Just like the AC. Typical South African !

The SATSA Gauteng issues of dissatisfaction have been simmering for a protracted period of time and is not an overnight wonder. Much thought and discussion has brought this matter to a head. It is interesting that with purported repeated member calls for answers - the challenges could not have been resolved. In other words somewhere along the line - an effective two way communication process has not taken place. It is a questionable state of affairs when answers are not forthcoming which has also been the experience of The MICE Academy. There appears to be two agendas at play with a limited even playing field. We applaud those members who have stood up to be counted in their erstwhile endeavors towards effective democratic governance. Lets hope the way forward will not be one of threats and legal action as appears to have taken place in the past.

You are correct, Helen. These allegations have been an ongoing issue for many years and need to be properly ventilated. At present, the 'transparent' approach has been an approach of threats, rather than productive dialogue. It would have been a simple issue of dissolving the illegal entity, before the start of the AGM in August. SATSA is an organisation of the members, for the members, and should not be allowed to operate outside of these parameters.

You mention two agendas at play. What are these agendas at play? I'm not involved in this at all but have been a member of SATSA since 2005. When I joined as a chapter member I understood I would not have national voting rights. This has changed with the new tiered membership structure, even first tier members now have voting rights, and I understand the new fee structure and growth in membership has strengthened SATSA's financial position. In 12 years of SATSA membership I have had no concerns or complaints, and this is the first time I have heard of this group of dissatisfied members and their issues. What is the real agenda of the disgruntled Gauteng members? Are they merely concerned about "effective democratic governance" or are they trying to hijack the association for their own purposes, and install their own appointees as directors? What is at the heart of the matter, and what is their end game? Is this about voting rights? About fees? About financial (mis)management? The people I know in SATSA leadership are all amazing people who have done an incredible job of supporting members and working on behalf of the industry on a range of issues that affect inbound tourism.

The MICE Academy has been involved with SATSA since 2003 and I sat of the Board for two years representing the meetings industry and indeed assisted with the organising of their conference in 2004. As a satisfied SATSA member - clearly your requirements from SATSA are being met whether under previous managements or the current one. The dissatisfactions do not emanate from members per se – the dissatisfactions emanate from primarily office bearers who have supported SATSA through good and not-so-good financial times (in fact dipping into their own pockets to keep the boat afloat) – these are the same ones that give much of their time over and above the actual member benefits that have satisfied your needs for over 12 years. In attempting to address your questions – the answers may not be as clear as you would wish but here goes:
What are the agendas at play? – If a constitution is not being adhered to – and concerned members via their office bearers ask for answers on a variety of matters going back over a two period and these remain unanswered or are met with extreme aggression, one could assume there is a further agenda which is not being shared.
What is the real agenda of the disgruntled Gauteng members? – there is only one agenda and that is good, democratic governance in accordance with the agreed terms of reference.
What is at the heart of the matter & what is their end game? This question has been answered.
Are they trying to hijack the association for their own purposes, and install their own appointees as directors? - At the meeting on the 3rd August – the serious concerns were voiced by both office bearers and others who have recently resigned thereafter the question was posed from the audience as to who would stand as an interim Board if the current Board were asked to step down. The names shown are those that raised their hand. These are the facts. There is no hijacking or disgruntled individuals. Trusting this is of assistance to you.