WITH reference to the article on Paarl Tourism, I would like to point out that municipal involvement in tourism is a legislative requirement in terms of the Constitution. Local tourism is one of the municipal competencies.
In addition, whether the municipality decides to internalise or deliver such service by way of outside parties must be done in terms of Section 78 of the Municipal Systems Act of 2000 and all the requirements of that section must be complied with before such decision can be made.
Secondly, I think implying that the municipal staff in the office does not have the competency to deliver, is baseless.
Closer analysis shows that all of the staff in the offices at least have a tertiary qualification in tourism and have had experience in dealing with the public.
The staff have been accredited by the SABS with ISO 9000 accreditation for service delivery processes.
Thirdly, the writer claims that Paarl Tourism as an organisation can deliver services better than a municipality can.
I must question the status of the development projects initiated by their organisation.
If tourism is the multi-million rand industry as portrayed by the article, how many previously disadvantaged members are there, how many guest-houses, B&B’s, homestays have they assisted? How many people have they helped get entrance into the market?
Fourthly, if they can exist on their own, why should the taxpayer pay for their existence?
Some of us still have faith in our local authority and I bear witness to the developmental work the tourism staff are doing.
Informed citizen
