Him - "very suspiciously like the bee commissioner"
Makes sense doesn't it. She has issues with the modified flow through principle. It seems that the drafters (which may or may not include awdoz) are trying to push the BEE verification industry to fit within section 10 of the Act.
(1) Every organ of state and public entity must 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 other authorisations 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;
(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.
If you look at subsection (a) it might actually fit. The question here is "does the dti have the right to place such restrictive conditions on this industry".
I reiterate - they have never listened to us before and they won't listen again. It doesn't mean that we shouldn't submit comments. We have to submit comments. Please send me anything you want sent to the deaf dti and I'll put it up here.
They say that those in power eventually revert to the ways of their former opponents or oppressors. It was Pete Townsend who carved those immortal lines "meet the new boss, just like the old boss" into rock history in 1971. This is an application of "the more things change, the more they stay the same". bolshie (sad commie) bob has published a document for comment. The document has a number of lofty ideals that include To specify Standards for Accreditation for a Rating Agency and To set Standards that will govern the B-BBEE Verification Industry. It prescribes certain minimums of levels of skill and competence for practitioners - which will automatically exclude many in the industry (specifically that person who shoots his mouth off about things that he truly has no competence to speak of). That's honourable and I see where bobby brown is headed there. However he has taken a giant step backwards when it comes to who can play in the verification industry (this possibly might include consultants). A leap so far back that it spans a distance of at least 106 years.
Our learned red man has proposed the following (page 15)
The rating agency in terms of this Statement must meet the following criteria:
8.7.1 To comply with the relevant Verification Methodologies as amended 8.7.2 To be verified as a Superior Contributor to B -BBEE Level One 1 to Three 3 Contributor with at least 51 % Black Ownership utilizing the Flow Through Principle as per the Amended Codes of Good Practice within 12 Months of the final publication of Statement 005. 8.7.4 The B-BBEE Verification Professional Regulator will assess and analyse the B -BBEE Verification Certificate and Report of the Rating agency inclusive of all supporting documentation and evidence. 8.7.5 A Rating Agency needs to be verified against all 5 elements of the scorecard regardless of their size (EME, QSE or Generic - and start-ups)
And if you don't meet 8.7.2
8.7.3 If the above is not adhered to Accreditation is automatically lost.
What the minister is proposing is that certain jobs that operate in the private sector are reserved for a certain class of company. In other words if you aren't 51% black owned as a minimum then you need not apply. Simply put this is apartheid endorsed job reservation (here is an old Black Sash document on job reservation written in 1963) and it starts with a small industry like BEE verification and then extends to other industries. What's stopping them from telling IRBA that all auditing firms may only be registered with them if they are 51% black owned. Can they prevent other professions from belonging to critical societies or organisations because they don't meet an apartheid style criterion? Will they start allocating licences to operate based on racial grounds? They can and they will.
We've tried to stop this flagrant disregard for the constitution and the rule of law before, to no avail. The mining industry stood up to zwane because he threatened the security of the industry. And they will continue to do so. davies is not in the same league of denseness as zwane but his systematic destruction of the economy through his badly thought out policies has gone unchecked, and for far too long.
You've got less than 60 days to submit your comments. It's your livelihoods that are at stake here - do something about it.
Interested parties are requested to forward their comments in writing for the attention of the B-BBEE Unit to either of the following addresses: 1. Email - [email protected] 2. the dti Campus 77 Meint ies street, Sunnyside Pretoria, 0002 c/o BEE Unit 3. Private. Bag X 84, Pretoria, 0002 Enquiries: 012 394 3518.
What is it about Namibia and Namibians? They are so different to us. They just want to get on with their lives and business and are willing to talk to each other in a constructive way to do this. I was invited to present a paper at a NEEEF conference in Windhoek a few weeks' ago, as it turns out I ended up chairing it (they told me when I arrived I was the man to do this). They asked me to speak about a localisation strategy but I chose to speak about what Namibia could learn from South Africa - I'll save the cynicism for a later post.
Namibia is about 15 years behind South Africa when it comes to a national empowerment policy. Established business is nervous about the policy and the policy is vague and in draft format. What I found interesting was how white business was nervous and government saw the need for the policy (like we were fifteen years ago), but they want to talk to each other. This conference was apparently a political hot potato. The organisers had been trying to arrange it for the last year and had come across major hurdles. The public wanted the conference because they wanted some information and so they got it. The speakers were extraordinary (I thought I was pretty good too), I don't know if I have been to a conference where speakers managed to hold the attention of the entire hall for the whole day.
Each speaker put their case strongly from the objective Ngoni Bopoto, the Namibian economist who painted a solid picture on Namibia's current economy through to Phillip Ellis, who made no bones about his capitalist slant. On the way we were given an overview of the Employment Equity Commissioner's thoughts on the necessity for redress. The commissioner, Vilbard Usiku, is one of those rare policy makers who comes across as objective (like Thuli was when she was public protector). I learned more about South Africa's apartheid legislation from Vilbard than I will from any of the current anc politicians. He has given me a copy of his speech which I would be more than happy to disseminate to anyone who requires it. We heard from the lawyers tasked with getting the draft bill promulgated. Again there was no "like or lump it" attitude here, I got the distinct impression that they want the process to be accepted by those who need to implement it. The highlight of the conference for me was Phillip Ellis. Phillip was concerned about NEEEF (pronounced NeeYIF) because it had been a mooted policy for years. It started off its life as TESEF, and slowly migrated across to NEEEF. A draft of the NEEEF bill has been available for comment for the last few years. Phillip is a very respected businessman and adviser to many businesses (both local and foreign) and he reckons that this uncertainty is hampering investment in the country. He told an interesting anecdote how a certain large South African company wanted to uproot to Namibia after zuma's Nene firing but refused to come because of the existence of the policy in draft format. Phillip quipped that people would prefer to have the finalised policy than the sword of Damocles. This is about policy certainty, Namibia has known about this for years and it gets delayed and reformatted.
This is the second NEEEF conference that I have chaired and spoken at (I'll speak at every other one too) and in each case I have put a strong argument for the procurement element. BEE as a policy exists and can measure its success because of the private sector. Without procurement as the glue these policies will fail. If BEE was left to the government to implement it would have fallen by the wayside years ago. This is the issue that I have not been able to understand, how is this supposed to succeed if a NEEEF scorecard is only required for licenses and state procurement. All the companies will just create a company for this purpose and so fronting will continue.
My two presentations are attached. I managed to present the one on lessons from South Africa, but couldn't tear Phillip away from the audience to present my why diets fail presentation.
Thanks to the organisers for arranging a conference that everyone enjoyed - me especially.