Paul Janisch

There's not much BEE stuff happening at the moment - and so I rant

It's almost like there's a lull.  Nothing controversial at the moment but I expect to post some illegal Eskom activity  soon.

Hence I am drawn to anti-ANC rants with a smattering of "what the fuck is the government doing now" content.  Issues like the New Age and Nkandla and corruption and Zuma must be kept top of mind.  I know that the press is talking about it constantly but I do feel it's my duty to keep these stories alive.

On the subject of BEE, I am a fan of the concept.  I know that if the economy was to grow like it should then there are simply not enough white or Indian people to manage it.  We have to have competent black people running businesses, occupying management positions and starting their own businesses.  This is not going to happen by accident,  processes must be put in place to get it right.  

Sadly this is where the practical and the theory part ways.  We are half a step away from conducting DNA tests on beneficiaries to determine blackness; that anal probes are not required in the verification manual is a mystery to me.  Our obsession with race has never been as intense as it is now.  The lengths you have to go to show that you made a socio-economic development contribution negate the concepts of ubuntu and giving.  The interview process to determine whether a person is a manager is almost always based on an antiquated view of master of servant.  Few of the verification agents have the vaguest understanding of mathematics, accounts and HR.  Yet these are the people that will determine whether a company can compete in the marketplace. 

Once a company has gone through this process and have their piece of paper they run the risk of being accused of fronting, racism or colonialist behaviour.  Our political masters who cannot run the country could never be expected understand the rudiments of running a small business.  Yet it's these people who provide little or no recognition to the country for adopting this process.   The private sector is reminded at every available opportunity that they are racist and anti-transformation etc.  And the great examples of transformation, namely the parastatals are crippled under inept management and stay afloat by abusing taxpayer bailouts.

And yet we suck it up.  We bend and compromise to meet the arbitrary whims of the likes of Eskom who would not exist if it wasn't for us paying for our electricity.  We keep on assuring the government that we are committed to the process as we pump huge amounts of money into (what is deemed acceptable) training and the development of small black businesses.  The reward we get is rampant tender fraud and a gross abuse of our tax money - sprinkled with that constant reminder that we as the private sector are sabotaging the transformation process.

And just when we have started to make headway in this process a few choice people decide that they will now make it harder for us to comply with their race agenda.

If BEE is going to work in future then we need a little respect from the government and in exchange we will start assisting them constructively in measuring the success of the programmes so far.  I think it would be very noble if the private sector gives the government credit for this progress.  In this way both parties would be able to set attainable goals across the board and go ahead and achieve them.  We cannot continue being dictated to by a clueless government who set arbitrary targets without providing the basic resources to achieving them - the most basic of which would be education.

If this conversation is possible and we are able to move away from our adversarial stances I think that BEE as a process would become less racial and more about building a country that can hold its head as the other BRIC countries.

And I would not come out of a verification wondering why my clients, who have the best intentions, have to be subjected to this Verwoerdian process.

 

New Age, all the rage, success due to ANC patronage? Could we have expected anything else

Thousands of unsold copies of the New Age newspaper were returned to its offices daily, according to a former employee who spoke to the M&G. The ex-employee also alleged that on the instructions of the owners, the Gupta family, the returns were sent to India to be recycled. "They didn't want it done in South Africa in case it got out," said the source, who left the paper in 2011.

New Age's chief executive, Nazeem Howa, dismissed the allegation as "malicious", but refused to divulge details of the paper's returns or sales figures. The M&G had asked the newspaper to reveal its single- copy sales for the past six months; what percentage of its claimed

A survey of advertising space in the paper in December 2012 and January 2013 conducted by the M&G indicates that advertising bought by parastatals comprised roughly 48% of the total. Advertising purchased by other governmental departments, municipalities and state entities comprised 28%, and the Gupta family's companies, such as Sahara Computers and JIC Mining Services, bought about 10%.

via mg.co.za

The New Age is a catastrophic embarressment to the journalism community.  Their reporting on BEE matters is patently incorrect and definitely regards business as the antagonist.  If you use this as a metaphor for the balance of the editorial then it's not vaguely surprising that the private sector is shying away from advertising in the paper.  Now that there is a spat between this respectable publication and Helen the New Age is certainly gaining a lot more exposure.  I see that Helen is going to ask the MasterCorruptA MC(P) to "request that he appoint a judicial commission of inquiry, headed by a retired judge, to investigate the funding of The New Age".

Good luck Helen, I am sure you rue the day that you ever had anything to do with this paper.

The Financial Services Sector Code (gazette no 35914) – summarised scorecard

The code is not yet finalised but this is a good summary of the whole scorecard. If you want a downloadable version take a look here

The Financial Services Sector Code (gazette no 35914)

The FSC was gazetted under section 9(1) of the B-BBEE Act on the 26^th of November, 2012 and is binding on all stakeholders operating in the Financial Services Sector. This includes (but is not limited to)

• Banking;
• Long-term insurance;
• Short-term insurance;
• Re-insurance;
• The management of retirement, pension and collective investment scheme assets;
• Management of formal collective investment schemes;
• Financial Services Intermediation and Brokerage;
• Management of investments on behalf of the public, including, but not limited to, private equity, members of any exchange licensed to trade equities or financial instruments in South Africa and entities listed as part of the financial index of a licensed exchange; and
• Underwriting Management Agents.

It does not apply to the international trading operations of those entities who operate in South Africa.

The commencement date of the code is 1 January, 2012.

Definitions

• Exempt Micro Enterprises (EMEs) – enterprises whose annual turnover falls below R5 million per year. These enterprises are exempt from any form of B-BBEE and are automatically level 4 contributors. EME's that are more than 50% black owned are level 3 contributors.
• Qualifying Small Financial Institutions (QSFIs) – a financial institution with designated investments of less than R50million and whose annual turnover falls between R5 million and R35 million.

 

FSC Scorecards

 

Companies complying with Empowerment Financing

Element	Points
Ownership	14 + 3 bonus
Management Control	8+ 1 bonus
Employment Equity	15 + 3 bonus
Skills Development	10
Preferential Procurement	16
Empowerment Financing	15
Enterprise Development	5
Socio-economic Development	3
Access to Financial Services	14
TOTAL	100 + 7 bonus points

Companies excluded from complying with Empowerment Financing

Element	Points
Ownership	14 + 3 bonus
Management Control	8+ 1 bonus
Employment Equity	15 + 3 bonus
Skills Development	10
Preferential Procurement	16
Enterprise Development	15
Socio-economic Development	3
Access to Financial Services	14
TOTAL	95 + 7 bonus points

 

complying with Empowerment Financing

 

QSFI's must select 5 out of the 9 elements with ownership being compulsory. Once the choice of elements is made these elements are used each year.

Element	Points	Weighting
Ownership	14 + 3 bonus	20%
Management Control	8+ 1 bonus	20%
Employment Equity	15 + 3 bonus	20%
Skills Development	10	20%
Preferential Procurement	16	20%
Empowerment Financing	15	20%
Enterprise Development	5	20%
Socio-economic Development	3	20%
Access to Financial Services	14	20%
TOTAL	100 + 7 bonus points	100%

Companies excluded from complying with Empowerment Financing

QSFI's must select 5 out of the 9 elements with ownership being compulsory. Once the choice of elements is made these elements are used each year.

Element	Points	Weighting
Ownership	14 + 3 bonus	20%
Management Control	8+ 1 bonus	20%
Employment Equity	15 + 3 bonus	20%
Skills Development	10	20%
Preferential Procurement	16	20%
Enterprise Development	15	20%
Socio-economic Development	3	20%
Access to Financial Services	14	20%
TOTAL	95 + 7 bonus points	100%

Contributors are measured using the table below.

Contribution Level	B-BBEE score range	Recognition level
Level One Contributor	≥ 100 points	R1.35/R1 spent
Level Two Contributor	≥ 85 points but < 100 points	R1.25/R1 spent
Level Three Contributor	≥ 75 points but < 85 points	R1.10/R1 spent
Level Four Contributor	≥ 65 points but < 75 points	R1/R1 spent
Level Five Contributor	≥ 55 points but < 65 points	R0.80/R1 spent
Level Six Contributor	≥ 45 points but < 55 points	R0.60/R1 spent
Level Seven Contributor	≥ 40 points but < 45 points	R0.50/R1 spent
Level Eight Contributor	≥ 30 points but < 40 points	R0.10/R1 spent
Non-Compliant Contributor	< 30 points	R0/R1 spent

FSC B-BBEE scorecard

Equity element

Ownership. Total points - 17 (including 3 bonus points)
Description		Weighting points	Compliance Target
	Voting rights
Exercisable voting rights in the enterprise in the hands of black people.		3	25% + 1 Vote
Exercisable voting rights in the enterprise in the hands of black women.		1	10% + 1 Vote
	Economic interest
Economic interest of black people		3	25% + 1 Vote
Economic interest of black women		1	10% + 1 Vote
Economic interest of the following black natural people in the enterprise black designated groups black participants in employee ownership schemes black beneficiaries of broad-based ownership schemes; or black participants in co-operatives		1	2.5%
	Ownership Fulfilment
Net Equity Value		3	No restrictions
Direct or Indirect Ownership in Excess of 15% (including Equity Equivalents and Asset Sales)		2	10%
	Bonus points
Black new entrants		2	10%
Ownership by ESOPs and Co-ops		1	10%

 

Management element

 

Management Control. Total points –9 (including 1 bonus point)
Description		Weighting points	Compliance Target
	Board participation
Voting rights of black board members as a percentage of voting rights of all board members		0.5	50%
Voting rights of black women board members as a percentage of voting rights of all board members		0.5	25%
Black executive members of the board as a percentage of all executive members of the board		1	50%
Black women executive members of the board as a percentage of all executive members of the board		1	25%
	Top management
Black senior top management as a percentage of all senior top management		1.5	40%
Black women senior top management as a percentage of all senior top management		1.5	20%
Black other top management as a percentage of all other top management		1	40%
Black women other top management as a percentage of all other top management		1	20%
	Bonus Point
Black independent non-executive board members as a percentage of all independent non-executive board members		1	40%

 

Employment Equity

 

Employment Equity. Total points – 18 (including 3 bonus points)
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target
Black disabled employees as a percentage of ALL employees	0.5	3%
Black women disabled employees as a percentage of ALL employees	0.5	1.5%
Black senior management as a percentage of all senior management	3	60%
Black women senior management as a percentage of all senior management	2	30%
Black middle management as a percentage of all middle management	3	75%
Black women middle management as a percentage of all middle management	2	37.5%
Black junior management as a percentage of all junior management	2	80%
Black women junior management as a percentage of all junior management	2	40%
BONUS POINTS
Bonus Point for meeting or exceeding the Economically Active Population (EAP) targets in senior management	1	87.5%
Bonus Point for meeting or exceeding the Economically Active Population (EAP) targets in middle management	1	87.5%
Bonus Point for meeting or exceeding the Economically Active Population (EAP) targets in junior management	1	87.5%

 

Skills Development

 

Skills Development. Total points – 10
Description		Weighting points	Compliance Target
Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the Learning Programmes Matrix
Skills Development Expenditure on Learning Programmes specified in the Learning Programmes Matrix for Black employees as a percentage of the financial institution's leviable amount		3	3% of payroll (3x SDL)
Skills Development Expenditure on Learning Programmes specified in the Learning Programmes Matrix for Black Women employees as a percentage of the financial institution's leviable amount		1.5	1.5%
Skills Development Expenditure on Learning Programmes specified in the Learning Programmes Matrix for disabled Black employees as a percentage of the financial institution's leviable amount		0.5	0.3%
Skills Development Expenditure on Learning Programmes specified in the Learning Programmes Matrix for disabled Black Women employees as a percentage of the financial institution's leviable amount		0.5	0.15%
	Learnerships
Number of Black employees participating in Learnerships or Category B, C and D Programmes as a percentage of total employees		3	5% of staff
Number of Black Women employees participating in Learnerships or Category B, C and D Programmes as a percentage of total employees		1.5	2.5%

Preferential Procurement

Preferential Procurement. Total points – 16
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target
B-BBEE procurement spend from all suppliers based on the B-BBEE procurement recognition levels as a percentage of total measured procurement spend	8	70%
B-BBEE procurement spend from all Qualifying Small Enterprises (QSEs) or from Exempted Micro-Enterprises (EMEs) based on the applicable B-BBEE procurement recognition levels as a percentage of total measured procurement spend	3	15%
B-BBEE procurement spend from any of the following suppliers as a percentage of total measured procurement spend
Suppliers that are 50% Black owned	2.5	12%
Suppliers that are 30% Black Women owned	2.5	8%

 

Empowerment Financing and Enterprise Development

 

Enterprise Development for those exempted from Empowerment Financing

Enterprise Development. Total points – 15
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target
Qualifying ED contributions made by the measured entity as a percentage of the target	15	3 % of Cumulative NPAT

Empowerment Financing – Long Term Insurers

Empowerment Financing. Total points – 15
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target
Targeted Investments	12	R27bn
BEE Transaction Financing	3	R15bn
TOTAL FOR LONG TERM INSURANCE SECTOR	15	R42bn

Empowerment Financing – Banking Sector

Empowerment Financing. Total points – 15
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target
Targeted Investments     Transformational Infrastructure     Black SME Financing     Black Agricultural Financing     Affordable Housing	12	R48bn
BEE Transaction Financing	3	R32bn
TOTAL FOR BANKING SECTOR	15	R80bn

Enterprise Development for those needing to comply with Empowerment Financing

Enterprise Development. Total points –5
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target
Qualifying ED contributions made by the measured entity as a percentage of the target	5	0.2 % of NPAT

Socio-Economic Development

Socio-Economic Development. Total points – 3
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target)
Cumulative value of all Socio-Economic Development Contributions made by a financial institution as a percentage of the cumulative net profit after tax	3	2012 = 0.75% of NPAT 2013 = 0.7% of NPAT 2014 = 0.6% of NPAT

Socio-Economic Development (exempt from Access to Financial Services)

Socio-Economic Development. Total points – 3
Description	Weighting points	Compliance Target)
Cumulative value of all Socio-Economic Development Contributions made by a financial institution as a percentage of the cumulative net profit after tax	3	0.7% of NPAT

 

Access to Financial Services (Banking Sector) – 14 points

	Access Method	Qualifying Market/area	Points	Qualifying Criteria	Range	Target
1	Geographic Access (Reach)		5	One or more of:
1.1	Transaction point	50% or more of households falling within LSM 1-5	1	Draw cash or purchase from their accounts	5km	85%
1.2	Service point		1	Reset a pin, Money transfers, GET a statement and initiate account queries	10km	70%
1.3	Sales point		2	replace a card, deposit cash into their accounts, or acquire: a transaction account, a funeral policy, a savings account, or a loan.	15km	60%
1.4	Electronic Access	Individuals earning less than R5,000 per month increasing by CPIX p.a.	1	TBC
2	Banking Densification	Individuals in the LSM 1-5 group nationally	2	Access to cash withdrawal facility per measuring unit	TBC	1500
3	Product Related Access	Individuals in the LSM 1-5 group nationally	3	Number of active accounts for qualifying products per institution	National	TBC
4	Affordable Housing Origination	Qualifying measures as per metrics agreed	2	Mortgage and development loans to qualifying households	National	TBC
5	Consumer Education	Qualifying individuals in the LSM 1-8 group	2	Consumer, Primary and Basic Education	National	2012 = 0.25% 2013 = 0.3% 2014 = 0.4%

Access to Financial Services (Short-Term Insurance Sector) – 14 points

Access to Financial Services	Weighting	Industry Targets
Appropriate Products	2	8
Insurance Policies	10		Maximum sum insured:
Motor vehicle		6%	R60k
Household Contents		6%	R100k
Property/Homeowners		3%	R350k
Black SMEs – equipment contents		15%	R100k
Black SMEs – premises		10%	R500k
Agriculture		6%	TBD
Livestock		6%	R600k
Co-operatives		6%	TBD
Consumer Education	2		Year 1: 0.25% Year 2: 0.3% Year 4: 0.4%

 

DTI names more products affected by local-content regulations (PPPFA)

The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) on Tuesday announced that

• valves,
• manual and pneumatic actuators,
• electrical and telecommunications cables, as well as
• solar water heater components

had been designated for local production and as requiring specified local content levels in the public sector procurement system.

Sectors already designated for local production with minimum local content thresholds were

• rail rolling stock,
• power pylons,
• bus bodies,
• canned or processed vegetables,
• certain pharmaceutical products,
• furniture products, and
• the textile, clothing, leather and footwear sector.

via www.engineeringnews.co.za

What has happened to Rob’s proposed codes?

The DTI received more than 550 submissions from public comments by the December 5 deadline last year. The department has now begun a process of technical analysis of the data received. This entails going through the submissions to consider what the key issues are. Thereafter, the DTI will set up work streams that are going to look at submissions for each element to enable officials to consolidate feedback from the market.

The department's chief director responsible for BBBEE, Nomonde Mesatshwa, says: "In terms of our time frames we are hoping that we will finish this process by the end of March this year."

via www.sundayworld.co.za

Unfortunately for Nomomde the camera captured her at the wrong angle and deprived her of her movie star looks that previous pictures have so adequately demonstrated. This minor technical glitch has not dampened her enthusiasm for Rob's folly the draft codes.

"We are hoping that with us putting the priority elements in place, it's going to stimulate the right level of activity in terms of access to opportunities and access to market for black-owned companies. "This can be achieved through corporate companies' supply chain systems. "It will make sure that companies focus on issues of effective ownership, skills development and supplier enterprise development. "We feel these three approaches, which we have canvassed through engagement in the public domain, will be able to turn around how the implementation of BBBEE has been in the past so that we can begin to see a meaningful impact in terms of black enterprises playing an effective role in the economy."

It seems as though she's made up her mind about priority elements and the like. She also maintains that the DTI actually did some research (which is widely disputed) and that by forcing companies to comply the desired results will follow. To quote the Sunday World "Mesatshwa is confident that the revised codes will auger well for business in general and black business in particular". This statement must surely suggest that the next round of codes are substantially different to the last proposed ones because there was nothing in there that augers well for anyone other than a miniscule percentage of ANC cronies. But wait – there's still priority elements, not very code-friendly at all.

I put it to the reader that the 550 submissions have not been looked at and I fear that they won't be. How else are they going to meet their March deadline?

Nzimande says business must boost learnerships for FET graduates | Education | BDlive

Nzimande said while there were 183,893 places for first-year university students this year, the FET college sector had 100,000 places and the Sector Education and Training Authorities (Setas) had 18,000 learnership and internship opportunities.

via www.bdlive.co.za

Eighteen thousand learnership opportunities? Is this the total number of learners available, or is it the total number of learnerships available? If it's the latter then it's very clear that the drafters of the original BEE codes did no research as to how many learnerships there are when they put in a target of 5% under skills development.

If not, then it is bad reading on my part. Would anyone care to inform me.

What exactly was FNB's rationale behind the new campaign?

This theory is not mine, it comes from a reader and regular commenter on this blog.  

FNB has been known to court controversy with the government of the day since its early days.  Some might recall the rabbit in the thorn tree controversy from the 80s, which is described by Arthur Goldstuck as

 THE rabbit in the (FNB) thorn tree is the archetypal South African political and business urban legend. Nearly everybody of a certain age remembers how First National Bank's (FNB's) late-1980s logo, a thorn tree silhouetted against the sun, dominated front pages for weeks as South Africans debated the existence of the (then banned ) African National Congress (ANC) rabbit in its branches.

Then there was the crime ad under the Mbeki regime which FNB pulled.  In February 2007, FNB were planning to publish an ad that requested Mbeki's "yes minister" government to do something about the unacceptable crime levels.  Did the ANC ever get upset, so much so that FNB decided not to go ahead with the campaign. 

And now we have the "You can help campaign" which has elicited a rather negative response from the dominant (goodness knows they don't rule) party and the presidency.  The latter responded with the ironic

 "Frivolous adverts which display hatred of government or the ruling party will not help us to achieve the country's developmental goals,"

The campaign makes no sense to me. They spent the last few years bombarding us with features and functionality and Marvin, Floyd and Steve. And then we have a number of children talking about their future. I don't see why the change in pattern.

It was then that my good friend Richard called me and made the following observation. The campaign shows a variety of children discussing their and the country's future. There is the occasional dig at Nkandla and the abysmal education system. All of which the educated people of South Africa are aware of. The ad is now going underground because FNB has pulled the more controversial aspects of it. YouTube loves it and so do the internet users. This then suggests that it's the more affluent and educated who are going to see it – and this is the target market.

Here you have a major financial institution telling the public that their government is inept and that they should be doing something about it. Perhaps FNB pitched the ad to the middle class who feel the same way is I do about this government, knowing that it would stir up controversy (something that they deny – but I don't believe that they could not have foreseen the likelihood of the ANC getting all sensitive). The campaign would provide a voice for all races that don't speak out about the government. They would then view the bank as the hero and hence someone they should bank with.

This is very plausible. I know that there is growing discontent amongst the black middle classes who view Zuma as an embarrassment. Their issue is that they cannot speak out about this because it's not the "African" way. The lunacy of this African way is perfectly articulated by Pierre de Vos

Growing up as a white Afrikaans boy in the threatening shadows of apartheid, I was often told that certain beliefs and actions and certain people were "volksvreemd" (alien to the "Afrikaner nation"). Beyers Naude, Bram Fischer and Frederick van Zyl Slabbert were volksvreemd. Listening to "Queen", "The Rolling Stones" and "The Beatles" were volksvreemd. Being an atheist or criticising National Party leaders like BJ Vorster and PW Botha were volksvreemd. Dancing on a Sunday and being a moffie were volksvreemd. Marrying an Engelse meisie or, god forbid, sleeping with somebody classified as "coloured" or "African" were beyond volksvreemd. And, of course, opposing apartheid and supporting the struggle against it was definitely volksvreemd. Some people were devastated when branded as volksvreemd. Volksvreemdes were often shunned by family and friends, ridiculed and shamed, told that they were not "true" Afrikaners. Their views could therefore be ignored, laughed at or branded as "dangerous" or "inauthentic".

The Afrikaner establishment thus attempted to police the thoughts and behaviour of white Afrikaans speakers to ensure that not too many of us would become critical of the government or ask too many questions about the injustices of the world we lived in and from which we benefited socially and economically. We were told that there was only one "right" way to think about our world and our place in it and one "right" way to live if we wanted to be viewed as authentic Afrikaners.

de Vos then brings this concept to the present day

President Jacob Zuma was reported as saying that black people should not keep dogs as pets because it is "un-African". Then Gillian Schutte, in a widely read open letter, called on "white people" to recognise that by jumping in on national debates "that do not concern them" they are usurping a platform for "authentic black voices". What these comments may have in commonis that they accept that there is a "right" way and a "wrong" way to be African and that those who are "real" Africans are worthy of respect and to be listened to while those who are not, can be ridiculed and dismissed as being un-African or need not be taken seriously.

Hence it is OK for me to voice my white opinions because it's not African and just a noise. But an African, whatever that may be – because there is a wide diversity of people in this country who may regard themselves as African, will be accused of being un-African for voicing their opinions. This un-Africanness was levelled at Lindiwe Mazibuko (who looks VERY AFRICAN to me) by Jackson Mthembu.

ANC spokesperson Jackson attacked Lindiwe Mazibuko for criticising President Jacob Zuma who said that one's business will multiply if one donated money to the ANC by stating that Mazibuko is "naive when it comes to African traditions" which she cannot relate to. "It is our tradition as Africans that if someone gives you something, in return you thank him/her and wish them prosperity and abundance," Mthembu said in a statement.

Volksvreemd indeed. Here we have a bank speaking out for this group in this new campaign, suddenly the un-African have now found a voice. If this is the case or even an unintended consequence of the campaign, it's brilliant. Hopefully we'll start providing opportunities for the un-African to voice their opinions without fear of labelling or ostracism.

My white sense of humour forces me to post this video even if it reminds the viewer about Angie and Jake.

Manyi's influence still very prominent in the BMF

The BMF further criticised the formula used to calculate the targets for Africans, coloureds and Indians. The formula should be adjusted to address the over-representation of South Africans of Indian descent, the BMF said.

via www.bdlive.co.za

Over-representation is a Manyi-ism. Him the racist who ran the BMF on racist and racial lines. It seems that his influence is still being felt in the BMF. Perhaps South African Indians might reconsider their membership of the BMF (if they are members).

Mantashe: Anglo, Amplats ‘stole’ our money (and put it into a FNB Account)

Mantashe reportedly said Anglo and its platinum unit Amplats (AMS), “must deal with South Africa as a country with respect,” he said. They shouldn’t “deal with South Africa as a junior partner,” Mantashe said. “It means that if there is a problem you engage on problems with South Africa,” Bloomberg reports him as saying.

via www.moneyweb.co.za

There is a distinct naivety to this statement. It is completely juvenile and victim-like. And this is the business-friendly party.  Now they've been bombarded by FNB, which I think is possibly a silly thing for FNB to have done - but I welcome the dig on the government because it will test the waters as to what the consequences may be if a large corporate tells the government what idiots they in fact are.  

It's this form of protest that we need to cultivate and encourage because the ANC are nowhere and as it turns out, never really ever had a plan or a clue.  We don't have to tolerate this anymore.

 

Online EE report's deadline was yesterday. What fun

Admittedly I did leave it to the last minute.  Because of this I did expect the website to have issues.  Surprisingly it actually handled quite well.  But I had problems with parts of the website, most notably updating the employer details, the drop down menus for the provinces didn't work.  They didn't work on a variety of browsers and as such my submission is incomplete even though the numbers have been updated.

There is a telephone number you can phone for help but they don't answer it.  They did answer it this morning who then referred me to another person who I did speak to.

What an unpleasant specimen of humanity.  Completely unhelpful, antagonistic and rude.  He informed me (often) that I have not complied - refuted that his system did not work and offered a bunch of useless information about what I should have done yesterday.  Apparently I should have gone to my provincial office and told them that there was a problem.  However the website provides you with a national telephone number and two documents that tell you what to do - but can't solve your problems.  And because this is an online submission you'd expect there to be some sort of assistance somewhere.

What was most hysterical about this incompetent and unnecessarily aggressive piece of protected employment was that he told me that he wasn't part of the technical team. 

I am sure that this happens the world over - it's just that it's what you expect from our absolutely incompetent government.  You've got your work cut out for you Cyril.

Anybody else had a similar or better experience.