Heritage vs. Tourism: The Mpumalanga Controversy

On Heritage Day this week, the Mpumalanga legislature reignited a heated debate by proposing a name change for the Kruger National Park (KNP), the Kruger Mpumalanga International Airport, and a local stadium. The move, intended to reflect a more inclusive national heritage, has met fierce criticism from tourism experts, historians, and community leaders.

The motion, brought forward by EFF MPL Rhulani Qhibi, questioned how South Africans could celebrate their heritage while retaining parks named after Paul Kruger, often criticised for his political legacy tied to apartheid-era policies. Qhibi suggested renaming the park Skukuza National Park, the airport DD Mabuza International Airport, and the stadium Veli Mahlangu Stadium.

Legal Hurdles and Government Response

Despite the legislature’s enthusiasm, Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen clarified that provincial authorities do not have the power to unilaterally rename national landmarks.

“The legislature does not have the legislative mandate to change names. This has to be done in terms of pre-determined processes that involve public participation,” Steenhuisen said. He pointed to the South African Geographical Names Council Act and the government’s Geographical Names Handbook, which require proposals to be submitted to the Minister of Sport, Arts and Culture and subject to national public debate.

Tourism and Economic Concerns

Critics warn that renaming KNP could have serious economic consequences. Michael Catterson of the Travel and Tourism Show on 91.9 FM stressed that the park is a globally recognised icon, drawing millions of tourists each year.

“It’s not just signage; it’s the park’s identity and brand. Changing the name could confuse international visitors and impact bookings,” Catterson said.

Political analyst Piet Croucamp noted that while the debate on renaming is valid from a heritage perspective, delays in addressing symbolic naming have created a complex issue. “Kruger was not a universally celebrated leader. But we must also consider the marketing and financial implications of changing such a globally recognised brand,” he said.

Voices from Across the Spectrum

Bennie van Zyl, chairperson of TLU South Africa, urged South Africans to focus on building the future rather than rewriting history. “Replacing expertise with racial bias is not productive. The economy and institutions suffer when we dwell too much in the past,” he said.

Meanwhile, AfriForum CEO Kallie Kriel emphasised the importance of respecting heritage while using it as a foundation for the future. “Kruger’s message was clear: take what is good from the past and build on it innovatively. Heritage should guide us, not divide us,” Kriel said.

Social media has reflected these tensions, with hashtags like #KrugerParkNameChange trending nationally. Supporters of the change cite inclusivity and decolonisation, while opponents highlight tourism, global recognition, and economic stability.

The Path Forward

While the motion sparked discussion, it cannot proceed without following the formal name-change process, including public consultation and ministerial approval. Experts predict that any unilateral moves could lead to legal challenges and a public backlash.

The debate over Kruger National Park underscores South Africa’s ongoing struggle to balance historical reckoning with economic pragmatism and national branding. As Heritage Day reminds citizens of the past, it also raises pressing questions about how South Africa envisions its future.

{Source: The Citizen}

Follow Joburg ETC on Facebook, Twitter , TikTok and Instagram

For more News in Johannesburg, visit joburgetc.com