What happens after 2010 ?

capetownguy said:
please back that up with evidence. ignorance is not evidence. in effect you need to show the billions Trevor has allocated to major infrastructure projects whether technology or transport or stadia etc. is debt and not government revenues.

You either know something we don't or you're another one of those...
Click to expand...

Yep, I'm one of those who can see the obvious. No special knowledge required.:rolleyes:
 
Rouxenator said:
Will we really be better off after having 2010 or will would it have been better if it was just a normal year like any other ?
Click to expand...

Normal year, and a very large debt the goverment has to pay back regarding the world cup.

And the savagery from the ANC will become worse.

Nothing new really, but the prestige of hosting it.
 
Boodles said:
Normal year, and a very large debt the goverment has to pay back regarding the world cup.
Click to expand...

Again, please show evidence that funding is debt and not revenues.
Ignorance is not evidence.

e.g. funding allocated for stadia accounts for 3% of governments infrastructure budget over the next five years. Tax revenues for 07/08 stood at R571 billion.
 
Last edited:
just a question, don't flame me ....... didn't the CT council just recently get asked to budget an extra R450 million rand which the council said couldn't be done without raising the rates for ratepayers by 69% ?
 
Mephisto_Helix said:
just a question, don't flame me ....... didn't the CT council just recently get asked to budget an extra R450 million rand which the council said couldn't be done without raising the rates for ratepayers by 69% ?
Click to expand...

yes. what i think will happen is, the figure will be reduced to R300m but all host cities are having issues with FIFA's additional requirements e.g. trees from the airport to stadium etc.

This should be covered by funds from the national government just as the national government covers the R30 million stadium overlay, which is also inadequate.

Treasury will also need to pump more money into the stadia so that the real cost is covered and not the "wishful thinking cost" treasury assumed initially even when stadia around the world were going for R 7 to R15 billion, including well run projects.

The City of Cape Town is usually quite frank and transparent when it comes to the costs where as other cities will wait until treasury responds to Cape Town and then benefit from the increased allocation as has happened I think twice, if not thrice.

While our expenditure is nothing like Beijing or Germany or some of the "poorly executed" stadium projects in the first world, this does not mean host cities have a bottomless pit of cash. Government provides guarantees to FIFA and should underwrite costs where necessary. These additional costs are neither excessive but may be necessary to meet FIFA requirements.

We're looking at about R16 billion spent on ALL stadia. That's equivalent to the cost of Wembley stadium.
Its important that government and host cities remain realistic about what the true costs are, who is responsible for covering these costs and realize we aren't immune to the global economy as some seem to think.
 
Last edited:
capetownguy said:
This should be covered by funds from the national government just as the national government covers the R30 million stadium overlay, which is also inadequate.

Treasury will also need to pump more money ...
Click to expand...

Cape Town R240m closer to R18 billion budget

By Anél Powell

THE City of Cape Town will have to find another R210 million for extra 2010 World Cup costs - down from the initial ask for R450m - but it could mean ratepayers may have to make do with lower levels of service delivery.

Despite this, the city was "closer to a solution" than it was last week, said budget committee chair and mayoral committee member for finance Ian Neilson.

The city's budget committee met yesterday for the third time to review possible ways of funding the shortfall without making drastic changes to rates and tariffs.

City director of budgets Johan Steyl said the amount needed in the city's operating budget for 2010 was R539m, but provision had been made for a "considerable" proportion of this. The city had provided R97m in its 2008/09 operating budget for 2010 costs. Some of this money would continue to be available in 2009/10.

Steyl said R103m had been projected in the 2009/10 budget, so the amount that had yet to be provided for was R210m.

The city could generate this revenue if it set the CPIX at 8%. If it set the CPIX at 6%, with a rates increase of 7.5%, additional revenue of R257m would be available for 2010 projects.

Neilson said he was concerned that a CPIX or inflation base of 6% would have a "serious impact" on the city's service delivery. The CPIX or rate of inflation is used by the city as a base to estimate its cost increases for the next financial year. It also determines tariff increases.

Neilson said the city had "seriously underprovided" in its 2008/09 budget by setting the CPIX at 6.5%, only for the inflation rate to reach 13%.

A CPIX of 10% would be more "comfortable" because it would allow the city to allocate money for maintenance and repairs in essential services.

"If it was cut to 6%, it would mean a 4% cut to all departments, which would have a serious impact on service delivery."

The ID caucus leader and mayoral committee member for economic development, Simon Grindrod, said the city had a responsibility not to place more financial pressure on ratepayers.

Peter Gabriel (ANC) agreed that more time was needed to review the city's budget options.

Neilson said a date for a fourth budget review would be set in the next few days. But he assured the committee that a solution to the 2010 shortfall was possible.

"In terms of the R18-billion budget, we are going to cope and we are going to deliver 2010. But we do believe the national government must come on board. This is not something that will break us in any way."

[email protected]

Published on the web by Cape Times on November 18, 2008.
 
Q121 said:
It would go to cape town before it ever went to smoggy Jburg.
Click to expand...

Hey, we only get a bit of a brown haze in winter, you guys get it every time the wind stops. Oh wait, that never happens :p

Joburg is better - we don't get floods. And smog isn't an issue - look at Beijing.

And we don't have Puke Watson.
 
Rouxenator said:
It seems the whole South Africa is just focussed on 2010 (has something to do with a faggy sport or something).

My question is what happens after 2010? Is there a future vision for all the effort and money that is thown into this whole 2010 thing ? What will South Africa be like in 2011 ?

Will we really be better off after having 2010 or will would it have been better if it was just a normal year like any other ?
Click to expand...

Soccer and Gtis are faggy?
 
I think Durban would be better suited to host the Olympics since it seems like they are the sports centre of SA and have you seen the super cool airport being built in Durbs, I saw it on tv the other day
 
metalcore said:
I think Durban would be better suited to host the Olympics since it seems like they are the sports centre of SA and have you seen the super cool airport being built in Durbs, I saw it on tv the other day
Click to expand...

new airport, still half the pax of CTIA, and a quarter of ORTIA.

sports centre? thats why they hosted the final of the RWC, CWC? and will host fewer matches than PE(bless the windy city) come 2010.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X