AIRPORT MOVE WILL ‘BANKRUPT AIRLINK’

Swazi Airlink, the only airline lined up to use the new King Mswati III Airport in Swaziland, would go out of business if it is forced to move, an independent study revealed.

Swazi Airlink at present runs a service from Swaziland’s Matsapha Airport to Johannesburg.  But the airline, which is a joint venture including the Swaziland Government, has been told it must leave Matsapha and operate out of the new airport, formerly known as Sikhuphe.

Matsapha is ten minutes’ drive from Swaziland’s commercial capital, Manzini, but Sikhuphe is about 70 km away in the wilderness in the east of the kingdom.

A 2009 study commissioned by Airlink found air travellers would rather drive to Johannesburg than take the trek to fly from Sikhuphe.

Business Report newspaper in South Africa quoted the study, ‘The road journey takes three hours including a stop at the border post. Total travel time from Matsapha, including getting to the airport, waiting, flying, going through customs and retrieving baggage at Johannesburg and taking ground transport to the destination is on average three hours 30 minutes.

‘From [King Mswati III airport] the journey in each direction will take four hours 20 minutes. This will make air travel from a morning or a day trip unviable as the time taken for travel will amount to eight hours 40 minutes, whereas road travel will take six hours.

The study added, ‘With 60 percent of passengers on this route being point-to-point travellers, it is estimated that as much as 40 percent of these passengers and 20 percent of connecting passengers, or 32 percent of current passengers, will opt for road travel.

“The risk of a move to [King Mswati III Airport] is unpalatable considering that in a realistic scenario the business will run at a loss… leaving the business unsustainable and an inevitable failure.’

At present Matsapha has about 70,000 passengers a year. King Mswati III Airport needs 400,000 passengers a year to break even.

In 2013, the Swaziland Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini, who was unelected by the people, but personally appointed by King Mswati, told newspaper editors, ‘Swazi Airlink will have to use Sikhuphe as it will be our international airport.’

After the official opening of the airport on 7 March 2014, Solomon Dube, Director of the Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority (SWACAA), told local media Swazi Airlink had specifically asked not to operate from the airport for now.

He said Swazi Airlink had to first notify its customers about the move. He said he was not sure when Airlink would relocate to the new airport.

Meanwhile, no international airline has expressed interest in using the airport which has cost an estimated E3 billion (US$300 million) so far to build.

The airport has been dubbed King Mswati’s ‘vanity project’ by critics. King Mswati rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch. The King has 13 palaces and a personal fortune once estimated by Forbes Magazine to be US$200 million. Meanwhile, seven in ten of his subjects live in abject poverty with an income of less than US$2 a day. Swaziland has the highest rate of HIV infection in the world.

ECONOMY HIT BY POLITICAL INSTABILITY

Claims by King Mswati III and his government that the economic crisis in his kingdom is largely due to world economic conditions have been undermined by two new reports.

One shows  Swaziland has again underperformed compared to other countries in the region.

And, a separate report says that political instability in Swaziland, where King Mswati rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, stops firms investing in his kingdom.

African Economic Outlook reported there falls in production in agriculture, mining, manufacturing over the past year.

The report stated, ‘[M]anufacturing contracted by 0.6 percent, making it the only sector that has contracted for four consecutive years, with a cumulative decline of almost 8 percent. 

‘The services sector, which had grown by more than 5 percent in 2009 and 2010, has experienced a significant slowdown in economic activity. In 2012, the services sector recorded a mere 0.4 percent growth.’

African Economic Outlook said the freezing of public sector salaries for the past two years, ‘has limited the purchasing power of about 10 percent of the labour force and further reduced consumer confidence and domestic demand’.

It said the slow implementation of the government’s ‘Economic Recovery Strategy’ has ‘prolonged the negative impacts of the fiscal crisis’. 

It went on, ‘Subsequently, public and private investments have remained low, even by regional standards. Therefore addressing the structural weaknesses characterising Swaziland’s slow growth remains critical – the business environment and management of public resources need to be improved to build confidence in the economy and encourage private investment. Further actions are also required to address skills shortages.’

A separate report by consultancy DNA Economics in Pretoria, found that fewer than 10 percent of 400 firms questioned in South Africa would consider investing in Swaziland, but more said they would consider trading with the kingdom.

The survey also interviewed 25 Swazi firms, which agreed that the country’s political situation was detrimental to the stable foundations desired by foreign investors, particularly when investors could do business in economically robust Mozambique or other regional economies, all of which are faring better than Swaziland. 

‘Swaziland has fallen behind in sub-Saharan Africa in terms of growth. The global crisis has affected every country but why is it that others have managed to do better? This could be attributed to domestic issues,’ Matthew Stern of DNA Economics told Business Report newspaper in South Africa. 

One banker told the newspaper, ‘We can’t openly discuss what is keeping Swaziland down, because it is governance. People are terrified to talk for fear of being labelled traitors and terrorists, which is what this government does with its critics, no matter how well meaning.’

He added that until it could be open to honest discussion, the root problems hindering its economy would fester. 

‘Swaziland is different from other sub-Saharan African countries, and until that changes investors will remain nervous about coming here. In fact, they’ve stopped.’

SWAZI MELTDOWN ‘WON’T HIT S AFRICA’

South Africa would not suffer economically if Swaziland’s economy went bust, an economist has said.

Jean Francois Mercier said any impact would be minimal.

Mercier from Citi Investment Research and Analysis, a division of Citigroup Global Markets, told the Business Report newspaper in South Africa that the financial exposure of South African companies and banks to the Swazi economy was small. ‘SA Reserve Bank data up to the end of 2009 showed that foreign direct investment (FDI) stocks into Swaziland were only R1.76bn (less than 0.1 percent of GDP and 1.5 percent of total outward FDI in the rest of Africa).’

He said in late 2009, South African banks’ Swazi assets were only worth R180m.

Swaziland is presently seeking a loan, believed to be about R1.2 billion, from South Africa to shore up its budget. Business Report said a delegation of trade unions and prodemocracy activists was in South Africa last week to lobby that a loan should only be granted on the condition of political reform in the kingdom, ruled by King Mswati III, sub-saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

To read the full Business Report article, click here.

See also

SOUTH AFRICA ‘READY TO GIVE LOAN’

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2011/07/south-africa-ready-to-give-loan.html

PRO-DEMOCRACY SETS NEWS AGENDA

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2011/07/pro-democracy-sets-news-agenda.html

SWAZILAND IS ‘NEARLY INSOLVENT’

THE DECLINE in receipts from the Southern African Customs Union (SACU), which last year accounted for 70 percent of the Swaziland government’s revenue, is threatening the national treasury’s solvency, according to the Central Bank of Swaziland’s annual review of economic indicators, according to Business Report, South Africa.

A poorly performing economy also offers little reason to hope for alternative income sources, it adds.

‘Estimates for 2010/11 indicate a worsening position with the overall budget deficit projected to reach 13 percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The negative turnaround in the fiscal position is the result of a 62 percent fall in SACU receipts,’ said Martin Dlamini, Central Bank governor.

To read the full Business Report click here.

ZUMA AIDS SWAZI KING CLAMPDOWN

The autocratic King Mswati III of Swaziland, bolstered by his invitation and the official reception he received at the inauguration of South Africa’s president Jacob Zuma ast weekend, has ordered a clampdown on Swazi trade unionists and other prodemocracy activists.

That, according to leading South African newspaper Business Report, is the view of leading Swazi activists, as police raids continued this week.

It says, although there appears to have been no mention in South Africa's media, exiled activists and unionists in the kingdom report numerous raids in which the police have seized any material - including T-shirts - calling for an end to the feudal monarchy.

‘They are reacting to the fact that the democracy advocates called for Mswati not to be invited to President Jacob Zuma's inauguration,’ Jan Sithole, the general secretary of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions told the newspaper.

To see the full report click here.

SWAZI-ZIMBABWE SUMMIT UPDATE

I wrote too soon yesterday (27 June 2008) when I said that the international media had missed the irony of Swaziland lecturing Zimbabwe about ‘free and fair’ elations.

Readers have pointed out at least two articles that make the case against Swaziland. (Thank you for pointing these out. I’m glad someone’s paying attention).

One of the articles was from ABC Television in the United States.

It states, ‘Leaders of the African Union (AU) and the Southern African Development Community (SADC), whose Security Troika, consisting of the presidents from Angola, Swaziland and Tanzania, met for an emergency session on Zimbabwe this week in Swaziland. But many of the elected leaders who make up the AU and SADC did not earn their powerful roles in free or fair elections themselves.’

It added, ‘Swaziland itself, where the meeting on the crisis in Zimbabwe is taking place, doesn’t have any presidential elections at all. It is a monarchy where the Presidency belongs to the king, passed down hereditarily, and who also appoints the Prime Minister and runs the army.’

It went on, ‘It is rare for African leaders to criticize one another at all. Partly because of the legacy of colonial rule, but also because criticizing other leaders leaves their own leadership vulnerable to scrutiny.’

Closer to home, Terry Bell, writing in Business Report from South Africa, said this about Swaziland,

‘A voting system does exist. All voting for nominated individuals is public. It is monitored by chiefs and headmen who have the power of patronage and are appointed by the king. Mswati appoints the government, controls the judiciary and exercises veto rights over all laws passed.

‘As Confederation of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) spokesperson Patrick Craven notes: “It is bitterly ironic that a conference to discuss democratic elections in Zimbabwe should be hosted by an autocratic monarch who stages elections that are no more free and fair than those staged by [Zimbabwe President Robert] Mugabe.”

‘Unions and other pro-democracy forces in the mountain kingdom now hope the Zimbabwe issue will focus attention on democratic rights throughout the region.

‘That Swaziland is a member in good standing of a regional body professing to promote freedom of association and parliamentary democracy is seen as hypocrisy within the labour movement. It is one of the reasons that Cosatu has staged protest blockades of the Swazi border in the past.’

The international media rarely report on Swaziland so many supporters of the status quo in the undemocratic kingdom thought that having King Mswati III as chair of the SADC summit would show him to the world as a statesman and leader. The Times of Swaziland on Thursday (26 June 2008) reported that the king was ‘showered with compliments’ and ‘rave reviews’ and ‘accolades’ for the part he played in the summit.

However, once the limelight was turned on Swaziland it took no time at all to see the warts under the makeup.

The spotlight has now moved away from Swaziland onto Zimbabwe itself where the fraudulent election of ‘President’ Mugabe took place yesterday.

Let’s hope that the international media return to Swaziland when the kingdom’s own election takes place later this year to show to the world what a sham they are.

Who knows, by Christmas we might even have another SADC summit, this time chaired by Mugabe, which declares Swaziland’s poll to be ‘free and fair’.

See also
SWAZILAND AND ZIMBABWE SUMMIT

‘SWAZI OBSERVER’ OUT OF TOUCH

I often think that journalists in Swaziland live in a world of their own.

I know it’s not a kind thing to say, but when you read newspapers in the kingdom as often and as closely as I do it’s hard not to come to that conclusion.

Swazi journalists just don’t know how ordinary people in the kingdom live. A particularly revealing case of this happened on Monday (7 January 2008) in the Swazi Observer.

Two reports it published that day illustrate this perfectly.

The first was headed Swaziland poverty levels and appeared on page 13. The report stated that ‘About 69 percent of the population [of Swaziland] lives below the poverty line, and the worst situation being that 48 percent of the population cannot meet their food requirements, i.e. they are considered to be living under extreme poverty.’

The report went on to say that 40 percent of the population never have enough to eat. The national unemployment rate in Swaziland among all adults is estimated to be 29 percent with 40 percent of youth and 70 percent of women unemployed, it stated.

The second report was headed Managing debt and appeared on page 20. This report gave tips on how to control the level of money you owe. The report told readers to analyse their level of debt by asking themselves some questions. Here are some examples from the report:

- What interest rate am I paying on my bond, credit card and loans?
- Can I ask my boss for an increase in salary?
- Can I cut down on the number of manicures I have?
- Can I cut down on holidays?

And so on and so on.

My questions are these. How on earth does the Observer think the article on reducing debt relates to the 69 per cent of people living below the poverty line (which is measured as living on E7 or one US dollar a day or less)? How can the 70 percent of women without a job ask their employer for a rise in salary? How can the 40 percent of the population who don’t get enough to eat afford to have their fingernails manicured in the first place?

Do you see my problem? The same newspaper published both reports, but they are directed at people from two entirely different worlds. That’s why I say the journalists live in a world of their own.

I have a possible answer to why this is happening. A close inspection of the poverty article reveals that it was taken from a report by the Southern African Regional Poverty Report. The debt article came from something called http://www.peterpyburn.co.za/

So there you have it, neither report was actually written by the Observer. They were both taken from the Internet. The Observer does this all the time. A quick look through the newspaper on that same day shows at least 20 reports from the South African Press Association (SAPA), at least 13 from BBC News, at least seven from News24 and one each from Business Report, and Energy and Capital.

What all these reports have in common is they have nothing whatsoever to do with Swaziland.

On its front page the Swazi Observer boasts ‘We Serve the Nation’. On this evidence it does no such thing. It doesn’t know who the people of Swaziland are and probably doesn’t care much so long as it can fill its pages with any old stuff it can get its hands on from the Internet.

A good newspaper is one that gives its readers news and information that is relevant to their lives, as well as giving them space to debate issues that impact on them. The Swazi Observer has a long way to go before it can consider itself a good newspaper.