THE NAC CANNOT BE RUN LIKE A GANGSTER MAFIA
A Brutal Interrogation of Lies, Contradictions, and a Council in Crisis
By Thami
akaMbongo Manzana
The latest
media statement issued by the National Arts Council of South Africa (NAC),
titled “NAC Confirms Continued Operational Delivery Amid Union Picket,”
is not just misleading.
It is a
calculated attempt to mask a crisis.
And when
placed alongside a damning letter from the Minister of Sport, Arts and Culture
— now circulating among artists — the situation becomes even more alarming.
Because
what is being presented as “stability” may, in fact, be institutional
dysfunction dressed up as control.
1. WHO IS ON STRIKE — NEHAWU OR NAC WORKERS?
The NAC
repeatedly refers to National Education, Health and Allied Workers' Union
(NEHAWU) as if it is an external force.
But let us
be precise:
- Is it NEHAWU that is on
strike?
- Or is it NAC
employees who are members of NEHAWU?
Why is the
NAC distancing itself from its own workers?
This is not
accidental.
It is a
deliberate attempt to:
- Externalise the crisis
- Avoid internal
accountability
- Reframe worker
grievances as disruption
This is not
an external problem. This is your staff.
2. “OPERATIONAL CONTINUITY” — OR MANUFACTURED ILLUSION?
The NAC
claims “critical operations” are continuing.
Let us
interrogate that fiction:
- What exactly are these
“critical operations”?
- Does this mean the NAC
can function without its full staff complement?
- If so, why has it
consistently claimed to be under-resourced?
Or is the
truth this:
- The payments being
processed now are from work already completed by the same staff who are
currently on strike?
If that is
the case:
Is the NAC
now taking credit for labour it is simultaneously undermining?
Further:
- Can the NAC guarantee
that the sector will not feel the backlog of these strike days?
- Or is the plan to
overburden staff post-strike to maintain the illusion of efficiency?
Who is
fooling who?
3. PAYMENTS “ON SCHEDULE” — BEFORE OR AFTER THE STRIKE?
The NAC
claims payments are being processed on schedule.
Let us
demand clarity:
- Are these payments from
submissions processed before the strike began?
- Or do they include
submissions made during the strike?
- Can the NAC provide a
clear breakdown?
Because if
these are pre-strike outputs:
Then this is not continuity — it is delayed execution of past work.
4. “TRESPASS INCIDENT” — CRIMINALISING WORKERS?
The NAC
refers to a “trespass incident.”
Let us ask:
- Has legal advice
already been sought on this matter?
- Against whom is this
being positioned — outsiders or striking staff?
And
critically:
- When the NAC speaks of
protecting “staff,” does it include the same workers currently on strike?
Because
here is the contradiction:
You cannot
claim to protect staff while treating them as a security concern.
And another
uncomfortable truth:
- How is the “integrity
of the institution” protected while workers are outside protesting for
days?
5. THE BROKEN PROMISE OF ENGAGEMENT
The NAC
claims commitment to engagement.
Yet:
- A meeting with the
sector was promised for 26 March 2026
What
happened?
- Was this commitment
made without full Council agreement?
- Why has no new date
been communicated?
- Why is there silence
instead of leadership?
Further:
- What is the real status
of engagement with the union?
- Who exactly was invited
to the NAC Strategy Workshop held outside the institution?
Transparency cannot be selective.
6. THE MINISTER’S LETTER: EVIDENCE OF DEEP ROT
Now let us
confront what the NAC does not want the sector to focus on.
A letter
from Minister Gayton McKenzie — — lays bare serious governance concerns.
According
to the letter:
- There were duplicate
payments under PESP
- A staggering R65
million was placed into a trust account
- The Council approved
projects not recommended by adjudication panels
- There were allegations
of interference in HR appointments
- A ministerial
moratorium on appointments may have been breached
These are
not rumours.
These are
issues raised at Ministerial level, requiring:
- An independent
investigation
- Possible suspension
of senior executives
- Recusal of implicated
Council members
Which
raises explosive questions:
- Has this independent
investigation been initiated?
- If yes, what are the
findings?
- If not, why not?
- Are implicated Council
members still participating in decision-making?
- Have they recused
themselves as recommended?
- Are the same
individuals influencing current decisions around the strike?
Is the current crisis a symptom of unresolved governance failures?
7. WHO IS REALLY RUNNING THE NAC?
The letter
further raises concerns about specific Council conduct and oversight failures.
This forces
us to ask:
- Is the full NAC Council
aware of all decisions being taken?
- Or is power
concentrated in the hands of a few individuals?
- Are some Council
members being shielded from scrutiny?
- Are others being
sidelined?
Is this a Council — or a controlled structure?
8. COMMITMENT TO THE SECTOR — OR EMPTY WORDS?
The NAC
speaks of commitment.
The sector
demands answers:
- Will AOSF outcomes be
announced on 31 March 2026?
- Has compliance for 2026
Annual Funding begun?
- Is Emergency Funding
adjudication complete?
- Has planning for PESP
7 started?
Or are
these timelines already compromised?
CONCLUSION: ENOUGH OF THE LIES
The NAC
must understand this:
You cannot
run a public institution like a private empire.
You cannot:
- Rewrite reality through
media statements
- Avoid accountability
- Ignore workers
- And expect the sector
to remain silent
The
Cultural and Creative Industries are watching.
And what
they are seeing is deeply troubling.
An
institution that is starting to behave less like a public body — and more like
a gangster mafia.
The choice
is simple:
- Truth or propaganda
- Accountability or
control
- Reform or collapse
Because
right now:
The truth
is not just hidden — it is being managed.
.jpeg)
.png)
Comments