South Africa tourist board SCRAP £42.5m sponsorship deal with Tottenham after outcry

South Africa’s tourist board has scrapped a proposed £42.5million sponsorship deal with Premier League side Tottenham Hotspur after it sparked public uproar amid regular power blackouts and water shortages in the country. 

Sportsmail reported last week that the club were set to sign a three-year contract with the African country – in a deal which, if it went ahead, could have repaid their entire £42m outlay for defender Pedro Porro in the January transfer window. 

South Africa’s Parliament tourism committee chairperson Thandi Mahambehlala said: ‘This deal, it ends here, today, now. Because there is everything wrong about the deal itself. There must be an investigation on this matter with immediate effect.’

Her comments come after Tourism Minister Lindiwe Sisulu told the committee she had no knowledge of the potential deal. Meanwhile, Tottenham and chairman Daniel Levy are yet to comment on the sponsorship proposal.

The committee, having called for the deal to be ended on Tuesday, also resolved to remove the board’s acting chief finance officer over an alleged conflict of interest and irregular appointment, according to the BBC.

The collapse will likely come as a blow to chairman Daniel Levy (above), who is yet to comment

South African Tourism CEO Themba Khumalo had said the deal was given conditional approval

Leaked documents obtained by South African newspaper Daily Maverick about the deal, worth 900m African rand, caused a furious public backlash.

News of the deal, which has reportedly been in the works for six years, sparked widespread controversy within the South African sports community, who feel the sizeable amount would be better spent locally.  

Themba Khumalo, South African Tourism’s acting CEO, confirmed on Thursday the deal had been given conditional approval – but was unable to reveal any figures linked to the sponsorship.

‘The board made a conditional approval because it commercially makes sense, but it needs communication with the stakeholders to make sure they’re aligned,’ he said, according to South African media outlet news24. 

‘The stakeholders were not engaged because we were going to do so before the leak came out. We believe in the engagement, but there isn’t a signed contract with the entity. There was a conversation that led to the conditional approval. 

‘There’s no signed contract, but there is an intention to. We need to do due diligence and follow government processes. We had to halt this conversation to have this conversation, so once we complete this one, we’ll look forward. The other teams had tourism partners and Spurs didn’t have one. We looked at every team in that tier.’ 

Brand Africa chairman Thebe Ikalafeng labelling the deal an ‘irresponsible use of tax’. Describing it as a ‘vanity investment’, Ikalafeng urged that the money should instead be put towards ‘safety for travellers, lights and maintenance’.

Political party Democratic Alliance said: ‘(The proposal is) a slap in the face of every South African whose hard-earned tax will be used to sponsor a first-world football team. (It is) an insult for the South African tourism and travel sector which was decimated, and in many cases completely destroyed, during and post-Covid.’  

The reported deal could have paid back the £42m Tottenham splurged on full-back Porro