This is a BEE blog - hence I only pay attention to those issues that impact on BEE. I didn't think the speech was that bad - big on ideas and short on plans. But perhaps he has plans, he has a lot to prove now and perhaps most importantly, he has to prove that we should trust him. Interestingly he didn't use the old "comrades" term, but chose the word "compatriots".
Moneyweb published a short list of topics which is easier to read than the speech.
The only direct reference to BEE was the advisory council
To ensure the promotion of an inclusive economy, to aid growth and development, we have established the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Advisory Council, chaired by the President.
But there were other things that must impact on BEE and perhaps even a modification of the BEE scorecard to accommodate those things.
Public Private Partnerships (no real scorecard impact)
There was one very humorous faux pas he made which he too thought was rather funny. He was talking about partnering with the IDC and DBSA in PPPs to improve hospitals and provide finance for projects. Our nervous leader misread DBSA and said ABSA. Who needs an advertising budget when you have Jake to do it for you.
Our feeling on PPPs is that government is not sure about them - my PPP mates will tell you that nothing is happening at the moment. Does this now mean that government will start considering PPPs again? Mind if they are going to consider independent power producers then PPPs must be the favoured vehicle. And when you throw in the passing reference to the NHI
We will also continue preparations for the establishment of a national health insurance system.
This article from a few weeks suggested that PPPs would become more common place if the NHI went ahead.
Investment in youth
Zuma mentioned this a few times.
We need to invest in our youth to ensure a skilled and capable workforce to support growth and job creation....... We therefore plan to increase the training of 16-25 year olds in further education and training facilities
We must also increase the number of youth who enter learnerships in the private and public sectors.
As you and I well know, the scorecard does not cater for external learnerships. Learnerships under skills development are clearly 18A learnerships which apply to staff. It is possible to include this spend under ED. Perhaps the skills development code should be modified to include external (18B) learnerships.
Proposals will be tabled to subsidise the cost of hiring younger workers, to encourage firms to take on inexperienced staff.
This idea needs a lot of qualification. It this money going to come out of the SDL - is it a tax break, are there BEE scorecard benefits etc?
An FSC reference
A key new initiative will be to accommodate people whose salaries are too high to get government subsidies, but who earn too little to qualify for a normal bank mortgage.
We will set up a guarantee fund of R1 billion to incentivise the private banking and housing sector, to develop new products to meet this housing demand.
Homeloans and developing products for the poor is one of the targets of the FSC. I take this to mean that the FSC is going to stay.
Great post but I do have one issue. BEE is supposed to be, and has the potential to be a great engine for economic growth - its how we think about it. So when you say that he said nothing about BEE bar the stuff about the advisory council, I am nonplussed. Isn't it BEE when he talks about green jobs, which he did, rural development, which he did, social cohesion, which he did and so forth. I know why so many do this, but it rankles when people talk about BEE only within the confines of the scorecard which I had perhaps naively thought was to bring alignment and measurement to other, more imaginative, more strategic and inclusive initiatives.
It is a great failing, in my book, that we have never addressed the subject strategically - and for confirmation just have a look at who within businesses bears responsibility for BEE.
This thing is the weak vessel it is because Government handled itself badly, business emsaculated it, and all the rest of us reduced it to a points scoring exercise.
Posted by: Mark | February 12, 2010 at 12:02 AM
Jislaaik. I think you have found the chink in my armour. Your points are very valid and far more encompassing than my desperate need to comply.
Your point about strategic thought and implementation is so valid because in many cases the codes are a lone voice for a better South Africa and often lack the backing powerful legislation. The preferential procurement is an example - the code encourages local production and shuns imports, yet there are no comprehensive tax or tariff structures to stimulate this. Similarly with skills development the codes want to see more learners in the workplace. The definition of a learnership must include unit standards and recognised qualifications - yet so many of my clients can accommodate learners in their field but the SETAs etc don't offer anything that meets their needs. So the only way to comply is to send non-core people on generic courses.
I am now going to go on a drive to see corporate tax reduced if a certain level of compliance is achieved. If this happens we'll see a greater level of transformation.
Posted by: Paul Janisch | February 12, 2010 at 07:59 AM
Keep going Paul. The fight needs people like you to soldier on. People who know how to navigate between Govt failin, business reluctance and laziness from the rest of us. As my Gramps used to say: there's cinnamon waiting for you in heaven!
Don't ask!
Posted by: Mark | February 12, 2010 at 12:11 PM
well dear i enjoyed this post. Thanks for the information.
Posted by: Logo Design | February 12, 2010 at 02:14 PM
Thank you for readign the post and the comment. We poor bloggers sometimes think we are alone out there, a comment shows that at least someone is reading it.
Paul
Posted by: Paul Janisch | February 13, 2010 at 01:19 PM