TICKING TIME BOMB: NAC Board on the verge of dissolution.
A six-year bonus dispute. A minister's ultimatum. A leaked letter. Employees receiving zero pay.
LINE IN THE SAND: NAC Board Chair Eugene Botha. Minister Gayton McKenzie has publicly declared that a failure to adhere to his clear instructions regarding staff bonuses will mean the "end of the Board."
The National Arts Council’s carefully managed façade of governance has collapsed completely.
What remains is an institution paralysed by bureaucratic arrogance, executive defiance and a shocking disregard for the workers keeping it alive.
More than a week after Minister of Sport, Arts and Culture Gayton McKenzie publicly intervened in the escalating labour crisis at the NAC, the board has still failed to comply with his direct instruction.
Todate, the Public Dispatch can reveal that many employees have negative balance on their payslips and missed payments while the NAC board stalls, delays and hides behind consultants, legal jargon and endless paperwork.
McKenzie’s order could not have been clearer
When the dispute spilled into the public domain, McKenzie did not use careful, diplomatic language.
At a media briefing, he said:
"When I saw the NAC problem I stepped in. I spoke to the Chairman of the Board and gave him one instruction, that people should be paid their bonuses. I'm waiting for that to happen. But I can tell you now that if my instruction is not adhered to, there will be a new Board. It's as simple as that. My instruction is very clear, that people must be paid their bonuses and we move on," he said.
Those are the words of an executive authority, the Minister responsible for the NAC under the PFMA, issuing a direct instruction and naming the consequence for non-compliance, on the public record.
McKenzie holds the power to dissolve the NAC board under the NAC Act. He was telling the board, and the country, that he was prepared to use it.
The letter: Written on 22 April, hidden until today
Before McKenzie spoke at that media briefing, he had already put his position in writing.
On 22 April 2026 - 28 days before today, he wrote a five-page letter to Botha. He sent it to Botha's personal law firm email at EBI Law.
The subject line read:
"Ministerial request to convene urgent special council meeting for consideration of proposed once-off full and final settlement of ongoing bonus dispute."When The Public Dispatch asked Botha for this letter, he refused.
"That letter is addressed to the Council and it is confidential," he said.
"Feel free to submit a PAIA request if you wish to receive a copy," he continued.
But The Public Dispatch managed to get the letter and notified him.
This letter in possession of The Public Dispatch carries no confidentiality marking. It is ministerial correspondence from a government minister to a public entity about a labour dispute affecting public servants, involving public money, exercising statutory oversight powers under the PFMA.
There is no legal basis for calling it confidential from the public.
Calling it confidential was a choice. And it was a choice made while employees were receiving zero pay.
What the letter reveals
The letter opens with McKenzie grounding his intervention in law, Section 63(2) of the PFMA, which requires the Executive Authority to exercise ownership control over Schedule 3A public entities to ensure PFMA compliance.
He then confirmed what no NAC statement had ever publicly admitted.
"Notwithstanding the legal position that no entitlement exists," McKenzie wrote.
"I am satisfied, having considered the matter carefully, that the continued prosecution of this dispute is not in the public interest. The aggregate value of the dispute is modest."
"The legal costs already incurred by the NAC, and those likely to be incurred if the matter proceeds to the Labour Court, materially exceed the value of the underlying claim. The reputational harm to the institution, and the disruption to its core mandate of delivering funding to the arts sector, compound this assessment."
The NAC has already spent more fighting its own employees than those employees were owed in bonuses.
McKenzie went further and invoked Section 51(1)(a)(iii) of the PFMA, the provision requiring prevention of fruitless and wasteful expenditure and told the board that continuing this litigation may itself constitute the kind of expenditure the law prohibits.
He also invoked Section 51(1)(b), requiring effective and efficient financial management. He told the board that the reputational harm and operational disruption compound the case for settlement.
The Minister used the PFMA against the board that has spent months hiding behind it.
Precise instructions. Ignored for 28 Days.
McKenzie's letter is not vague. It does not leave room for creative interpretation. It sets out a precise, step-by-step framework for resolution and asks Botha to convene an urgent special meeting under Section 8(2) of the NAC Act.
Before that meeting, management must prepare a memorandum signed by the CEO and CFO confirming the verified total value of the bonus claims, budget confirmation, and a financial interest assessment.
The internal audit function must prepare a separate memorandum for the Audit and Risk Committee. Labour law advisors must provide a written opinion confirming the settlement is lawful under the Labour Relations Act. The Audit and Risk Committee must be briefed and must make its own recommendation to council.
At the meeting itself, council must consider and if satisfied pass a resolution approving a once-off, full and final settlement, explicitly not a backdated bonus and not an admission of entitlement and authorise management to sign a settlement agreement with NEHAWU immediately.
McKenzie wrote:
"I request that you advise my office in writing within two working days of the special meeting of the outcome of the meeting and the resolution passed."
Today is 20 May 2026. That meeting has not produced a resolution. The ordinary council meeting is scheduled for 29 May, 37 days after the Minister wrote urgent, 37 days after he wrote without unnecessary delay.
Botha's explanations: confidentiality, then process, then service providers
Botha's handling of this story has gone through three distinct phases, each revealing something new.
Phase one — the letter exists but is confidential. This was volunteered by Botha. The Public Dispatch asked him to share the letter but he refused. He told this publication to file a PAIA request. Then The Public Dispatch independently obtained the letter and notified him.
Phase two — the process is being followed. In his first substantive message to The Public Dispatch, Botha wrote:
"This is a Public entity working with Public money and proper compliance must be applied. The Union is fully aware hereof. Personally, I wish we could have resolved this already because the NAC gains nothing from this impasse, but the law is the law."
Phase three — the service providers are to blame. Botha disclosed for the first time that an urgent council meeting had already taken place, a fact he had not previously mentioned in any communication with The Public Dispatch. He named Rain as the internal auditor preparing the required opinion. And he shifted responsibility for the delay:
"The service providers have taken their time to prepare proper reports."
Eventually, he abandoned his confidentiality claim and explained the contents of the letter in detail, in the same message where he had previously said it could not be shared.
The Minister's closing words
McKenzie ends his letter with a paragraph that ought to be framed in the NAC's boardroom.
"The NAC exists to serve the arts sector and the people of South Africa. It cannot do so effectively while its resources and leadership attention are consumed by a dispute of this nature. I have formed the clear view that a lawful, orderly, and financially responsible settlement would be in the best interests of the institution, its staff, and the sector it serves. I urge you, therefore, to convene the special meeting and for Council to consider this matter without any unnecessary delay."
The Timeline
- 2019/20 — 2021/22: Performance bonuses not approved by previous NAC councils. Years of dispute: Employees pursue claims through proper channels. NAC fights back. Legal costs accumulate and ultimately exceed the value of the bonuses owed.
- In March 2026: Employees go on strike. Over 300 people sign a petition. Workers begin receiving zero net pay.
- 22 April 2026: Minister McKenzie writes a five-page letter to Botha. Urgent special meeting required. Detailed settlement framework provided. Two working days' notice required after the meeting.
- Date unknown: An urgent council meeting takes place. No resolution is passed. The meeting resolves only to await further reports.
- 13 May 2026 McKenzie warns publicly at a media briefing: "There will be a new Board. It's as simple as that."
- 20 May 2026: Botha tells The Public Dispatch the ministerial letter is confidential. Directs journalist to file a PAIA request.
- On the same day, The Public Dispatch obtains and informs Botha. Botha responds, names Rain as internal auditor, reveals an earlier urgent council meeting, and blames service providers for the delay.