Global sporting events must end harmful partnerships to protect people and planet:
What is it with major sporting events and partnering with those who harm people and the planet? The African Cup Of Nations partnered with TotalEnergies, well known for its human rights abuses on the continent, and the last Fifa World Cup was held in Qatar, where human rights abuses are well documented.
The latest in this unsavoury trend is the Olympic Games and its partnership with Toyota. After promising to be the “most sustainable games” ever, the event is maintaining its sponsorship deal with the car manufacturer, which is likely to come to an end after this year’s spectacle.
The organisers of the games have pledged to halve the competition’s carbon footprint, in comparison to previous Olympics. This means emissions must be less than 1.75 million tonnes of carbon. Previous games hit 3.5 million tonnes, according to the organising committee.
While it is commendable that it is taking up such initiatives, partners must be on the same page. Steps taken by the organising committee include using existing infrastructure, scaling up renewable energies and recycling initiatives. There are also plans for the use of bicycles, plant-based foods and less single-use plastic, for example.
But together with Toyota, the organisers released the following statement:
“Toyota, the Worldwide Mobility Partner of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and the International Paralympic Committee (IPC), has delivered the first vehicles for the official fleet that will support the Olympic and Paralympic Games Paris 2024.”
This is something that drew the ire of current and former Olympians. By way of a statement, several Olympians said the following:
“Instead of phasing out combustion engine vehicles in line with settled climate science, Toyota is ramping up production – it plans to add more than 11 million to the roads this year. This means Toyota’s emissions are massive: at a self-reported 575 million tonnes of CO2 equivalent, the company already has far higher emissions than France, and they’re rising.
“Toyota continues to lobby governments to delay, weaken, and roll back essential climate regulations. According to a report by InfluenceMap released in May this year, Toyota is the worst company in the auto sector in this regard, holding back progress everywhere from the US to Australia. Less than 1% of Toyota’s car sales last year were electric, while other major car makers like BMW already reached 15%.”
The statement went further and said that less than half Toyota’s vehicles are fully battery-electric, and most of the rest run on petrol.
This means the emissions of the games will increase, making the goal of halving emissions incredibly difficult. There is also the issue of public perception, as it will undermine the messaging of electric vehicles, “thinking 100% fossil-fuelled hybrid cars are EVs.”
It sounds as though there is a case of sportswashing taking place. Sportswashing is described as the use of an athletic event by an individual or a government, a corporation, or another group to promote or burnish the individual’s or group’s reputation, especially amid controversy or scandal.
The athletes welcomed reports that Toyota is ending the partnership with the Olympics, and the hope is that it will also cut ties with the Paralympic organising team.
The overall hope is that global sporting events end all partnerships with companies harming our climate.
“In 2024, giant polluters lobbying against the public good, and against the fundamental interests of athletes in a safe climate, should not be granted the privilege of partnering with the Olympics and Paralympics. This year must be the last time the world’s biggest polluters are allowed anywhere near the Games,” said the athletes.
It is important to make the distinction between climate and sporting events. Heat and pollution are both tough aspects that will make athletes struggle.
This is a prudent time to remember that the climate affects such events. The Qatar World Cup and the Afcon both had to be moved to a time when the weather was more moderate.
The 2020 Olympic games saw marathons and race-walking events moved to other venues as participants would not be able to cope with the high temperatures.
“The women’s Olympics soccer finals were not only rescheduled, but the stadium was changed due to extremely high temperatures – a first in the history of the Olympics. In addition, an archer fainted and three tennis players retired during their matches due to heat-related illnesses,” said the athletes
Failure to address climate change will see more and more events rescheduled, moved, and ultimately, the athletes will be the ones who suffer. Partnering with those guilty of destroying our climate helps no one, it subtly points to condoning their practices. A stand must be taken.
The statement by the former and current athletes sum this up the following way:
“As the eight-year contract between Toyota and the IOC comes to an end after the Paris Games, it will be time for Toyota to pass the baton to a clean Olympics mobility sponsor.”
These are the Olympians who penned the letter to the Olympic organisers:
Marcelien Bos de Koning – Dutch sailing Olympian
Laura Baldwin – British sailing Olympian
Dotsie Bausch – American cycling Olympian
Jenny Casson – Canadian rowing Olympian
Francesca ‘Frankie’ Clapcich – Italian sailing Olympian
Rhydian Cowley – Australian race walking Olympian
Melissa Humana-Paredes – Canadian beach volleyball Olympian
Philippe Marquis – Canadian freestyle skiing Olympian
Eliza McCartney – New Zealander pole vault Olympian
Etienne Stott – British slalom canoe Olympian
Ramaphosa unlikely to sign Bela bill into law before new administration is in place:
The Basic Education Law Amendment (Bela) Bill will probably not be signed by President Cyril Ramaphosa before the new administration takes its seats in the National Assembly (NA), said presidency spokesperson Vincent Magwenya.
It will now be up to the new administration to decide by a motion of the house whether the bill should go through the National Assembly again for reconsideration, or it should proceed to the president to be signed into law.
The bill, first drafted in 2017, proposes the biggest update to education law in the past decade. It seeks to amend the South African Schools Act of 1996, and the Employment of Educators Act of 1998 to align with “developments in the education landscape”.
A key aspect of the Bela bill seeks to make grade R the new compulsory school-starting grade and provides for penalties when parents fail to enrol their children.
The bill also proposes measures to prevent the unnecessary disruption of schooling by protests or other causes, including criminalising such actions. It will introduce penalties for parents who deliberately keep their children out of school for extended periods.
The bill addresses aspects of homeschooling, requiring parents to register their children with the department and specify the curriculum being used. It mandates independent assessments to monitor the children’s progress.
It also offers an expansive definition of corporal punishment to include “any acts which seek to belittle, humiliate, threaten, induce fear or ridicule the dignity and person of a learner”.
The bill aims to revise the admission and language policies of schools, by transferring decision-making authority from the school governing body (SGB) to the head of department (HOD). This change was prompted by instances of discriminatory admission practices observed in some schools.
But it has faced opposition, including from the Democratic Alliance, which says the bill cannot “fix the education system” by “centralising power into the hands of unelected bureaucrats”.
On 15 May, the National Council of Provinces (NCOP) said it made amendments to the bill, which has been adopted by the portfolio committee on basic education.
Civil society organisations Equal Education and Section27 have rejected the NCOP’s proposed changes to the bill, saying it “water[ed] down important clauses that entrench proactive oversight powers on the part of provincial education HOD”.
“We are disappointed with the new amendments and we believe that there should be oversight by the HOD on language and admissions policies but we just want the bill to be passed at the end of the day,” said Equal Education Law Centre’s Katherine Sutherland.
In its amendments, the NCOP added that in terms of clauses 4 and 5 of the bill, the involvement of the head of department in approving policies has been removed, and the time frames which the basic education department said have caused difficulty in implementing the adoptions.
“In the adopted amendments, the HOD retains the final authority on admissions and in providing guidance on the number of mediums of instruction that public schools may use,” the portfolio committee on basic education chairperson, Bongiwe Mbinqo-Gigaba, said in a statement.
According to a constitutional court 2019 ruling school governing bodies have the power to determine the school language policies. But the court has warned that should the school governing body adopt policies that are not in line with the constitutional right to basic education, the head of department should intervene.
school governing bodies of public schools must “recognise that it is entrusted with a public resource which must be managed not only in the interests of those who happen to be learners and parents at the time but also in the interests of the broader community in which the school is located”, the court said.
With the proposed new amendments, the oversight role of the HOD will be scrapped.
Section27 added that the changes will not only align the Schools Act with constitutional court cases such as MEC for Education in Gauteng Province v Governing Body of Rivonia Primary School but will also give “access to the right to basic education and address past inequalities that have stubbornly lingered in South Africa’s education system through discriminatory SGB policies”.
Responding to the amendments, the DA said the bill was passed through the National Council of Provinces and went to the desk of the president without following parliamentary protocols.
“The bill hands extensive decision-making power to the heads of provincial basic education departments, diminishing the role of SGBs and local communities in determining language and admissions policies,” said the DA’s education minister, Baxolile Nodada.
The education department said the changes to the language policies were prompted by instances of discriminatory admission practices.
A case that is often cited when the school language policy is brought up is Matukane and Others v Laerskool Potgietersrus. In this case, the school governing body tried to exclude black learners seeking English-medium instruction from a parallel-medium school.
The school attributed its desire to maintain the culture and ethos of the institution, which was closely connected to the Afrikaans language, and would be diluted if the school was “swamped by English-speaking pupils”.
The court found that this constituted unfair discrimination, and directed the school to admit the learners, even though this was inconsistent with the school governing body’s language policy.
In September 2013, the basic education department released a draft policy on the Incremental Introduction of African languages in schools. It provides that learners in all grades should learn one language at a home language level, and two languages at the first additional language level, with a specific focus on the protection of African languages.
“Not only will an adopted language policy promote languages that have been historically marginalised; it is also aimed at promoting the culture and heritage that attaches to them,” Equal Education said.
The DA said it has been advocating for “mother tongue” languages but the school governing body should determine the decision on language policies.
“Let the SGB decide, they know the community better because why should we put that power in the hands of the government?” Ndoda said.
The National Council of Provinces, in its amendments to the bill, also agreed to amplify the corporal punishment definition and used the Criminal Procedure Act, which expands the powers of the courts in dealing with sentencing and penalties.
Kathmandu was complete chaos — cars, bikes, rickshaws, driving at great speed on both sides of the dusty potholed road, weaving in and out among people and donkeys. They were first in line for the flight to Lukla the next day – altitude close to 3?000 metres – to start their trek.
“I believe this is the world’s most dangerous airport,” Jerry said casually, as the twin engine plane stopped short of the mountains looming, it appeared, just a few metres away.
“Nice to know, now that we’re on the ground,” Amy said. She was trying to keep her excitement under wraps. Of course Jerry had arranged for a guide.
Dipak met them at the airport and led them on a three-hour hike to a tea house in the next village, where the main dining room was warmed by a furnace fed with yak dung. He showed them their room — a plywood box with a double bed and a single blanket.
“Uh oh,” Jerry said.
“It’s okay,” Amy said, “we can cling to the edges.” But they didn’t.
At Jerry’s suggestion, they lay nose-to-toe. Snuggling, sleeping bag to sleeping bag, got them through the night. It was a pattern they repeated at every stop, as the rooms grew colder and colder.
The next day, they hiked up to Namche Bazaar, at 3?400 metres. Amy began to flag and Jerry offered to carry her backpack but she demurred, dragging it up the stone steps to the tea house.
When they set out again after two days of acclimatisation, they found swing bridges before every village, long flights of stone steps and the occasional narrow ridge, shared with yaks laden with goods.
Dipak told them to stop and give way to the yaks, who had been known to push hikers off the path — and it was a long way down. Amy used those encounters as a chance to stop and catch her breath.
The tea houses were pretty much identical — plywood walls, furnaces in the dining rooms, ablution facilities down the hall or outside. There was no hot water.
Jerry had had the foresight to bring plenty of baby wipes, which were okay for a couple of days but not for the entire trek. “It’s surprising what you can get used to,” she told Jerry, after braving a freezing cold shower.
Six days after leaving Namche Bazaar they hiked through a snowstorm and down slippery stone steps to a tea house in the village of Gorakshep, at just over 5?000 metres, where they would be staying while their bodies got used to the thin air.
Only then would they be considered fit enough for the final push to Base Camp, which they had been able to see from the trail —the brightly coloured tents and flags and the famous Khumbu Icefall in the distance.
The next day dawned with blue skies, or so Jerry told Amy, who lay in bed for a while, listening to the bells on the yaks delivering supplies to the guest houses. The days of acclimatisation were the best for Amy.
She wandered the streets, catching her breath, buying fruit and Snickers bars and trying to engage local people in conversation. She was picking up a bit of Nepalese — hello, how much, would you like a Snickers bar? And wherever they stopped, she also picked up a trail of small children who, indeed, would like a piece of chocolate.
“I think I’m in love,” she said to Jerry, on the morning they set out for the final push to Base Camp. Jerry looked alarmed.
“No, silly, not with you,” she said. “Mel’s safe. No, it’s Nepal. I think I’m in love with Nepal.”
“It’s too cold for you,” he said. “I keep worrying you’re going to turn into a block of ice.”
“I’m okay with it,” she lied.
They set out in a state of great excitement, despite the snow that began to fall when they were nearly there. But Base Camp turned out to be a big disappointment.
Serious climbers preparing for summit attempts were not very welcoming to wimpish trekkers, who were treated like daytrippers — which, in fact, they were.
“I don’t suppose they’ll offer us a cup of coffee?” Amy said.
“Come on,” Jerry said. “Let’s go back.”
Tracing their path back to Kathmandu, but more quickly this time, with no need to acclimatise —they passed struggling trekkers on their way up to Base Camp.
On one long and steep section through the national park, Amy wanted to assure them it would get easier, but the trekkers kept to themselves, concentrating on saving their breath and keeping their feet from slipping.
Amy didn’t, and suddenly felt a shooting pain in her left foot. There was nothing she could do about it with a couple of hours of hiking left, so she carried on in agony.
At last they arrived at the guest house. Sitting near the furnace in the dining hall, she could finally take off her boot. She’d only twisted the foot, not the ankle, she was relieved to see, but it really hurt, and she rubbed her foot vigorously to take the pain away.
Two tiny children who had been racing around with sticks, pretending they were horses — or maybe donkeys — noticed Amy, stopped playing, came over and stroked her ankle. They looked ineffably sad.
“It’s okay,” Amy said, moved by their concern, hugged them each in turn and handed over a Snickers bar.
In the days that followed, on the trail and in the guest house in Lukla, she couldn’t get the children out of her mind. In Kathmandu and Lukla, in the bigger towns, one could see children sharing iPads and teenagers with an ear glued to a phone. But in the hill villages, sticks had to stand in for even the most basic toys.
What happened when they reached school age? Were there even textbooks, much less iPads? Was there a future for these children?
“There are schools,” Dipak told her, when she asked about facilities in the hill villages. “But they struggle. The government wants the children to be taught in English, because it is the language of the future. But the teachers don’t know English well enough to teach in it.”
“What about mother tongue?” Amy asked him. “We have a lot of mother tongues,” he said. “Twenty or thirty. Look, I’m fortunate. I live in Kathmandu. My second brother is at MIT in America, studying civil engineering. When he starts making money, it is my turn.”
“Are you also going to MIT?” she asked.
“I haven’t decided where to go. But I’ll leave engineering to Krishna. I am more interested in hospitality.”
Jerry weighed in. “I’m not sure where this conversation is going,” he said, “but the shuttle’s about to leave.”
Five hours later they were in Kathmandu, and a few days later, back in Johannesburg.
It was easy for Amy to adjust to Johannesburg’s altitude, after climbing above 5?000 metres, but everything else seemed out of joint. What was she supposed to do with the rest of her life, without Greg?
One day, she started to email the provincial education department, then scrapped that idea. She wanted to teach, not spend the day in the staff room, which is where the teachers spent most of their time when she did her practical training in Soweto.
She was in the classroom because she was a student teacher, but the people who were supposed to supervise her were nowhere to be found.
Meanwhile Jerry and Mel were getting married — Mel realised that he could have lost Jerry under an avalanche or down a crevasse. “Will you be my Best, oh, I don’t know, Person?” Jerry asked Amy.
“I’d be honoured,” she said. “Do I have to arrange a stag night?”
Jerry laughed — and then she could hear him over the phone, shouting her question to Mel, and she could hear Mel laughing too.
“I think we can skip that.”
“Flowers then,” she said.
“Just bring wine,” he said.
“Next Sunday. At the house.”
The impending wedding concentrated her mind. What did she really want out of life? The next morning, she phoned Dipak, who was home in Kathmandu after taking some clients from Japan on a four-day trek.
A couple of days later he phoned her back. That’s when she bought a one-way ticket to Kathmandu, promised the lawyer she would stay in touch, and phoned Charlotte, the estate agent who lived on the next street, to offer a sole mandate.
Moving On is published by Modjaji Books.
Submit and get free exposure here: Showcase Your Business | Advertise Your Special Offers.
