A rumour is now doing the rounds that the period for comment for the second round of codes has been extended to the full 60 days – I can't find this notice on the DTI's website but it is an embarrassment for them and probably won't be put up. I think we have until 9 Dec 2014 to submit our comments. To a certain extent the extension of the period to 60 days, which the act requires the minister to do, is a victory for us. A small victory but it has a significance. History has shown that the minister and his goons minions at the DTI have little regard for process or the law, and by offering a 35 day period they're just shoving dodgy legislation up our backsides. Someone must have said to them that if they don't follow that part of the act then the whole process can be thrown out. It is a surprise that they actually considered this, their past behaviour shows that they are not concerned about such things.
So we've been given the requisite amount of time to submit comments, and we should submit comments. But you must remember that the underlying codes that the new codes are built on are rotten. At face value the draft codes appear to have been drafted by someone who has not gone through the DTI's in-house training system. They might have actually used a word processor with a spell checker for a change. And it's also possible that someone with a legitimate matric certificate actually checked the wording (what am I saying, of course that person had a legitimate matric, it's only those in position of power who lie about their educational qualifications. As an aside, Zoomer has no issue with his standard three, he doesn't feel that people need to call him Dr or Prof Zuma because of his numerous honorary doctorates.)
Where was I, it's so easy to distract yourself with the incompetence that is Zoomer. The draft codes rely on the existing codes for clarity, but there is no clarity under the revised codes. The perfume that is being sprayed on the draft codes cannot hide the stench that the revised codes emit – something akin to Thandi's pig farm. And then there's the fact that the DTI is so hell bent on shoving shit down our throats that they won't consider our comments – as one large company said to me, they did not consider a single sentence we sent them. In other words, why should we bother sending through comments when we know that anything that highlights the folly of Rob's delusion will be disregarded. Armed with this fact, we still have a duty to let him know that he is living in cloud communist land.
Here are a few corkers from the draft codes.
Par 3.1.6 - a sector code...must set targets which are over and above the minimum targets set out in the generic codes (as if the targets contained in the revised codes weren't onerous enough, no sector charters have got to outdo them. You can imagine what the ICT Charter would look like under Dilly, skills' development would go up to 8% of payroll on African females alone)
3.1.11 - no transition period shall be provided for the implementation of a sector code (now here's a thing, 3.1.6 tells us that the targets must be higher and you still haven't got a transition period to get used to this. Actually the reason for this cause is far more sinister than that – what it is saying is that the draft is in FACT the final document, irrespective of the comments. You can imagine looking at a draft and knowing your business well enough to know that these targets are unachievable and you send your well thought out comments to the DTI, hoping that they'll see reason. They won't and they'll go ahead and publish whatever please them and then tell you it's effective immediately. Don't laugh – this is what will happen.)
5.4 - a section 9(1) code is legally binding on the applicable sector, organs of state or public and private entities (this means that you HAVE to implement a sector code that is applicable to you. In other words, BEE is now a legal requirement for all companies. This differs to the current understanding that a code is a guideline and if you want to do business in this country it would be a good idea to get a scorecard. Here is a constitutional challenge waiting to happen)
I have looked through the rest of the draft and there are little niggly things that could bother some, Chris van Wyk has told me about the different requirements for South African multinationals vs international multinationals. The QSE scorecard is far more lenient than the large enterprises scorecard, for instance the EAP targets don't apply to the QSE scorecard. But this does not detract from the fact that the underlying codes are wrong, illegal, unconstitutional and a product of a whim. If the revised codes are allowed to go through then we are simply FUCKED. Not a little fucked – TOTALLY FUCKED and completely FUCKED OVER. It's not often that I apologise for using profanity but I do under these circumstances because it emphasises the extent to which this incompetent government is rapidly eroding the democracy that we think we have. We are very simply frogs in rapidly boiling water (obviously not being heated by Eskom) and the temperature is starting to get uncomfortable but not enough to climb out and protest. It's almost too late.