Initially he was known as Dinogwed. I had to think about the best type of dinosaur that would suit our mining minister. He couldn’t be a T-Rex. He was best suited as a lumbering herbivore, my first choice was an ankylosaurus. But it I don’t know where to fit the Gwed into the name – Gwedlyosaurus, ankylogwed. Unfortunately I have to go with the very predictable Gwedosaurus – modeled after the stegosaurus - probably apt because he’s just as prickly as a stegosaurus. You’ll notice the uppercase – I don’t dislike him, but he is not suited to hold any type of political office. He’s backward and patently serving a certain segment of our entitled society.
Ed Stoddardwrote something about the recent court case in the Daily Maverick this morning.
In classic Mantashe fashion, his response will have left investors in the dark.
“To me, appealing or not appealing the latest charter ruling is not the issue. I may appeal to ensure the smooth running of the department. But for me, the major issue is whether the industry is committed to transformation, and will we see more black capitalists. If the industry is committed to transformation, we will not be appealing,'” he said.
So if you want to commit significant capital to South Africa’s mining sector, just wait. The legal shenanigans over this vexed issue may or may not be over. The minister says he wants investors but such uncertainty is a key deterrent to investment.
I agree with Ed’s comment after the underlined sentence. BUT – it’s the underlined sentence that worries me the most. How do you determine whether you are committed to transformation and how does Gwedosaurus determine it. This is a problem. It’s not documented. You’ve got the mining charter that has been chopped down completely. Does the Jurassic one think that a commitment to those aspects is enough. Is using the generic scorecard (bolshie’s bullshit one) an acceptable method?
This is a problem. One of the many in the mining industry. I’ll leave Ed’s final comment in another article as a good representation of what is happening in the mining industry, although it’s a metaphor for almost every ministry, department or municipality that the anc has corruption control over.
Top it off with an incapable and corrupt state, and you get dramas like the one that just took place in Orkney. It won’t be the last.
The country's construction sector needs massive transformation, Public Works Minister Thulas Nxesi said on Thursday.
"The industry has to transform and include black professionals. Engineers, surveyors and all sorts of artisans in the sector are male and white," he told delegates at the National Union of Mineworkers' (NUM) central executive committee meeting in Johannesburg.
He's not wrong. But what he's not doing is accepting responsibility for the fact that the education system that his government has destroyed developed is not producing the black skills that it needs to create those engineers, artisans etc. A skilled artisan takes years of training - the shortage of these artisans cannot simply be reduced to anti-transformation sentiments.
This cry of lack of transformation/racism is really an acknowledgement by the ANC government that it has failed. If you can't accept responsibility for your mistakes then blame it on apartheid and white racism. The problem is that the country has seen through all this and the ANC is going to have to start accepting responsibility for its own fuck ups.
Strangely enough I am sensing that they are starting to do this.
The board at State-owned company (SoC) Transnet will complete a wide-ranging review of the group’s procurement policies by the end of March and the new policy, which will have a strong transformation underpinning, will have implications for the procurement approach pursued during the implementation of the group’s R300-billion, seven-year investment programme.
What would this mean?. Transnet was the first of the parastatals to request BEE scorecards. This suggests a change in the way they do things in line with the new BEE Bill. We needn't worry that they won't be accepting BEE scorecards, they will but only those that work within their transformation structures. As per section 12A
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.
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.
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.
It seems very likely that the parastatals are starting to make plans in terms of this.
Gigaba said he intended to be “hard” on the issue of transformation and would “brook no deviations” from the SoCs, which were expected to lead the way for corporate South Africa as a whole.
Yes minister - just like Eskom fair dinkum fucked up the economy with their Eskadaat, now you're giving the other parastatals a chance to destroy what's left.
Is it too late to ask for sense to prevail? Probably
Tim Cohen wrote a piece
yesterday on the mining charter and how the industry has descended into a corrupt mine field.
In the new South African mining strategy , the industry managed
to include the notion of “sustainable growth” along with the requirement
of “meaningful transformation”, which has been arguably the only thing
the department has really cared about until now. The department has
often painted itself as the sole and crusading believer in
transformation, which is just nonsense. Mining companies in general are
not so stupid they don’t realise the need to compromise . What has
changed is the realisation that all the discretionary items that have
been put into the new legislative and rights formulations have resulted
in creeping and debilitating corruption.
The department typically turned a blind eye , thinking perhaps it was an
unfortunate side-effect of transformation . But it was actually eroding
the industry, as investment levels show.
Cohen notes
In Australia, investment is considered so important that a popular prime minister falls within a month of threatening that investment climate. All mining companies had to do to reverse a decision to impose a super mining tax was to threaten to pull their expansion projects.
Not quite the same with our government - as Hilary Joffe concluded in her article today.
Shabangu’s comments (any company that sold its empowerment stake to non-empowered shareholders would just have to do another deal) were a depressing reflection of how little appetite there is in the government for a rethink. Policies often do prove to have unintended, even damaging, consequences. But it takes bold leaders to admit that, and even bolder ones to throw out the articles of faith and start again.
Quentin Wray's blog actually calls for a lot more government accountability but does not absolve the private sector's involvement in the transformation process
It is easy for the government and the ANC to blame (transformation) failings entirely on the business sector rather than critically examine its own role in the failure of its policies. However, it is also all too easy for business to put all the blame on to the government. Both sides are wrong.
What we need is a new approach to the whole thing. Government must start delivering what it has promised rather than blaming others for its failures and business must embrace the notion of doing the right things because they are right rather than just required. Unless this happens, at some stage, there will be no more give from either side and the simmering antagonism between the business community and the government will evolve into something far more sinister.
Both sides have massive extortion power - the private sector can withhold investment and cut jobs and the state can capriciously pull licences - and it would be a tragedy for all of us should the relationship to degenerate into a tit-for-tat, my stick is bigger than yours battle.
Business Day - Advocates raise the bar on transformation
ADVOCATES in Johannesburg aspiring to attain the highest status in their profession — that of senior counsel or “silk” — will from now on have to display a “demonstrable commitment to transformation” to qualify for selection. This is froma a resolution passed by the Johannesburg Bar Council.
This demonstrable commitment
Now the silks committee had to consider the extent to which a candidate had mentored black and women juniors, his participation in transformation through bar structures, and how often he had involved black and women juniors in cases.
I like this.
FM - GOVERNMENT TENDERS - Sold, to the highest bidder
A sad tale of a person who applied to the court to get a tender decision set-aside. It took him two years to get the matter to the supreme court. By the time the court had heard it the contract (winning bidder) had run its course.
The SCA concluded that the question was moot and any judgment would have no practical effect. The appeal was dismissed with costs.
And so says Andrew Donnelly of Shepstone & Wylie
"(I)nterdicts are often hurried and we don't
always have all the information, but this is our one bite at the
cherry," says Donnelly. "And if it is unsuccessful, it is not practical
to take it any further."
The message seems to be that you need to have your act firmly together if you want to pursue this route. Read the article.
I just got a call from Mzwandile Jacks telling me about the BEE Advisory Council that's just been announced. This is what it looks like
Minister of Trade and Industry, Rob Davies.
Minister of Labour, Membathisi Mdladlana
Minister of Economic Development, Ebrahim Patel
Minister of Women, Children and Persons with Disabilities. Noluthando Mayende-Sibiya.
Professor Mohammed I. Jahed, professor of macro-economic policy, economics and public finance at the Wits University Graduate School of Public and Development Management.
Prof Eltie Links, a professor extraordinaire at University of Stellenbosch Business School
Wendy Lucas-Bull, a businesswoman and the founder of Peotona Group Holdings
Andile Lungisa, Chairperson of the National Youth Development Agency
Sebenzile Matsebula, an independent consultant and former Director in the Office on the Status of Disabled Persons in the Presidency
Jerry Vilakazi, chief executive officer of Business Unity South Africa
Dumisani Mthalane, a member of the National Working Committee of the South African National Civics Organisation
Ellen Tshabalala, a business and management consultant with expertise in small, medium and micro-sized enterprises development, banking and marketing.
Adv Matshego Ramagaga, Vice-President of Black Lawyers Association
Tsakani Matshazi, President of the Association of Black Accountants and Vice-President of the Confederation of Black Business Organisations
Sidumo Dlamini, President of the Congress of South African Trade Unions
Sandile Zungu, businessman with extensive experience having served in various companies at a senior level including NAIL and Denel.
Don Mkhwanazi, a former president of the Black Management Forum
Dr Claudia Manning, businesswoman
Chantyl Mulder, senior executive for transformation and growth at the SA Institute of Chartered Accountants, who has served as facilitator of the BEE Charter process amongst other work on economic transformation.
It's the required 19 people with the exeception of the President who is required in terms of section 6(a) of the BEE Act. I wonder if this will have an impact on the legitimacy of the council.
I would have liked to see more business representation.
The reality is that unless you measure and evaluate what you are doing, you will not know what works and what does not. It may be that you have to try a variety of different approaches before hitting on the successful ones, but without the measurement, evaluation and analysis we are left in the dark.
Those who are successful at what they do are also those who measure stuff. They might not think of it as analysis, and may stare blankly at you when you talk about measurement and evaluation, but that’s what they are doing. Measuring each initiative, and then going back afterwards and figuring out just how successful it was. Was it better or worse than other initiatives? This is data driven marketing at its best, on this occasion given a rather curious name by someone who clearly thinks analysis is something to keep quiet about!
Zuma's ANC letter beautifully precised by Moneyweb as "ANC president responds to the concerns raised by the BMF over Eskom and other SOE's".
A few features/quotes
One of the key focus areas of the ANC government is economic transformation.
We emphasise that the creation of decent work will be at the centre of our economic policies and will influence our investment attraction and job-creation initiatives.
To achieve this, we said we would utilise state levers such as
procurement, licensing and financial support to assist small and medium
enterprises as well as to promote the implementation of Broad-Based
Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) and affirmative action policies.
These policies must not just benefit a few but should be extended to a
broad section, especially the workers, youth, women and people with
disabilities.
(You know where licensing comes in - good old section 10)
And then a reference to the BMF (who now deny that they ever suggested Bobby is racist, but they want the board to resign). And now for a post within a post. This is from November the 9th (Business Report) in which they called for the resignation of the board and threw in a few choice epithets.
Mnyaka said the problems at the power utility stemmed from an ideological disconnection between the strategic imperatives of the ANC government and the board led by its chairman Bobby Godsell, as well as lack of clarity between his and Maroga's role. She added that Maroga was a victim of "anti-transformation people with a racist agenda" at the electricity parastatal.
'nuff sed about that. Back to Zumachine Gun
Our meetings with black business sensitised us to some actions of government which serve to hamper the development of small entrepreneurs. One of these is the delays in paying small businesses.
During the election campaign we said we would change the way in which government works, and that we would ensure faster delivery. Treasury Regulations on the approval of expenditure in government states that unless determined otherwise in a contract or other agreement, all payments due to creditors must be settled within 30 days from receipt of an invoice or, in the case of civil claims, from the date of settlement or court judgment.
We have instructed all government departments to comply with this regulation without delay.
To further streamline our transformation work, we are currently in the process of appointing a BBBEE Advisory Council which in terms of the BBBEE Act will be chaired by the President of the Republic. This process should be completed in a few weeks’ time. The Council’s responsibility will be among others to advise government on black economic empowerment, monitor implementation and review progress in achieving black economic empowerment.
That's about it. You can read the whole thing here.
The question that begs to be asked about the Forum of Black Journalists' (FBJ) decision to host a function that excluded whites is; is it racist? I think it is. And seeing that this is largely a BEE blog, I'll answer that question in terms of the B-BBEE Act and other supporting legislation.
This is what I understand.
The forum planned to host a private event, and the constitution does grant everyone freedom of association (for the trainspotters it's section 18 "Everyone has the right to freedom of association").
White journalists were either barred from entry, or asked to leave if they had managed to gain entry.
Abbey Makoe, chair of the FBJ did not understand the problem with this meeting. He repeatedly told journalists after the session that they just "didn't get it" when they claimed it was a public meeting. The Citizen quoted Makoe as saying "what is wrong when black journalists come together? We have the Black Management Forum, the Jewish Board of Deputies and we never had a problem with them".
Zumachine Gun addressed the forum and then spoke to the riff-raff waiting outside for five minutes. "I don't see anything wrong with this," he said. When asked about the constitutionality of this meeting he deferred to Makoe who said "there is nothing constitutionally wrong with this."
I can't confirm this - but I believe I heard Makoe saying on 702 that the forum is only open to black people who are defined black by law. I have to include this because it helps with my BEE angle.
And now to respond to each of the above.
Private vs public Fiona Forde pointed out in her article in today's Sunday Independent - White journalists left out in the cold, (as usual the Independent hasn't put this up on the web yet), that by inviting Zumachine Gun to address the forum and by not putting any issues on the agenda that specifically pertained to the internal workings of the FBJ, it was a public event. Removing the wrong people Stephen Grootes of 702 managed to get in to the event, Makoe said "Sir, please don't cause a scene just leave." So Grootes waited outside. Not getting it I think that if journalists "didn't get it" then Abbey had cloistered his thoughts like a meditating monk - because I certainly don't get it. And his reference to the BMF and Jewish Board of Deputies is beyond me. Firstly the BMF is not exclusively black - I have a few white friends who are active members of the forum, and I quote the BMF's website "its' (sic) policy and philosophy is non-racial" . Secondly since when has the Jewish Board of Deputies ever been based on racial lines. It is a body that looks after the interests of South African Jews. I have met one or two South African black Jews. Similarly the Muslim Judicial Council looks after the interests of South African Muslims. The FBJ (I keep on wanting to write PFJ) is open only to black people (see more on this below). Even the Black Lawyers' Associationconstitution states that "membership of the Association shall be open to all lawyers and aspirant lawyers irrespective of colour, race, gender or creed who accept BLA’s policies, principles and abide by its Constitution." Zumachine Gun and the constitution I can't say much about Zumachine Gun. But he does speak for himself in this BBC documentary "No more Mandela's". This is part 3 of 3 parts, you might want to watch the other two as well.
Regarding the constitutionality of the event - we must go back to the constitution and look at section 9 - Equality 9.
(1) Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law. (3) The state may not unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds, including race, gender, sex, pregnancy, marital status, ethnic or social origin, colour, sexual orientation, age, disability, religion, conscience, belief, culture, language and birth. (4) No person may unfairly discriminate directly or indirectly against anyone on one or more grounds in terms of subsection (3). National legislation must be enacted to prevent or prohibit unfair discrimination.
And now onto the definition of black According to a quote from the Mercury"the forum allowed membership to anyone who matched the criteria - if they were of African descent, coloured or Indian" . This means that any person of African descent (excluding whites - I used to work with a few Egyptians in London and we used to remind each other that we were all Africans) may join. Technically speaking this includes all black people from any country in Africa.
Whilst the constitution does not expressly mention the words black and white in the context of people (it does use those words when defining the flag in section 5), the definition of black people does appear in a few acts and tends to be "a generic term for Africans, Coloureds and Indians". The latest B-BBEE and Employment Equity codes of good practice have refined the definition to Africans, Coloureds and Indians
who are natural persons and are citizens of the Republic of South Africa by birth or descent; or
are citizens of the Republic of South Africa by naturalisation before the commencement date of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act of 1993; or
became citizens of the Republic of South Africa after the commencement date of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act of 1993, but who, not for Apartheid policy that had been in place prior to that date, would have been entitled to acquire citizenship by naturalisation prior to that date.
If I heard Abbey correctly then this must be the definition he follows. I wonder if the insists on looking at the ID books of each individual and conducts an in-depth interview to ascertain whether they are black enough for the FBJ.
And now to the obvious question - was the event and the handling of white journalists racist?
I have convinced myself that it was. 702 laid a formal complaint with the SA Human Rights Commission (SAHRC) of racial prejudice - they'll decide for us. The FBJ in itself is not unconstitutional, but it is a very reactionary way of going about things. And Joey (if you ever read this) - the difference between this group and the white groups of the last government is that the last government legislated racism, the current government actively outlaws it - and we are all better off with the current set up.
"Ahem.... further to my prior post on transformation and compliance" . I happened upon an article in the Business Report on how Woolworths has not replaced their outgoing chairman (Buddy Hawton) with a black chairman. It's not jungle jim doing the moaning this time - but his deputy Nomhle Nkumbi-Ndopu.
I'm not going to go into the finer details of this article. I'm going to concentrate on the last paragraph.
The retailer said its approach to transformation was holistic. Its goal was to become a level 4 black economic empowerment contributor by 2012 and its targets were on track.
This is compliance. They want to get to 65 odd points in five years' time. And good luck to them - getting 65 points on the generic scorecard is not easy (I do often wonder how EmpowerDex gets to its scores) and a five year game plan to achieve this is probably realistic.
The second point is what incentive does a company like Woolworths, Massmart or Pick n Pay (note the apostrophe is something of the past) to implement BEE. Admittedly they might need to supply some form of a scorecard to renew their liquor licences, especially if section 10A of the BBBEE Act is going to be implemented
Every organ of state and public entity must take into account and as far as is reasonably possible, 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 terms of any law;
Other than that there is no incentive to go beyond compliance. I am not going to boycott any one of those stores because their BEE score is low - I shop for convenience and for prices. And I am willing to bet anything that every one I know thinks the same.
Come on Trevor - cut us a few tax breaks and maybe we'll see Woollies going beyond simple compliance.
