Paul Janisch

Wherefour art thou James?

Most parents who have more than one child will tell you how different their children are. Thank goodness mine are no exception if they were I would just rehash Oliver's 4^th birthday post.

The two children are remarkably different. A fact I will be reiterate until I stop writing these missives. Oliver has a vivid and active imagination. James is more literal and of this world. He is more independent than Oliver, but is certainly quite influenced by him. Yesterday we were at Reggie's party and James came up to me and said "How come (X) gets to have cake?!". Words directly from his brother's mouth. James has entered nursery school, the same nursery school that Oliver went to. As with Oliver I get to walk James to school in the morning. I've found that we get to school 40 minutes earlier if I carry him on my shoulders (the school is 800 metres away). We tried riding to school on his JDBug a few times but that takes an incredible amount of time. I would inevitably put him on my shoulders and carry him and everything else to school. There are no stories told on the way, that's not his thing. We'd sometimes talk about the weather, who he was going to play with, his friends at school and he has a number of those. James settled into school very quickly, he stopped crying after the second day and just got stuck in. The teachers also call him JimJam which makes my heart soar. I think to a large extent he's rather like his mother. His behaviour at times borders on reckless, he's not a cautious boy like his brother. Now I'm not saying his mother is reckless but when we went skiing a long time ago if Kath could see the bottom of the slope she would gun it down that hill. James is similar, he and his JD Bug will fly down any hill and damn the consequences – and there have been consequences.

Then there is the language. It could be that school has increased his vocabulary but whatever the reason is his language and comprehension has improved a million-fold in the last year. Here are a smattering of statements that I wrote down over the last few months.

• Long sleeve shorts
• I don't have enough toys (we are reminded of this situation ALL the time – he does have enough toys)
• I meed more toys (of course he meeds more toys)
• NemoShacko (more accurately MemoShacko). More on NemoShacko below
• Does this have sugar in it? Sugar isn't healthy (wise beyond your years my boy)
• My leg is sore I can't walk (this is what I get when I take him off my shoulders and get him to walk the last 50 metres into school. He can really ham it up. I've taken to doing the same with the opposite leg and we walk into school as the hopalongs)
• That's the deal (that's what he says to you when the deal is in his favour)
• Carious George (Curious George)

And then there's using language to justify why you shouldn't

1. Eat your supper
2. Bath
3. Go to bed
4. Eat breakfast
5. Go to school
6. Do anything
7. Stop playing
8. Get out of the pool (we don't have one of those at the moment – four of us are sleeping in the same bedroom)

It would be remiss to omit his tantrums (or is that tantra?). Mein Gott this kid is a pro. The naughty corner is perilously close to losing its primary function as a guest toilet. The terrible twos have now seamlessly merged with the fucking fours. No respite, no quarter given. Food tantrums involve declining to eat anything other than refined carbohydrates (even though sugar is bad for you –see above).

And then there is NemoShacko. Who calls their cat NemoShacko!! We had a deal that because Oliver named Leia (he was very into Starwars at the time) James could name the kitten. We went off to the vet to collect the kitten and waited a while. Oliver cottoned on that we were collecting a cat and so we said we're coming to get a fish like Nemo. When the cat came out we said to James, "what's the kitty's name" – "NemoShacko". I think this is the best name for a pet ever!!!! There are variances, NemoShacko Jack, NemoShacko Black Cat, Snowy (you'll see from the picture that NemoShacko is neither black nor snowy.

He is capable of amusing himself, although he begs his parents to play with him. But you put him in swimming pool he will swim for hours. I took both of them to the Parkhurst pool and James got into his armbands and swam all over the pool. Sometimes this independence can lead to a lost child and we've been known to do this on occasion - hence the title of this post.

Happy fourth birthday JimJam. You are the best youngest son a parent could ever wish for. You are adored by your older brother and you adore him in return (this might not always be apparent). We love you very much and are immensely proud of you. You've had a fantastic year at school, made a lot of friends and grown up to be the person who your parents and family love more and more each day.

And then there is the music

James Phillips.

03 - James Phillips - The Branch -- The Cherry Faced Lurchers

Last year I went off to the Shifty 30^th year anniversary concert and spent a day listening to the music that was so important to my own musical journey. It was bands like the Gereformeerde Blues Band that made me appreciate and love Afrikaans as a language (this is after two years of military Afrikaans which can put you off the language completely). James Phillips started this alternatiewe Afrikaans movement with his "Wie is Bernoldus Niemand?". Phillips is James' dedicated musician, he was a very politically active and conscious musician who died just as South Africa moved into a democracy. What is frightening though is how a number of his songs written about the apartheid government now ring true for the Zoomer dictatorship.

The other James – James Marshall Hendrix

08 - Jimi Hendrix - Red House

I was talking to a parent at Reggie's party yesterday about the best guitarists ever. He showed me a post where Hendrix wasn't even mentioned. This is very rare. Most polls start with Hendrix and then move five other names around to make the top six. Hendrix came into my life in the early eighties via a book called "The Natural Superiority of the left hander". Hendrix and McCartney were the reasons why I never learned to play the guitar right handed, even though I am very naturally left (something I do rather regret). Red House is now a blues standard. It's like Dust My Broom or Crossroads or Sweet Home Chicago. As a guitarist you want to learn this song. There are numerous live recordings but this is the best. Yes it's long but it never gets boring and it showcases what a great blues guitarist was.

Happy birthday my wonderful and fantastic and beloved JimJam. Many more happy returns.

Related articles

The second turns three or sharing's caring

Our second is two

Take a look at the caption below the picture

Wolfe Meyer, right, and Dud Myeni. Picture: SOWETAN

 

via www.bdlive.co.za

How apt is that? If you don't know who Ms Myeni is then take a look at this article.

As only Pierre de Vos can say it - Zuma is a moron content

If the President holds him or herself out as a mere servant of the political party who has elected him or her as President and not as a servant of all the people, it is difficult to argue that the office of the President should be respected because of the fact that the President also acts as the head of state.

Of course, it’s important to note that while the office of the President should ideally always be respected in a democracy, the individual who is elected to that office because of his or her political position can not automatically expect such respect as no politician can automatically expect to be respected merely for holding a certain office.)

But where a President suggests that politics (and the loyalty to a chosen party) trumps all, it is not only the person that is exposed to criticism and ridicule: it also becomes more difficult to argue that his or her office should not be ridiculed or mocked. This is because the person holding that office would have signalled that he or she does not hold the position as head of state in high regard and does not consider the office as important as holding the office of political party leader.

via constitutionallyspeaking.co.za

Maladministration mails

Maladministration is a long-time reader of this writty. He's sort of faded off the radar but he knows a person or two. He responded to my weekend post

Rob has a bigger problem. 3(2) is potentially meaningless to the objective he wants to achieve.

All empowerment licensing regimes of which I know have specific BEE criteria either hard-coded into the primary legislation (MPRDA being a case in point) or hard-coded into regulations (Sea Fisheries). In the case of the former, the BEE requirements for licensing are specifically dealt with in the MPRDA. Hence, section 3(2) does not trump the MPRDA as the BEE requirements for licensing are not specifically dealt with in the BBBEE Act and are, at best, generally dealt with in the BBBEE Act. Where the BEE licensing requirements are dealt with in regulations associated with another piece of primary legislation, the same should apply, although I can see a bit more scope here for debate - a crack in the door, at most.

Moreover, the MPRDA has a different empowerment objective specifically dealt with in the MPRDA with its own beneficiary class which is wider than that in the BBBEE Act. No trumping here, regardless of all the noise these guys make. All this pretence that he has jurisdiction over the MPRDA is demeaning of his own intelligence, let alone ours.

When asked whether he thought Rob Davies was strong like Mother Russia

That ministry is up to no good. Stuffing up international investment and trade with reckless abandon. Not just AGOA, see BITs, SADC Protocol, Protection of Investment Bill and the new SADC EPA Agreement with the EU which will be signed by October 2016. Under cover of darkness, Rob is turning us into Albania circa 1974. BEE is their sideshow...

Albania, now there is a communist country I hadn't considered. Thank you for your input Maladministration

Related articles

We are here today to bury ................

Does the Mining Charter have any teeth? Written by Allan Reid via BDLive

Draft PPPFA regulation disgust (discussed and cussed)

Yes but 3(b) ………………..? Why do I bother?

Ah Rob, Rob the Red, Rob the nasty commie, Rob the destroyer of the economy. Rob who has been placed over a barrel and is waiting to receive the American AGOA bullet. Rob who is under the influence of the single minded black business council.  Rob who doesn't read what he signs.

You might have seen this note. Here it is summarised a bit

COMMENCEMENT OF SECTION 3(b) OF THE BROAD-BASED BLACK ECONOMIC EMPOWERMENT AMENDMENT ACT, 2013 (ACT NO. 46 OF 2013)

The Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Amendment Act came into operation on 24 October 2014, except for section 3(b). In terms of section 10 (3) of the Amendment Act…section 3(b) comes into operation one year after the date on the Amendment Act was proclaimed.

I therefore deem it necessary to (inform the public) that section 3(b) …. automatically commenced on 24 October 2015.

I suppose you haven't seen the problem yet. The BEE Amendment Act that was published in 2013 only included the amendments to the 2003 BEE Act, the final Act must be read in conjunction with the original BEE Act. The complete section 3 reads as follows

3. Any person applying this Act must interpret its provisions so as

1) (a) to give effect to its objectives and purposes; and

(b) to comply with the Constitution

2) In the event of any conflict between this Act and any other law in force immediately prior to the date of commencement of the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Amendment Act, 2013, this Act prevails if the conflict specifically relates to a matter dealt with in this Act.

What Rob's clever cleavers did was only look at the Amendment Act and saw that the section that referred to section 3(2) was 3(b). They write a note with remarkably no spelling errors and refer to a section that DOESN'T EXIST. It did under the 2003 Act, but no longer does. You might argue that 3(b) is the bit about complying with the constitution. But that would be wrong. Under the amendment code that subsection is 3(1) (b). This is just pathetic and typifies a government that forces us to second guess them because they deliberately choose to be vague. I have my doubts whether this is because they want to fuck us around, I think it's because of the sheer incompetence that operates at all level of state – from government through to the parastatals. Believe t or not it was a note issued by the Department of Mineral Resources on the 30^th of October 2015 which correctly refers to the relevant section as 3(2).

It doesn't really matter, Rob's statement is "a loud sounding nothing", it was designed to bring the Mining Charter within his control. No sooner had he published his note the DMR announced (in the 30^th of October note) that they are going to need another year to fuse the two.

Related articles

Section 9 of the BEE Act and the proposed QSE Codes (inter alia)

Yes but we already knew that - it's you who have no clue

A letter from the CA Charter Council demonstrating logic

The verification of B-BBEE status levels occurs in accordance with the Codes of Good Practice issued in terms of the B-BBEE Act (Act No 53 of 2003, as amended). The Amended Codes of Good Practice came into effect on 1 May 2015 in accordance with the Revised Notice of Clarification issued by the Department of Trade and Industry (the dti) on 15 May 2015. However, in its clarification notice, the dti determined that for purposes of Sector Codes, which includes the Chartered Accountancy Sector Charter (CA Sector Charter), the transitional period for alignment with the Amended Codes of Good Practice is extended to 30 October 2015.

The CA Charter Council (the Council) has been responsible for the amendments to the CA Sector Charter. It remains the strong preference of the CA Sector to have its own Sector Code that gives expression to its priorities of increasing access to the profession for black people and ensuring that black people play a meaningful role throughout the profession. The focus of the amendments is on skills development and the transformation of the profession.

The amended CA Sector Charter has been finalised and signed off by all stakeholder representatives on the Council except for one of the representative groups. The implication is that the amended CA Sector Charter was not gazetted by the dti's deadline of 30 October 2015.

In a letter received from the Minister of Trade and Industry the CA Sector has been given until 15 November 2015 to reach consensus and finalise the amended CA Sector Charter. It should be noted that all the constituencies are committed to reaching consensus and the Council will continue to work towards this aim. If consensus can be reached and the amended CA Sector Charter can be signed off by 15 November 2015, the amended CA Sector Charter will be effective from the date of gazetting.

Where does this leave entities within the CA Sector in terms of measurement of their B-BBEE status levels in the interim, if the amended CA Sector Charter is not approved and gazetted by 15 November 2015?

* B-BBEE verifications in respect of a financial year ending on or before 31 October 2015 will still be conducted under the extant CA Sector Charter
* B-BBEE verifications in respect of a financial year ending after 1 November 2015 will be conducted in accordance with the Generic Scorecard under the Amended Codes of Good Practice, and not in terms of the extant CA Sector Charter

The Council will keep the CA Sector updated on developments in this regard.

Regards

Tsakani Ratsela
Chairperson: CA Charter Council

Repelling arbitrary repealing - Construction Code Content

It's not as though we didn't see this coming. We know that charter councils have until the 15th of this month to at, the very least, submit their revised codes to the dti (I've been told I have to be nice about them). And I quote

Sector Charter Councils have until the 15 November 2015 to submit aligned Sector Codes for approval to Minister of Trade and Industry, Dr Rob Davies. All existing Sector Codes that have not submitted application for approval to the Minister to be aligned with Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Codes of Good Practice will be repealed.

This does leave us in a somewhat difficult position. If they are summarily repealed what do you do? I spoke Chris van Wyk about this a while ago and he said that repealing is in effect an amendment and must go out for comment as per the act, which says 60 days. The about-to-be-repealed code must still be in force during that period and during the period that the dti is "considering" the comments. In theory there is no guarantee that the code will in fact be repealed. Only then can you come up with an alternative but that alternative can only operate from the date that the code is finally repealed. If you declare one sunny day that "all scorecards issued from now on can only be issued using the revised codes" you are violating the rule of law. Rule of law you ask, yes. This would be an application of retrospective legislating. What you are saying is that a code that was not applicable to you because your specific sector code was still valid is now suddenly applicable. Oh many would argue that you should have known about the revised codes. Yes you should have known but only in so far as the revised codes exist – they are not applicable to you and hence you legally and legitimately do not need to worry about them. What is also very important to remember is that it is only Rob the red that issue a code or decide when or what anything may apply.

Not so if you are Construction Sector Charter Council (perhaps just the CEO of the Charter Council). You decide to take over Rob's role and spew forth the following

03 November 2015

Communication to:

All Construction Sector Stakeholders

All Industry Voluntary Associations

All Verification Agencies

All Construction Sector BBBEE Practitioners

Subject:

Verification Measurement Position Beyond the 31 October 2015

Hmmm, this should be interesting. Our author blabs on about 31 October and repealing etc, you can read it here. That, dear reader, is not the most significant bit. This is

Applicable Measurement position after the 31^st October2015

5. Following the letter of communication issued by the Minister of Trade and Industry on the 30 th October 2015, although no additional extension has been granted by the DTI, major construction industry associations/stakeholders under the Charter Council have however been provided an opportunity to finalise outstanding areas of the CSC alignment process and targets.

In the interim, all construction measured entities seeking to renew their BBBEE Verification Certificates will make use of the revised generic BBBEE code as gazetted on the 1 May 2015.

Here we are – a god complex. Like the uber trumping clause ever. And this is why this is a problem

1. The CSCC cannot dictate, suggest, intimate or scream from the mountain tops that companies that operate within their sector must use a certain scorecard system other than the one they are responsible for
2. Their code hasn't been repealed
3. This is retrospective legislating. Let me explain what retrospective legislating is. Say the department of transport announces that from tomorrow all cars need to be left hand drive and will drive on the right hand side of the road (which is very similar to adopting the revised codes). They then scrutinise fines for infringements from before the 6^th of November and prosecute those drivers who drove on the left hand side and had right hand drive cars because they have infringed the new law.
4. It is only Rob who can make such a call
5. Whoever drafted has no idea about the rule of law.

I was pretty sure I was right when I saw this but I consulted my colleague and friend Chris van Wyk about it. This is what he had to say

You are absolutely correct though. They are acting way outside the scope of their authority. The council may not impose a repeal of the sector code where it is still valid. It is only the Minister that may repeal it. Even if repealed, they may not impose the general "Amended Codes" on a construction company whose year end preceded the repeal date. At most they can on repeal impose it on businesses whose year ends completed after 30 April 2015. Those whose year ends finished prior to 30 April should be capable of measurement on the old 2007 general codes.

In a phone conversation Chris stressed that if the code is repealed you must allow certificates based on a measurement period before the date of repealing to be issued in terms of the code that was valid at that time.

What do you do if you come across this notice? Ignore it, the rule of thumb is that if it comes from Rob or his minions you can pay attention.

Related articles

Time To Rescue The Rule Of Law From A Judicial Aristocracy

Challenging the 2013 BEE codes in a court of law - the ball has started rolling