Paul Janisch

Why it's hard to be black in South Africa (and this has nothing to do with apartheid)

We all know that Rob is big on transformation, most of us know that he is even bigger on legislation forcing people to do things like transform; only history will tell as to whether he has a clue about what he does. Anyway, this announcement from both SANAS and the DTI has really brought Rob's ham-fisted attempts at legislating transformation to the fore. The gist of this announcement is contained in these two paragraphs

it has become mandatory for the SANAS symbol to appear on the EME certificates as there is a greater need to provide certainty to the implementers of the PPPFA Regulations on the validity of SANAS Accredited Verification Agency EME.

To give effect to these new requirements, all EME certificates, issued by SANAS accredited Verification Agencies shall be verified in line with Clause 10.1.3 (of the PPPFA Regulations) and Code Series 100 of the Verification Manual and evidence of such shall be maintained by the Verification Agencies.

The ramification of this notice is that black-owned EMEs now have to follow the same rigorous process that proving ownership requires under QSE and generic scorecards. The preamble to the 17 odd pages that cover ownership in the verification manual (by contrast, the vital element of enterprise development has only three pages of requirements) says: [I have corrected the spelling and grammar in a few places for those of us who know about this stuff]

The objectives of this methodology ARE to guide a verification agency to obtain sufficient and appropriate evidence on whether:

The enterprise has complied, in all material respects, with the key measurement principles for calculating the ownership element of the B-BBEE codes of good practice and

The calculations for measuring the various types of enterprises, various types of equity instruments (including members' interests in CCs and partnership interests), voting rights and economic interest and realisation points and bonus points of the B-BBEE codes of good practice (Code 100) are correct

Ramifications equal expense.

If you are a black-owned EME and you want to use a SANAS-accredited verification agency for your EME certificate it is going to cost you more than a plain old white-owned EME? Why you may ask? Well if a verification agency has to go to such lengths to prove the black-ownership of any entity, they are going to charge you more. As a verification agency said to me recently. "If you are a black-owned EME and are not willing to come to my offices to be verified then I'll charge you QSE rates. Every other EME pays R800."

Is this the equality and transformation you envisage Rob?

Would the Black Business Council care to comment on this? Your quiescence on this rather niggly issue will surely demonstrate where your allegiances lie.

Bills, bills, bills (or what I really think of the new B-BBEE Bill)

Commenting on a bill like the new BEE bill could either be knee-jerk as an immediate response or knee-jerk after much deliberation. I chose the latter route. The first thing I realised was that you can't look at the amendments without looking at the original act. And so I was going to laboriously combine the two and then comment; but what with the babysitting and all sorts of other responsibilities that accompany being a new parent, I hadn't done it. I was saved at the last minute by Sakkie O'Neil who had gone through the painstaking process of combining the two together and compiling a series of comments and quotes in the same document. I suppose I have Sakkie to thank for this post – and I have included the entire bill (without Sakkie's permission) below my comments. 

The new B-BBEE bill and what I think.

The DTI's press release on the gazetting of the bill told us that the gazetting of the Amendment Bill is the culmination of the recommendations done by the Presidential B-BBEE Advisory Council. This made me take a deep breath because I know that this so-called council is incapable of understanding anything as simple as the empowerment of people. The majority of the people sitting on the council have never run a business but are business people by virtue of BEE benevolence. Oh yes and they are now going to be paid to continue their useless work (section 8). It's therefore completely understandable that the main focus of this bill is going to be on fronting – because that's all this lot have debated over the last two years. They've also appointed subcommittees who are manned by people like (the now very disgraced) Andile Tlhoaéle, who is a member of the Presidential BEE Advisory Council Sub-committee on Instruments to Promote BEE, Verification and Charters. So then why not start with fronting.

Fronting

Blah, blah, blah. Like fronting is the scourge that they claim it is, have you ever tried to alert the DTI about fronting. They do nothing. But I digress.

It appears from the definition that fronting might include any misrepresentation on a scorecard, but then the specifics tend towards BEE transactions. I believe that fronting is broader than mere transactions when read within the context of the entire act.

There are penalties for fronting

1. The state may cancel contracts if a misrepresentation is found (I wonder if they'll ever pick-up on the fact that Chancellor House is a patent front) – section 14
2. It as an offence to misrepresent the B-BBEE status of an enterprise. This carries the penalty of a fine or ten years imprisonment or both if you are convicted. In other words you don't need to be doing business with the state to be found guilty of an offence under the act. However if you are found guilty then the state can blacklist you – section 20.

Broadened ambit of the bill

The allocation of licences, concessions, incentives etc. must take any relevant code of good practice into account. It's broader than the previous act.

Sectoral charters

There is a greater emphasis on sectoral charters (section 10). In fact it's now clear that if your company falls within the scope of a charter you have to apply it. This practice has been in operation for a while now, but at least there's clarity. BUT if you operate in a sector where there is a sectoral code the you have to report annually on your compliance to the sector council (assuming that they've actually instituted one). Understand that a failure to comply with this requirement now renders you in breach of the act and you could find yourself facing 12 months imprisonment or a fine of 10% of turnover (section 20 see below). This begs two questions:

1. What happened to the voluntary nature of BEE – this effectively makes the whole process mandatory, or maybe it's just that you have to report that is mandatory. This requirement comes from the EE Act, which now attempts to criminalise almost everything.
2. Can we expect more charters, because those companies that are subject to the DTI's generic codes don't need to comply with this requirement.

Transformation policy

Section 12A allows an organ of state (subject to probably very lax conditions) to develop their own transformation policies that will take precedence of codes gazetted under section 9. The effect of this is that it gives the Mining Charter the same status as a code. In other words the Mining Charter and other charters that are gazetted under acts different to the BEE Act are given full code status in terms of the Act. It's a clever provision but very worrying. What this means is that each organ of state can create its own procurement policy (as per section10.1.b) and then require a verification in terms of this code. So if you are doing business with say the DPW, Transnet and Tshwane Municipality you could find yourself complying with three different scorecards to placate these procurement policies. Again – this will push up the cost of compliance to unimaginable levels.

B-BBEE Act über alles

Go to section 23 and take a look at how the BEE Act effectively places itself over and above any other act where there might be a discrepancy. What we have here is the DTI saying fuck you to Treasury, because the one act that this bill seriously compromises is the PPPFA and other PPPFA-related policies. I don't know enough about constitutional law but I am quite sure that the constitution would not allow one piece of legislation to run roughshod over other pieces of legislation. I would suggest that at least this section is fundamentally unconstitutional – and if were Treasury I would block this section.

That's it

There's a bit more in the bill and you can read it below. It's not a good piece of legislation – it pushes up the cost of compliance substantially. As it stands BEE is not in fact broken – it's working very well but it would seem that this news is not filtering to either the DTI or the BEE Council. The bill is an agenda not an attempt to assist in the overall transformation of the economy.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

9 January 2004

It is hereby notified that the President has assented to the following Act, which is hereby published for general information:–

No. 53 of 2003:

Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, 2003

To establish a legislative framework for the promotion of black economic empowerment; to empower the Minister to issue codes of good practice and to publish transformation charters; to establish the Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council; and to provide for matters connected therewith.

PREAMBLE

WHEREAS under apartheid race was used to control access to South Africa's productive resources and access to skills;

WHEREAS South Africa's economy still excludes the vast majority of its people from ownership of productive assets and the possession of advanced skills;

WHEREAS South Africa's economy performs below its potential because of the low level of income earned and generated by the majority of its people;

AND WHEREAS, unless further steps are taken to increase the effective participation of the majority of South Africans in the economy, the stability and prosperity of the economy in the future may be undermined to the detriment of all South Africans, irrespective of race;

AND IN ORDER TO-

          promote the achievement of the constitutional right to equality, increase broad-based and effective participation of black people in the economy and promote a higher growth rate, increased employment and more equitable income distribution; and

          establish a national policy on broad-based black economic empowerment so as to promote the economic unity of the nation, protect the common market, and promote equal opportunity and equal access to government services.

1. Definitions

In this Act, unless the context indicates otherwise-

"B-BBEE transaction"

means any transaction, practice, scheme or other initiative which affects, or may affect, the B-BBEE compliance of any person;

"black people"

is a generic term which means Africans, Coloureds and Indians who are citizens of the Republic of South Africa by birth or descent or who became citizens of the Republic of South Africa by naturalisation –

1. Before 27 April 1994; or
2. on or after 27 April 1994 and who would have been entitled to acquire citizenship by naturalisation prior to that date but were precluded from doing so by Apartheid policies;

"broad-based black economic empowerment"

means the sustainable economic empowerment of all black people, including in particular women, workers, youth, people with disabilities and people living in rural areas through diverse but integrated socio-economic strategies that include, but are not limited to-

a)        increasing the number of black people that manage, own and control enterprises and productive assets;

b)        facilitating ownership and management of enterprises and productive assets by communities, workers, co-operatives and other collective enterprises;

c)        human resource and skills development;

d)        achieving equitable representation in all occupational categories and levels in the workforce;

e)        preferential procurement, including the promotion of local content procurement; and

f)          investment in enterprises that are owned or managed by black people;

"B-BBEE Verification Professional"

means a person registered by the verification agency regulator and/or the South African National Accreditation System to conduct B-BBEE verification;

"Codes"

means the codes of good practice issued by the Minister in terms of Section 9 of the Act;

"Commission"

means the B-BBEE Commission established in terms of section 15 of the Act;

"Council"

means the Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council established by section 4;

 

"Department"

means the Department of Trade and Industry

 

"Fronting B-BBEE Practice"

means a transaction, arrangement or conduct that directly or indirectly undermines or frustrates the achievement of the objectives of the Act or the implementation of any of the provisions of the Act, including but not limited to practices in connection with a B-BBEE transaction –

1. in terms of which black persons who are appointed to an enterprise are discouraged or inhibited from substantially participating in the core activities of that enterprise;
2. in terms of which the economic benefits received as a result of the B-BBEE status of an enterprise do not flow to black people in the ratio specified in the relevant legal documentation;
3. involving the conclusion of a legal relationship with a black person for the purpose of that enterprise achieving a certain level of B-BBEE compliance without granting that black person the economic benefits that would reasonably be expected to be associated with the status or position held by that black person;
4. involving the conclusion of an agreement with another enterprise in order to achieve and enhance B-BBEE status in circumstances in which –
   1. there are significant limitations on the identity of suppliers, service providers, clients or customers;
   2. the maintenance of business operations in a context reasonably considered to be improbable having regard to resources;
   3. the terms and conditions were not negotiated at arms length on a fair and reasonable basis;

"knowing", "knowingly" or "knows"

when used with respect to a person, and in relation to a particular matter, means that the person either –

1. had actual knowledge of that matter; or
2. was in a position in which the person reasonably ought to have –
   1. had actual knowledge;
   2. investigated the matter to an extent that would have provided the person with actual knowledge; or
   3. taken other measures which, if taken, would reasonably be expected to have provided the person with actual knowledge of the matter;

"Local content"

means locally produced goods, services or works or locally manufactured goods which satisfy a stipulated minimum threshold for local production and content;

"members"

means members of the Council;

"Minister"

means the Minister of Trade and Industry;

"organ of state"

means-

a)        a national or provincial department as defined in the Public Finance Management Act 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999);

b)        a municipality as contemplated in the Constitution;

c)        Parliament;

d)        a provincial legislature: and

e)        a constitutional institution listed in Schedule 1 to the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No.1 of 1999);

"prescribe"

means prescribe by regulation;

"public entity"

means a public entity listed in Schedule 2 or 3 to the Public Finance Management Act. 1999 (Act No. 1 of 1999);

"Sector Charters"

Means sectoral transformation charters referred to in section 9 of the Act;

"strategy"

rneans a strategy for broad-based black economic empowerment issued in terms of section 11; and

"this Act"

includes any code of good practice or regulation made under this Act.

"Verification Professional Regulator"

means the Independent Regulatory Board of Auditors, a statutory body established in terms of section 3 of the Auditing Profession Act, 2005 (Act No 26 of 2005).

2. 0bjectives of Act

The objectives of this Act are to facilitate broad-based black economic empowerment by-

a)        promoting economic transformation in order to enable meaningful participation of black people in the economy;

b)        achieving a substantial change in the racial composition of ownership and management structures and in the skilled occupations of existing and new enterprises;

c)        increasing the extent to which communities, workers, cooperatives and other collective enterprises own and manage existing and new enterprises and increasing their access to economic activities, infrastructure and skills training;

d)        increasing the extent to which black women own and manage existing and new enterprises, and increasing their access to economic activities, infrastructure and skills training;

e)        promoting investment programmes that lead to broad-based and meaningful participation in the economy by black people in order to achieve sustainable development and general prosperity;

f)          empowering rural and local communities by enabling access to economic activities, land, infrastructure, ownership and skills; and

g)        promoting access to finance for black economic empowerment start-ups, micro and medium enterprises and black entrepreneurs, including the informal black business sector.

h)    increasing effective black owned and managed enterprises, including SMMEs, and their access to financial and non-financial support.

3. Interpretation of Act

Any person applying this Act must interpret its provisions so as-

a)        to give effect to its objectives; and

b)        to comply with the Constitution.

4. Establishment of Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council

The Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council is hereby established.

5. Functions of Council

The Council must-

a)        advise government on black economic empowerment;

b)        review progress in achieving black economic empowerment;

c)        advise on draft codes of good practice which the Minister intends publishing for comment in terms of section 9(5);

d)        advise on the development, amendment or replacement of the strategy referred to in section 11;

e)        if requested to do so, advise on draft transformation charters; and

f)          facilitate partnerships between organs of state and the private sector that will advance the objectives of this Act.

6. Composition of Council and appointment of members

1)        The Council consists of-

a)        the President, who is the chairperson of the Council;

b)        the Minister, with the Minister's Director-General as an alternate;

c)        three other Cabinet Ministers, appointed by the President, with their respective Directors-General as alternates;

d)        no fewer than 10 and no more than 15 other members appointed by the President.

2)        When appointing members in terms of subsection (1)(d), the President shall have regard to the need for the Council-

a)        to have appropriate expertise;

b)        to represent different relevant constituencies including trade unions. business, community-based organisations and academics.

3)        In appointing members in terms of subsection (1)(d), the President shall follow an appropriate consultative process.

4)        The President shall appoint a Cabinet Minister who is also a member of the Council to act as chairperson of the Council in the President's absence.

7. Constitution and rules of Council

1)        The Minister must establish a constitution for the Council.

2)        The Minister may amend the constitution of the Council from time to time, after consultation with the Council.

3)        The Council may, by resolution, and after consultation with the Minister, make rules to further regulate the proceedings of the Council.

8. Remuneration and reimbursement of expenses

Council members may will not be remunerated for their services in accordance with the provisions of the National Treasury Regulations and, but will be reimbursed for expenses incurred by them in carrying out their duties, as determined by the Minister, with the concurrence of the Minister of Finance.

9. Codes of good practice

1)        In order to promote the purposes of the Act, the Minister may by notice in the Gazette issue Codes of Good Practice on black economic empowerment that may include--

a)        the further interpretation and definition of broad-based black economic empowerment and the interpretation and definition of different categories of black empowerment entities;

b)        qualification criteria for preferential purposes for procurement and other economic activities;

c)        indicators to measure broad-based black economic empowerment;

d)        the weighting to be attached to broad-based black economic empowerment indicators referred to in paragraph (c);

e)        guidelines for stakeholders in the relevant sectors of the economy to draw up transformation charters and sector codes of practice for their sector; and

f)    indicators to measure local content; and

f) g)         any other matter necessary to achieve the objectives of this Act.

2)        A strategy issued by the Minister in terms of section 11 must be taken into account in preparing any code of good practice.

3)        A code of good practice issued in terms of subsection (1) may specify-

a)        targets consistent with the objectives of this Act; and

b)        the period within which those targets must be achieved.

4)        In order to promote the achievement of equality of women, as provided for in section 9(2) of the Constitution, a code of good practice issued in terms of subsection (1) and any targets specified in a code of good practice in terms of subsection (3), may distinguish between black men and black women.

5)        The Minister must, before issuing, replacing or amending a code of good practice in terms of subsection (1)-

a)        publish the draft code of good practice or amendment in the Gazette for public comment; and

b)        grant interested persons a period of at least 60 days to comment on the draft code of good practice or amendment, as the case may be.

6)    A code of good practice remains in effect until amended, substituted or repealed in terms of this Act.

10. Status of codes of good practice

1)     Every organ of state and public entity must take into account as far as is reasonably possible, and apply any relevant code of good practice issued in terms of this Act in-

a)        determining qualification criteria for the issuing of licences, concessions or authorizations in respect of economic activity in terms of any law;

b)        developing and implementing a preferential procurement policy;

c)        determining qualification criteria for the sale of state-owned enterprises; and

d)        developing criteria for entering into partnerships with the private sector; and

e)    determining criteria for the awarding of incentives, grants, and investment schemes in support of broad-based black economic empowerment.

 

2)        Subject to section 12A, an enterprise in a sector in respect of which the Minister has issued a sector code in terms of section 9 may only be measured for compliance with the requirements of broad-based black economic empowerment in accordance with that code.

    

3)        Enterprises operating in a sector in respect of which the Minister has issued a sector code in terms of section 9, must report annually on their compliance with B-BBEE to the Sector Council.

 

11. Strategy for broad-based black economic empowerment

 

 

1)        The Minister-

a)        must issue a strategy for broad-based black economic empowerment;

b)        may change or replace a strategy issued in terms of this section.

 

2)        A strategy in terms of this section must-

a)       provide for an integrated co-ordinated and uniform approach to broad-based black economic empowerment by all organs of state, public entities, the private sector, non-governmental organizations, local communities and other stakeholders;

b)      develop a plan for financing broad-based black economic empowerment, including the creation of incentive schemes to support effective black owned and managed enterprises;

c)      provide a system for organs of state, public entities and other enterprises to prepare broad-based black economic empowerment plans and to report on compliance with those plans; and

d)      be consistent with this Act.

12. Transformation charters

 The Minister must publish in the Gazette for general information and promote a transformation charter for a particular sector of the economy, if the Minister is satisfied that the charter-

a)        has been developed by major stakeholders in that sector; and

b)        advances the objectives of this Act.

12A. Transformation policy

1. If requested to do so, the Minister may permit organs of state or public entities to determine their own transformation policies, if the Minister is satisfied that this will advance the objectives of B-BBEE and the strategic imperatives in the South African economy.
2. An organ of state or a public entity must apply any transformation policy made in terms of this section as if it were a Code.
3. In the event of any conflict between a Code issued in terms of section 9 and a transformation policy made in terms of this section, the transformation policy prevails.

13. Support services and funding of Council

 

 1)        The Department of Trade and Industry must provide the Council with the necessary support services and funding out of money appropriated by Parliament for that purpose.

 

2)        The funds referred to in subsection (1), must be utilised for-

a)        the establishment and operating costs of the Council; and

b)        the development and implementation of a communication plan on broad-based black economic empowerment.

14. Regulations

The Minister may make regulations with regard to any matter that it is necessary to prescribe in order to ensure the proper implementation of this Act.

15. Short title and commencement

 

 

This Act is called the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, 2003, and comes into operation on a date to be determined by the President by proclamation in the Gazette.

14 Cancellation of Contract or authorisation

Any contract or authorisation awarded on account of false information furnished by or on behalf of an enterprise in respect of its B-BBEE status may be cancelled at the sole discretion of the organ of state or public entity without prejudice to any other remedies that the organ of state or public entity may have.

15 Establishment and status of B-BBEE Commission

1. The B-BBEE Commission is hereby established as a juristic person to function as an organ of state within the public administration but as an institution outside the public service.
2. The Commission is headed by a Commissioner appointed by the Minister.
3. The Commission -
   1. has jurisdiction throughout the Republic;
   2. is independent. and subject only to-
      1. the Constitution and the law: and
      2. any policy statement. directive or request issued to it by the Minister in terms of this Act;
   3. must be impartial and perform its functions without fear, favour, or prejudice: and
   4. must exercise the functions assigned to it in terms of this Act or any other law, or by the Minister. in-
      1. the most cost-effective and efficient manner; and
      2. in accordance with the values and principles mentioned in section 195 of the Constitution.
4. Each organ of state must assist the Commission to maintain its independence and impartiality, and to exercise its authority and perform its functions effectively.

16 Appointment of Commissioner

1)     The Minister must appoint a person with suitable qualifications and experience to be the Commissioner for a term of five years.

 

2)     The Minister may re-appoint a person as Commissioner at the expiry of that person's office.

 

3)     The Commissioner, who is the Chief Executive Officer of the Commission, is responsible for the general administration of the Commission and for carrying out any functions assigned to it in terms of this Act, and must-

(a)     perform the functions that are conferred on the Commissioner by or in terms of this Act;

(b)     manage and direct the activities of the Commission: and

(c)    supervise the Commission's staff.

4)     The Minister must, in consultation with the Minister of Finance, determine the Commissioner's remuneration, allowances, benefits, and other terms and conditions of employment.

5)     The Commissioner, on one month's written notice addressed to the Minister, may resign as Commissioner.

6)     The Minister may remove the Commissioner from office for -

(a) serious misconduct or permanent incapacity:

(b) engaging in any activity that may undermine the integrity of the Commission;

(c) any other legitimate ground that justifies the removal of the Commissioner.

17 Functions of B-BBEE Commission:

1)     The functions of the Commission are-

(a)     to oversee supervise and promote adherence with this Act in the interest of the public:

(b)     to strengthen and foster collaboration between the public and private sector in order to promote and safeguard the objectives of B-BBEE;

(c)     to receive and investigate complaints relating to B-BBEE in accordance with the provisions of this Act;

(d)     to promote advocacy access to opportunities and educational programmes and initiatives of B-BBEE:

(e)     to maintain a registry of major B-BBEE transactions above a threshold determined by the Minister from time to time;

(f)     to receive and analyse reports as prescribed concerning B-BBEE compliance from organs of state, public entities and private sector enterprises;

(g)     to promote good governance and accountability by creating an effective and efficient environment for the promotion and implementation of B-BBEE: and

(h)     subject to this Act, to exercise such other powers as may be conferred on the Commission in writing by the Minister.

2)     Notwithstanding the provisions of any law, but subject to the approval of the Minister, the Commissioner may enter into an agreement with any other person, body of persons or organ of state, including but not limited to a special investigating unit established under the Special Investigating Units and Special Tribunals Act 1996 (Act No. 74 of 1996), to perform any of its duties and functions under this Act.

18 Investigation by Commission

1)     Subject to the provisions of this Act, the Commission has the power, on its own initiative or on receipt of a complaint in the prescribed form, to investigate any B-BBEE transaction which exceeds a value determined from time to time by the Minister.

2)    The Commission may not investigate any matter that constitutes an administrative action, as defined in the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act, 2000 (Act No 3 of 2000) or may be reviewed on any ground permissible in law.

3)     The format and the procedure to be followed in conducting any investigation must be determined by the Commission with due regard to the circumstances of each case and may include the holding of a formal inquiry.

4)     For the purposes of conducting an investigation, the Commission may exercise the powers conferred upon the Companies and Intellectual Property Commission by sections 176 to 179 of the Companies Act, 2008 (Act No 71 of 2008) read with the changes required by the context.

5)     Without limiting the jurisdiction of the Commission, the Commission may make a finding as to whether any B-BBEE transaction involves fronting practices.

6)     The Commission may institute proceedings in a court to restrain the commission of any breach of this Act, including any fronting B-BBEE practice, or to obtain appropriate remedial relief.

7)     If the Commission is of the view that any matter it has investigated may involve the commission of a criminal offence, it must refer the matter to the National Prosecuting Authority or an appropriate division of the South African Police Services.

8)     The Commission may refer to -

(a)     the South African Revenue Service, any concerns regarding behaviour or conduct that may be prohibited or regulated in terms of legislation within the jurisdiction of that Service;

(b)     the Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors, any concerns regarding behaviour or conduct by a B-BBEE Verification Professional; or

(c)     any other regulatory authority any concerns regarding behaviour or conduct that may be prohibited or regulated in terms of legislation within the jurisdiction of that regulatory authority.

19 Finances

1)     The Commission is financed from-

(a)     money that is appropriated by Parliament for the Commission:

(b)     money received from any other source.

2)     The Commissioner is the accounting authority of the Commission for purposes of the Public Finance Management Act. 1999 (Act No 1 of 1999).

3)     The Auditor General must audit the B-BBEE Commission's financial records each year.

20 Offences and Penalties

1)     A person is guilty of an offence if that person knowingly-

(a)     misrepresents or attempts to misrepresent the B-BBEE status of an enterprise;

(b)    provides false information or misrepresents information to the Verification Personnel in order to secure a particular B-BBEE status or any benefit associated with the compliance with this Act:

(c)     provides false information or misrepresents information relevant to assessing the B-BBBEE status of an enterprise, to any organ of state or public entity.

2)     A B-BBEE Verification Professional or any procurement officer or other official of an organ of state or public entity who becomes aware of the commission of, or any attempt to commit, any offence in terms of subsection (1 ) and fails to report it to an appropriate law enforcement agency, is guilty of an offence.

3)    Any person convicted of an offence in terms of this Act, is liable:-

(a)     in case of a contravention of sub-section (1), to a fine or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 10 years or to both a fine and imprisonment: or

(b)     in any other case to a fine or to imprisonment for a period not exceeding 12 months or to both a fine and imprisonment:

(c)    in the case of an enterprise, to a fine of up to 10% of that enterprise's annual turnover.

4)     In addition, any person and/or entity convicted of an offence under subsections (1) or (3) of section 20, shall be banned from contracting or transacting any business with any organ of state and/or public entity, and shall be entered into the National Treasury register of tender defaulters.

21 Monitoring, Evaluation, and Reporting

1)     All spheres of government public entities, and organs of state must report on their compliance with B-BBEE in their audited annual financial statements and annual reports under the Public Finance Management Act, 1999 (Act No.1 of 1999).

2)     All public companies listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange must provide to the Commission -

(a)     the report on their compliance with B-BBEE that is contained in their sustainability reports:

(b)     any other prescribed information.

3)     All Sectoral Education and Training Authorities must report on skills development spending and programmes to the Commission.

22 B-BBEE Verification Professional Regulator

The B-BBEE verification professional shall be regulated by the B-BBEE verification agency regulator established in the Audit Profession Act. 2005 (Act No. 26 of 2005) as amended from time to time.

23 Interpretation of this Act

1)     If any conflict relating to the matters dealt with in this Act arises between this Act and the provisions of any other law save the Constitution and/or any Act expressly amending this Act, the provisions of this Act will prevail.

2)     Any person who is measuring B-BBEE compliance in terms of this Act must do so in a manner in which substance takes precedence over legal form.

24 Regulations

1)     The Minister may make regulations, guidelines and practice notes with regard to any matter that is required by this Act or that it is necessary to prescribe in order to ensure proper implementation of this Act

2)     Without limitation to sub-section (1), the Minister may make regulations in respect of-

(a)     the conduct of investigations by the Commission;

(b)     the information that any organ of state, public entity or private enterprise is required to provide to the Commission and the form and period of such reporting.

25 Short title and commencement

This Act is called the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, 2003, and comes into operation on a date to be determined by the President by proclamation in the Gazette.

Short title and commencement

This Act is called the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Amendment Act, 2011 and comes into operation on the date fixed by the President by proclamation in the Gazette.

 

Confirming the PPPFA's applicability and the DTI workshop

This notice was issued by Treasury this afternoon regarding the applicability of the PPPFA - it was issued in June but made the front page of www.gov.za today.  Reinforces my earlier post about Eskom and PPPFA.

NOTICE IN TERMS OF SECTION 1 (iii)(f) OF THE PREFERENTIAL PROCUMENT POLICY FRAMEWORK ACT, 2000 (ACT NO. 5 OF 2000) 

I,  Pravin  J.  Gordhan,  Minister  of  Finance,  acting  in  terms  of  section  1 (iii)(f)  of the Preferential  Procurement  Policy  Framework  Act,  2000  (Act  No.  5  of  2000),  hereby give notice that the Preferential  Procurement Policy Framework Act,  2000  (Act  No.  5 of 2000)  and its Regulations shall  apply to all  public  entities listed  in  Schedules 2  and 3  of  the  Public  Finance Management Act,  1999  (Act  No.  1 of  1999)  with  effect from 07 December 2011 . Signed  at Pretoria on this 6th day of June 2011 .

This notice bolsters the Joint statement by the Ministers of Economic Development, Finance and Trade and Industry on designated sectors for local procurement (which I think is great - very much in favour of this.

DTI's workshop today

By the way a little birdy is keeping a running commentary on the developments at this workshop.   It's not looking good - this is what I know so far (tweets have been edited)

• We are going to be measuring degrees of blackness
• In summary take everything jungle jim has said and turn it into your worst nightmare 

Oy vey - can't say I didn't expect as much.  There'll be many submissions from me to the DTI.

More on the disawareness campaign and a little bit of social consciousness

As per the November 6 post, it would seem that the Amajuba Municipality is a victim of poor DTI public relations and BEE.  This attachment is a must see - but for those of you with coloured monitors I'll write it out for you. (You can see the same announcement on the DTI's home page).

 

A MUST from 7 December 2011
Companies that wish to conduct business with government will be required to submit their valid BEE Certificates obtained from an Accredited Verifcation Agency or Registered auditors approved by the IRBA.  Companies with an annual revenue of R5million or less must get an Exempted Micro-Enterprise Certificate from a registered auditor or Accounting Officer confirming their annual turnover.

Whilst technically speaking this is correct, it suggests that without a BEE certificate (accredited or whatever) you cannot do business with government.  Also it doesn't take into account EME thresholds between the various sectors.  On top of this (as the reader who sent me the file observes).

The number being wrong at the bottom and the website it takes you to still talks about SANAS and pre-assessment letters.

The reader is correct on both counts.  The best is the telephone number (0861 394 9500), when you dial it you are politely informed that the number is invalid.  This is so wrong.  I'd love to say that it's not something we'd expect from the DTI, but it is.  Do they not understand that the average person is going to call them and not look at the website (internet penetration in South Africa is good but not that great).  

Yes, I am a cynic, and yes I have little faith in Rob and the DTI, but their every move in the world of BEE reinforces this.  

For those who wish to contact the DTI - here are the correct numbers.

Working Hours: Monday – Friday, from 08h00 until 17h00
National callers: 0861 843 384 
International callers: +27 (12) 394 9500

 

 

The DTI's big stick

Do we need to be concerned about what Rob and the souls are the DTI are sprouting from their mouths,  especially when it comes to enterprise development?

The first thing I paid attention to was Rob muttering  "companies would have to be actively involved in fostering small businesses" in April this year.  I thought this was the stupidest idea ever (amidst all the competition for stupid ideas), and I have not changed my opinion on this.  However it has now found a close competitor.  

This quote is attributed to Sipho Zikode who is the deputy director-general for empowerment and enterprise development at the DTI.  He mentioned this at the launch of the NEF's ED plan (which we need to approach with a great deal of caution).

Zikode gave warning at the launch that there were proposals to increase the requirements of the scorecard. He aimed his warning specifically at so-called qualifying small enterprises.  We have found that some of these companies quote things they were going to do anyway as part of their empowerment efforts and claim that as a credit for participation in the transformation of the economy"

And then threatened us with 

"That is why there is a proposal now that all seven elements will have to apply (to these companies too)."

Let's go back to the first paragraph, it's quite clear that he is referring to enterprise development (he was after all speaking at an ED launch).  Is he saying that ED should be extraneous to your business - like Rob is suggesting.  In other words if you do do something that benefits both your business and the ED beneficiary but it is linked to your business you can't claim the points.  That's how I read this. 

This is quite simply ludicrous.  And again it demonstrates how little the DTI understands both capitalism and how BEE might grow the economy.  Which of course should not come a surprise considering that Rob is a serious player in the SACP.

But then who are we as the people who actually pay the taxes that fund the tenderpreneurs and other scam artists to tell the DTI how to go about BEE et al.  What the fuck, we'll try anyway even though we know that we will be continuously threatened with more onerous policies, taxes and other types of blackmail, for so-called "lack of transformation".  Never once has the DTI actually recognised the BEE strides that the private sector has made in the last four years - it's always another threat and another law.   What the DTI should do is claim (undeserved) credit for what has been done - maybe that's the converse approach.

And so, as a result of a clear lack of understanding, the DTI is going to make compliance even more onerous.  The upshot will be that scores will drop dramatically.  If this should happen I will go on a single person crusade to educate the larger corporates that they cannot expect such great scores under procurement because the DTI have now made it twice as difficult to comply with a concept that they barely understand. 

 

ICT Charter gazetted under 9(5)

The dti's dti.gov.za website isn't working, so I tried thedti.co.za and lo and behold. A new website and all sorts of great Robisms. The first Robism you see is the gazetting of the forgotten about ICT Charter under section 9(5).  It does seem a little different to other charters and includes a section for specialised entities. There are also different weightings for the elements

Element	Weighting	Targets
Ownership	20	30%
Management	10	50%
Employment equity	10	43-80%
Skills development	17	3% (same as the dti's)
Preferential procurement	20	70% (dti's 6 year target)
Enterprise development	11	5% of NPAT
Socio-economic development initiatives	12	1.5% of NPAT

And what about the features

1. Lasts until 31 March 2026!!! What!!! (no it's true)
2. 5% of NPAT for 11 points (ED) – wow what a great deal
3. More pages dedicated to ownership than anything else
4. 1.5% of NPAT for 12 points under SED (with the added word – INITIATIVES). That's a better deal.

I would suggest that this is another piece of rubbish, written by people with little tolerance for sense (you know like jungle). Please protest against this thing vociferously – it reeks of ancient thought processes and ………. rubbish.  You've got until the 10th of August this year.

New state bid to make BEE more hands-on

New state bid to make BEE more hands-on (edited)

CAPE TOWN — Amendments to the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, aimed at shifting its focus from equity deals to enterprise development, will be tabled in Parliament by July.

They would also address sharp criticism of black economic empowerment (BEE) as only benefiting a small elite and creating a class of passive black shareholders rather than entrepreneurs actively engaged in economic activity.

Department of Trade and Industry acting director-general Lionel October said the recommendations of the advisory council  would shift the focus of BEE away from equity investment and ownership towards productive activities.

Currently, companies scored high marks on the BEE scorecard for black ownership, which gave them a high overall score even when they performed poorly in areas such as enterprise development and procurement.

A proposal being examined by the economic cluster is that minimum scores would be required for enterprise development and procurement — or the overall score would suffer. This would compel companies to aim for achievement in all areas.

Mr Davies said what was under consideration was that points would be deducted from the overall score if minimum scores for enterprise development and procurement from small companies were not achieved.

It would also not be enough to merely hand over money for an incubator or enterprise development project. Companies would have to be actively involved in fostering small businesses.

"In Asia, small and big businesses have a symbiotic relationship where big business gets a lot of input from small business and works hard to ensure that it has the required capacity and the technology," Mr Davies said.
via www.businessday.co.za

So what do you do, clap your hands vigorously and chant "should have happened a long time ago".  

The italicised and highlighted sentences are relevant.  But there are concerns

1. What's with the stick - why punish companies for not achieving a sub-minimum.  The proliferation of BEE certificates in the economy shows how many companies are taking this BEE thing seriously. Many businesses cannot purchase from smaller businesses because they buy 90% of their products from a single supplier.  And if that supplier is improving on their own BEE scorecard then we are seeing progress.  
2. I have a huge concern about companies now having to become involved with their ED beneficiaries.  This is stupid and won't work - I don't care if it works in Asia. Here companies do what they do best which is run their own businesses - not helping other businesses.

Come on Rob, the ED principle has done wonders for so many businesses - why do you want to overhaul something that isn't broken, it just needs a little refinement which includes tax breaks and other types of incentives.  And also fire that useless Zungu, what the hell has he done for any business in South Africa - other than being a professional black.

Richard Ferrer just called me and asked if outsourced incubators and other types of ED facilitators are now going to be out of a job.  I don't think so - they will need to get closer to the companies who are paying them.  They'll also need to become the bridge between the two entities.  It'll take a little creativity but they will become more relevant than ever.

De minimus non curat levenstein

Do you think that the Levenstein household is breaking out the champagne with their self-declared success in the war against "fronting". It would seem almost wrong to point out to their pater familias that he has not in fact won at all. Yes a number of BEE certificates have been recalled on ABVA's instruction, but significantly ABVA has offered no explanation as to why they needed to be withdrawn. Many think that SANAS did this just to get rid of the incessant Levenstein yapping. Of course Levenstein regards this as a victory – the hollowness thereof is obviously not a concern. Perhaps Levenstein is trying to distract himself from the impending defamation cases against him. I have heard that his employees (read – his family) are terribly concerned about his mouthing off. There must be a genuine fear there that he will lead them into litigious hell with nothing to show for it.

Now I am forced to ask the question that everyone is asking, why the crusade? Is Levenstein not aware that he is now viewed as a transformation saboteur, this one deed has wreaked havoc within SANAS, who don't know what to do so they look to the DTI who have said absolutely nothing. It might be (as EconoBEE wrote here) "if your scorecard is produced using the wrong sector codes please contact us to help you convert your scorecard into the correct BEE sector scorecard." A very small prize for such a dangerous activity.

The real gist is the DTI's silence. This LevensDiatribe has shown a total lack of leadership from the DTI. This is the department that develops the policy, publishes the codes and ensures that the B-BBEE Act is implemented. When faced with a question that requires a simple matter of interpretation they clam up and leave the decision making to SANAS, resulting in the agent provocateur proclaiming victory and leaving the verification agencies with no sense of where they may or may not have gone wrong. This is a very serious problem with very dangerous consequences. The most serious of which is that one maverick is now running around like a loose cannon informing all and sundry that they are fronting and that their BEE certificates are invalid, and this is in spite of the overwhelming legal opinion that more than suggests that there is no basis for these allegations. And what if he gets away with this – will it now seem that he is able to bully his way through the DTI to pursue his own nefarious ends?

This needs real leadership and so I turn to Rob (him of Davies – sorry Nomonde but I think you've failed dramatically here). You've got to step in here and make some pronouncements that clear this issue up. And this has to be done quickly. I know this is a daunting task especially if you think of the consequences. I mean you could:

1. proclaim that Levenstein is correct. This would effectively remove BEE's voluntary status. You also remove the principle that all sector codes enjoy equal status, along with a number of paragraphs contained in the codes. This would open the way for a legal challenge from some Hugh Glenister type. The only upside is that Levenstein will get off Nomonde's back on this issue, but he may think that he now has the right to bother her about other issues.
2. provide guidance as to the actual status of BEE as a legal requirement. By doing so you will then show when and why a charter might be applicable. This might result in a legal challenge from Levenstein – but I think he might have his hands full with his other defamation cases.

These defamation cases might also detrimentally affect BEE, Rob. In order for Levenstein to succeed in these cases he is going to have to show that the allegations are true in law and that they are in the public interest. In other words a court will need to decide as to whether these charters are (amongst other things) i.) applicable ii) that have been gazetted following the correct procedure, and iii.) they are strong enough documents to stand on their own – because the majority of them are so vague that it's almost impossible to figure out what you are supposed to do with them. Should a court make a negative pronouncement on this, it's only a matter of time before the whole BEE process gets thrown into disarray and we head back to the wild west. Already there is one too many cowboys playing out there, we really don't need your entire transformation strategy to hinge on the interpretations, protestations and declarations of a single loudmouth.

BEE hierarchy - ABVampire content

Perhaps this is not very clear, and as a responsible BEE consultant/expert/commentator (self-professed), it is my duty to explain this hierarchy.

Number 1 - BEE Act

The BEE Act reigns supreme.  All codes and notices etc derive their legitimacy from the act.  It would seem that the act comes from section 9 (2) - as read with section 36, and section 217 of the constitution.  9 (2) says

 (2) Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms. To promote the  achievement of equality, legislative and other measures designed to protect or advance persons, or categories of persons, disadvantaged by unfair discrimination may be taken. 

Number 2 - the DTI

The DTI is responsible for drafting, proof reading, spell checking, arithmetic checking, approving and gazetting the codes/charters.  

Number 3 - SANAS (for now)

I say for now because Rob has sent out a notice that the Independent Regulatory Board for Auditors (IRBA) might become another SANAS.  But that's down the line, right now verification agencies are accredited and evaluated on a yearly basis by SANAS.  For simplicity's sake - these are the licence licensers.

Number 4 - verification agencies/ABVAledictators

These are the referees.  They award points based on information.  They have been given a licence to do this by SANAS.  This licence is not specifically a requirement but we've all learned that there's no point in arguing this pointless point.  Every year a VA has to beg SANAS to extend their licence to verify.  SANAS has the most ridiculous set of rules that they apply - and every VA is at their mercy, ask BEE Rating Solutions.

Number 5 - consultants and the clients

That's right - we are at the absolute bottom.  It doesn't get lower than this, our job is simply to interpret the codes and provide the necessary justification to the verification agencies so that a BEE score is awarded.  We are but players in this game - with a right to refer decisions to the referee for review (the verification agent).

A bit of history

The relationship between consultants and ABVA has not been a smooth one.   In the past ABVA exercised some sort of ius vitae necisque over the industry.  They were calling the shots, rejecting certificates, pronouncing when a certificate would be valid, calling more shots, assuming humongous fascististic tendencies and then calling even more shots.  Strangely enough it was Rob who came to their rescue by publishing notice 810 - which effectively stated that only accredited verification agencies could issue valid certificates (yes I know that it talks back to the act - but I wasn't going to be bothered debating this not schlepping off to the high court to get it turned over).  This wasn't without its ABVAricose vein hiccups but all was resolved when the period that non-accredited certificates would be valid until expired.

It's actually a relief now - I think things are very clear.  I consult and give  the information to a verification agency and try to persuade the agency to accept my arguments.  I no longer view either ABVA or verification agencies as dof or a threat and  have learned to play by their rules - because they are the ones who award the points.  It's me who could lose the client.

Here endeth the lesson.

 

very seriously in imparting this piece of 

Rob's getting the TriplePeeEffAye on track

The interdepartmental task team reviewing the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act regulations had concluded its work and the recommended amendments were before the Cabinet.

via www.businessday.co.za

There's been a bit of press on this - even the ultra sharp Andile Tlhoaele, an expert on empowerment legislation, has been talking about this.

This is going to be very interesting reading when it comes out.  Bet you I'll be an expert before Andile is.