/ 9 March 2001

We are not in the red

Madoda David Mabunda

right to reply

The report “Kruger National Park R36m in the red” (March 2 to 8) warrants setting the record straight.

The memorandum on “Drastic measures to curb non-essential expenditure” sent to 300 cost-centre supervisors and managers was an open internal management tool rather than a secret classified information document hidden in the director’s office. It is the director’s primary duty to crack the whip on wayward “spendthrifts” to curb expenditure if it is necessary to do so as was the case on February 18. The exercise was therefore an effort by the director to inculcate the “hygiene of financial management” among his staff and not a panic button.

The Mail & Guardian reporter, because of her limited understanding of the Kruger park’s financial system and accepted accounting practice principles, gave a shallow interpretation of the park’s financial situation and misled the public.

The park is not “R36-million in the red” and the M&G’s R36-million loss figure is not even audited as required by the National Parks Act.

Any seasoned manager will attest that it is a dangerous game to publish fluctuating cash-flow figures as if they were an audited balance sheet or financial statement at the end of a specific term. There is a vast difference between “cash-flow” and “profit/loss” concepts and it is disappointing that there are journalists who try to give a public account on a subject of which they have no basic knowledge.

The truth is that at the time we experienced a cash-flow problem for a variety of reasons. Among them the customary January-February trough period, the impact of loss of revenue due to the February 2000 floods when the park was closed for six weeks, the up-front footing of the multimillion-rand flood reconstruction bill by us and the hockey-stick effect on expenditure incurred by cost-centre managers on non-essential stock for the shops, for example, stock like curios when our visitor volumes are low.

A combination of these factors put us in a R16,5-million overdraft within our approved facility. The projections for further expenditure stood at R20,1-million, the bulk of which was related to the flood reconstruction projects (payment of contractors and for supplies) as well as the salary bill which was also to come through within that period.

This was the scenario 10 days before February month-end. An over-simplistic logic to an outsider would be to add both the overdraft and projected expenditure figures and arrive at a R36,6-million deficit. Such logic can be spurious, mendacious and misleading.

It (the report) implies that no tourists arrived in the park during the said period and that we did not earn any revenue from other sources such as our debtors’ accounts, airport landing fees, rentals from contractors, safari game drives, percentage share of contractors operating on our premises and so on.

Our debtors’ accounts (for domestic and international travel tour companies) were at R22-million on February 28, money which is now coming in. That changes the gloomy picture painted by the M&G report. In the 10 days since February 18 we have also received payments from the command centre for the flood damage reconstruction programme.

The trough effect does not concern us because we will start cashing in more income during high seasons to enable the park to meet its budgeted tourism income turnover a year and there is no need to be alarmist.

With the command centre reimbursing us on receipt of claim certificates, with prudent expenditure controls in place (without compulsive neurotic buyers) and the mid-March to July high season just around the corner it should be all systems go from now on.

With the exception of the Cape Peninsula (Table Mountain) and Tsitsikama National Parks, Kruger cross-subsidises 17 national parks within the national parks stable every year. We are confident this year will not be different. The M&G headline is devoid of any grain of truth. Be that as it may, we will not stop acting in a transparent manner at the risk of documents being leaked by anti-transformation elements acting in cahoots with suppliers who are feeling the pinch of belt-tightening exercises.

On another serious note it is no secret that “Operation Prevail”, a Phase 2 Restructuring Exercise aimed at rightsizing and installing a sound business model to make South African National Parks self-reliant and more efficient is under way.

The winds of change are blowing in national parks and it is not unexpected that staff will be uncertain about their jobs and future. It also comes as no surprise to management that we now have “big cash crisis in Kruger park” stories flying around.

The decision to build a business model that will meet the competitive challenges of our time will continue as planned with due consideration for the majority of our staff who believe in the cause of biodiversity management. South African National Parks will live up to its expectations of being a premier conservation body that is focused on its core business of biodiversity management and tourism by managing its resources in an efficient and cost-effective manner.

Madoda David Mabunda is director at the Kruger National Park