventures aimed at the rest of the world for recognition of Durban as a 'world-class city', attempting to hide the disenfranchised and dispossessed from view, which effectively constricts the trickledown effect, disempowering the poor and preventing them from directly benefiting from these developments.

Interest will wane and irritation will set in as the burden of debt created by the Moses Mabhida Stadium, which the city council seems determined to keep away from the public eye, becomes apparent. Stifled public dialogue and the lack of airtime to publicise views of those opposed to the direction that the city is taking will simply add to simmering discontent.

The Olympic bid will further skew development, resulting in redundant facilities and taking away the attention and resources needed to address the backlog in services. Based on the Moses Mabhida Stadium experience, beneficiaries of the Olympics will be big business, and while there may be job creation there are no guarantees of quality jobs that are likely to be sustainable.

Moses Mabhida Stadium is here to stay, a fairy-tale ending for those who are far removed from the ground. But for those on the ground, this Olympic flagship might come to be even more of a horror story should the city continue to embrace event-led development as opposed to people-focused, needs-led development.

The eThekwini municipality states its long-term vision as follows: By 2020, eThekwini will enjoy the reputation of being Africa's most caring and livable city, where all citizens live in harmony.' To achieve this, the municipality will need to move away from its development paradigm that favours business interests and privileged enclaves to one that focuses on the social and economic upliftment of its citizenry with participatory dialogue and transparent decision-making, creating not just a world-class city' but a 'world-class city for all'.

Publication

South Africa’s World Cup – A Legacy for Whom?

Edited by Eddie Cottie

2011 – University of KwaZulu Natal

References

1. South Africa 2010 Bid Company. 2003. Africa's Stage: South Africa 2010 Bid Book (Johannesburg: South Africa 2010 Bid Company).

2. Official Durban 2010 FIFA World Cup?M host city website. 2010. 'About the stadium', https://fifaworldcup.durban.gov.za/Pages/About_the_Stadium.aspx (accessed 29 August 2010).

3. Ken Mchunu and Siyabonga Maphumulo. 2008. 'Stadium funding: City upbeat', https://www.durban.gov.za/durban/government/spu/moses/history/stadium_funding

(accessed 29 August 2010).

4. KwaZulu-Natal Provincial Government. 2009. 'Moses Mabhida Stadium - sheer magnificence!' 14 February, www.kzn2010.gov.za/node/29 (accessed 29 August

2010).

5. Margie Inggs. 2009. 'Despite the doubters, the Moses Mabhida stadium is officially complete, Engineering News online, https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/moses mabhida-stadium-2009-12-04 (accessed 29 August 2010).

6. Sam Sole. 2010. 'Durban's Moses Mabhida Stadium: Arch of hope or yoke of debt? In Collette Schultz Herzenberg (ed.), Player and Referee: Conflicting Interests and the FIFA

2010 World Cup (Cape Town: Institute for Security Studies), p. 176.

7. Sole, 'Durban's Moses Mabhida Stadium: Arch of hope or yoke of debt?' p. 177.

8. Mercury. 2006. 'KZN pegged for world-class soccer stadium', 7 February.

9. Suren Naidoo. 2010. 'Durban's World Cup dream makeover a reality', Hotel News, https://www.travelwires.com/wp/2010/06/durban%E2%80%99s-world-cup-dream-makeover-a-reality/ (accessed 16 September 2010).

10. Craig Schwabe. 2004. 'Fact sheet: Poverty in South Africa', Human Sciences Research Council, 26 July, https://www.sarpn.org.za/documents/d0000990/index.php (accessed 16 September 2010).

11. Statistics South Africa. 2010. 'Community survey interactive database', https:// www.statssa.gov.za/community_new/content.asp?link-interactivedata.asp (accessed 16 September 2010).

12. Sunday Tribune. 2007. 'Why Durban can't always be tops', 21 October, https://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-170117526.html

(accessed 16 September 2010).

13. Parliamentary Monitoring Group. 2008. 'Municipalities reports: e-Thekwini, Nelson Mandela Bay and City of Cape Town: Summary', https://www.pmg.org.za/report/ 20081120-municipalities-reportse-thekwini-nelson-mandela-bay-city-cape-town

(accessed 22 September 2010).

14. City of Durban. 2009. 'eThekwini municipality draft medium term budget 2009/10 to 2011/12, https://www.durban.gov.za/durban/government/treasury/budget/eThekwini%20DraftMTREF%202009_2010pdf

(accessed 22 September 2010).

15. Jenny Morgan. 2008. 'A Place in the City: A world class city for whom? World Cup tourists and the rich, or the poor majority?' Grey Street Films, Durban, https:// links.org.au/node/1778

(accessed 22 September 2010).

16. Statistics South Africa, 'Community survey interactive database'.

17. Morgan, 'A Place in the City'

18. Morgan, 'A Place in the City'

19. Morgan, 'A Place in the City'.

20. Richard Pithouse. 2006. 'Struggle is a school: The rise of a shack dwellers movement in Durban, South Africa', Monthly Review, Vol. 57, https://www.monthlyreview.org/ 0206pithouse.htm (accessed 22 September 2010).

21. Abahlali baseMiondolo. 2010. 'Shack fire in Kennedy kills three; 3 000 homeless. Press statement, 4 July, https://www.abahlali.org/node/7130 (accessed 12 September 2010).

22. Abahlali baseMjondolo. 2010. 'World Cup for all - Phansi Thiefa! Durban Social Forum memorandum of grievances calls for real development, not more elite profits', 16 June, https://www.streetnet.org.za/?p=244 (accessed 19 August 2010).

23. Abahlali baseMjondolo. 2010. 'Grievances about World Cup 2010 management, 19 June, https://www.abahlali.org/node/7088 (accessed 12 September 2010).

24. Roy Chetty, spokesperson of the Early Morning Market, interview by author, 22 August 2010.

25. Vivian Attwood. 2009. Malls are not for the poor', Sunday Tribune, 7 June, hep:// www.dailynews.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=3532&fArticleld=vn20090607080229464C125111 (accessed 22 August 2010).

26. SAPA. 2009. 'eThekwini council in trouble with the law', Daily News, 15 June, https://www.dailynews.co.za/fSectionId=&fArticleId=nw20090615131411280C220198

(accessed 22 August 2010).

27. Daily News. 2010. 'This 2010 mall will starve us', 16 June, https://www.dailynews.co.za/index.phpfSectionId=3532&fArticleld=vn20090527110313812C434306 (accessed 22 August 2010).

28. David J. Roberts. 2010. The rebranding of Durban', Mercury, 18 June.

29. Kamcilla Pillay. 2010. 'World Cup for all! People before profit!' Daily News, 17 June, https://links.org.au/node/1747 (accessed 22 August 2010).

30. Ayanda Mdluli. 2010. 'Prioritise residents instead of FIFA', Mercury, 17 June.

31. Warren Ozard, operations manager for the Federated Hospitality Association of South Africa, interview by author, 28 September 2010.

32. Patrick Bond. 2010. 'FIFA hydra hoovers up World Cup benefits', Mercury, 25 May, https://www.themercury.co.za/index.php?fArticleld=5483585 (accessed 29 August 2010).

33. Bond, 'FIFA hydra hoovers up World Cup benefit

34. Niren Tolst. 2010, 'Erora a flood to a trickle", Mail S Guardian online, hap co.al/article/ 2010-04-323 froma-floodeotrickle (accessed 29 August 20101

35. Roy Cokayne. 2010. Slowdown hammers building jobs, 9 September, hips/ww busrep.co.za/index.php/tArticleld=5639489 (accessed 16 September 2010)

36. Eddie Khan, legal officer for KwaZulu Natal office of National Union of Mineworken interview by author, 21 September 2010.

17. Sally Evans and Nivashni Nair. 2010. World Cup security shakeup. 15 Jane, hits/ www.timeslive.co.za/local/article.505551.eve/World-Cupsecurioshake up (accessed 29 August 2010).

38. Adrian Basson and Niren Tolst. 2010, World Cup security shambles', Mail & Guardian online, https://www.mg.co.za/article/201006-18-world.cupsecurity shambles (accessed 29 August 2010).

39. Anelisa Kubheka. 2010. 'Fan park stall holders feel short changed', Meres, 17 June

40. Pumza Fihlani. 2010. South Africa World Cup just for the rich"', 10 May. hets/ news.bbe.co.uk/2/hi/8663148.stm (accessed 27 September 2010)

41. Fihlani, 'South Africa World Cup "just for the rich".

42. Colleen Dardagan. 2010. 'Jobs, millions lost in stadium shutdown, 24 May, he// www.iol.co.za/sport/jobs-millions-lose-instadium-shutdown-1.484809 (accessed 20 August 2010),

43. Pillay , 'World Cup for all! People before profit!”

44. Durban Social Forum. 2010. 'South Africa: World Cup for all', 15 June, https://www.africafiles.org/article.asp?ID=23863 (accessed 16 September 2010).

45. IOL News. 2008. 'KZN ratepayers take on municipal authority', 24 June, http:/ /www.jol.co.za/news/south-africa/kzn-ratepayers-take-on-municipal-authority-1.405533

(accessed 27 September 2010).

46. Parliamentary Monitoring Group. 2010. Future of stadiums: Host cities, SA Football Association and SA Rugby Union briefings', 17 August, https://www.pmg.org.za/report/ 20100817-host-cities-south-african-football-association-and-sa-rugby-union-fut (accessed 29 August 2010).

47. WBHO and Group Five Annual Reports 2004-2009, analysed by Labour Research Service, 2010.

48. WHO and Group Five Annual Reports 2004-2009, analysed by Labour Research Service, 2010.

49. SAPA. 2007. 'Bonus wrangle threatens 2010 stadium', Business Day, 6 November, https://www.nd.co.za/germanchambernewsletter/anpfiff/page.php?pid=61&edition=e-3-December%202007&pd-Bonus%20wrangle%20threatens%202010%20stadium

(accessed 27 September 2010).

50. Eddie Khan, legal officer for KwaZulu-Natal office of National Union of Mineworkers, interview by author, 27 September 2010.

51. Sole, 'Durban's Moses Mabhida Stadium: Arch of hope or yoke of debt" p. 176.

52. Thandiwe Mthethwa. 2010. 'Musicians threaten boycott over R2 000 performance fee', Mercury, 9 June.

53. Terence Creamer. 2010. Organising committee earnings could reach $100m - Jordaan', Engineering News online, 21 June, https://www.engineeringnews.co.za (accessed 30 August 2010).

54. eThekwini Municipality. 2010. '2010 and beyond sustainability: The case of Durban'.In Parliamentary Monitoring Group, 'Future of stadiums: Host cities, SA Football Association and SA Rugby Union briefings'.

55. Bongani Mthembu. 2010. 'Maintenance for World Cup stadiums to be costly, Mail & Guardian online, https://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-05-12-maintance-for-world-cup stadiums-to-be-costly_ (accessed 29 August 2010).

56. Bongani Mthembu and Ivana Naidoo. 2006. 'Durban's 2010 stadium "not a waste of money"', Daily News, 13 July, https://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id-1Sclick_id-13&art_id=vn20060713091508694C174156 (accessed 29 August 2010).

57. James Corbett. 2010. 'Serious concerns over legacy plans for South Africa World Cup stadia', World Football Insider, 19 August, https://www.worldfootballinsider.com/Story.asp?id=33639 (accessed 29 August 2010).

58. eThekwini Municipality, '2010 and beyond sustainability: The case of Durban'.

59. Parliamentary Monitoring Group, 'Future of stadiums: Host cities, SA Football Association and SA Rugby Union briefings'.

60. Parliamentary Monitoring Group, 'Future of stadiums: Host cities, SA Football Association and SA Rugby Union briefings'.

61. Xan Rice. 2007. 'Ready or not', Observer Sport Monthly, https://www.guardian.co.uk/ sport/2007/jun/03/newsstory (accessed 29 August 2010).

62. Kay El. 2009. 'Maritzburg beat AmaZulu to win the KZN Derby at Moses Mabhida Stadium', 28 November, https://www.vuvuzelasouthafrica.co.za/maritzburg-beat-amazulu-to-win-the-kzn-derby-at-moses-mabhida-stadium/(accessed 29 August 2010).

63. Goal. 2010. 'Orlando Pirates-Kaizer Chiefs Derby semi-final is a sellout', https:// www.goal.com/en/news/1659/south-africa/2010/04/02/1859111/orlando-pirates- kaizer-chiefs-derby-semi-final-isa-sell-out(accessed 29 August 2010).

64. SAPA. 2010. World Cup stadiums turning into white elephants', Business Report, 19 August, https://www.bustep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=552&fArticleld=5607000

(accessed 29 August 2010).

65. Corbett, 'Serious concerns over legacy plans for South Africa World Cup stadia'.

66. David Canning and Colleen Dardagan. 2006. 'Rugby important for Durban's new stadium', Mercury, 29 September, https://www.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1Sclick_id= 594&art_id=vn20060929080802545C648401&page_number=1 (accessed 29 August 2010).

67. Canning and Dardagan, 'Rugby important for Durban's new stadium'.

68. Doc Louw. 2009. 'Moses Mabhida Stadium isn't all that good for our Sharks', Witness, 11 June, https://www.witness.co.za/index.php?showcontent&globall_id|=23912

(accessed 29 August 2010).

69. Lungile Madywabe. 2006. 'Soccer's lasting legacy from 2010°, Mail & Guardian online, https://www.mg.co.za/article/2006-10-23-soccers-lasting-legacy-from-2010 (accessed 29 August 2010).

70. Canning and Dardagan, 'Rugby important for Durban's new stadium

71. Canning and Dardagan, 'Rugby important for Durban's new stadium'

72. Times Live. 2010. 'Durban to bid for 2020 Olympic Games, 8 September, https:// www.timeslive.co.za/sport/other/article648721.ece/Durban-to-bid-for-2020-OlympicGames (accessed 21 August 2010).

73. Parliamentary Monitoring Group, 'Future of stadiums: Host cities, SA Football Association and SA Rugby Union briefings'.

74. Irma Venter. 2010. 'Durban 2010 stadium to feature cable car, city vying for Olympics, Engineering News online, https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/durban-2010-stadium-to-feature-cable-car-city-vying-for-olympics-2009-04-03 (accessed 21 August 2010).

75. Nivashni Nair. 2010. 'Durban going for gold: Plans for 2020 Olympic Games streets ahead, says city's manager', 14 July, https://www.timeslive.co.za/sport/other/article551027.ece/Durban going forgold (accessed 21 August 2010).

76. Petronel Smit. 2010. 'As SA cities weigh their 2020 Olympic options, scepticism abounds', Engineering News online, https://www.engineeringnews.co.za/article/olympic2010-09-03 (accessed 21 August 2010).

77. Smit, 'As SA cities weigh their 2020 Olympic options, scepticism abounds'.

78. Smit, 'As SA cities weigh their 2020 Olympic options, scepticism abounds'.

79. Smit, 'As SA cities weigh their 2020 Olympic options, scepticism abounds'.

80. Venter, 'Durban 2010 stadium to feature cable car, city wing for Olympics'.

81. Nair, 'Durban going for gold: Plans for 2020 Olympic Games streets ahead, says city's manager'.

82. Zwelinzima Vavi. 2006. 'COSATU tribute to Moses Mabhida', 3 December, hup:// amadlandawonye.wikispaces.com/Zwelinzima+Vavi,+COSATU+Tribute+ to+ Moses+ Mabhida (accessed 27 September 2010).

83. eThekwini Municipality. 2002. Transformation and the Integrated Development Plan

(IDPY, 13 January,https://www.durban.gov.za/durban/government/media/press/147/ view (accessed 27 September 2010).