Paul Janisch

More on gupta grabbing and their contribution to white monopoly capital

The last post on this was written in a relative hurry, Alec Hogg had asked for other opinions on the guptas and so I wrote the opinion and sent it to him, which he published.  I did spend a bit of time this weekend reading through some of the publicly available gupta emails.  A lot of it is run of the mill stuff, I think they were put up there to show that these emails are real.  They are all in .pdf format, you therefore can't check the headers etc.  

Before I get into one of the emails I happened across this paragraph on the sahara website

Sahara's on going sponsorship & continuous social development has reinforced Sahara's commitment to developing sport and youth in the country both at provincial and national level. With continuous support and endorsing development programs in education, contributing to the government's skills development programs, and active involvement in foundations that support technology participation in the education sector, the company aims to give a new innovative world back to the community that supports it.
Sahara Computers (Pty) Ltd is a "Black Empowered" organisation as per the South African Agriculture Charter

This paragraph is most likely an absolute lie, they refer to three elements that they are generously contributing to but yet their BEE scorecard shows a minimal effort in those elements.  I can't find earlier BEE certificates but I get from the emails from one Sekete Malebana-Metsing to the verification agency that in February 2016 they had nothing to offer on ED and SED.  The subsequent certificate shows zero for both SED and skills and 0.52 for ED/Supplier Development.  And yet they tell us on their corporate website that they are so generous.  If they were so generous then their scorecard would reflect it, why would you do all this stuff and not use it?

It is obvious that this paragraph is not current, they refer to a level six under the Agriculture Charter,  They still posted their revised BEE certificate up there without updating the website.

And yet the white monopoly capital allegations are still being peddled and gupta pillaging is justified.  One email  shows an opinion piece that could have been written by Haranath Ghosh, an ann7 patsy being sent to a number of gupta editors (moegsien williams being one of the recipients).  santosh choubey then forwards this to the [email protected] email address.  I assume this email address is group address and one of the recipients is bell pottinger.

Ghosh writes

Hi Sir
Please see attached opinion piece. kindly let me know if this can go in the paper after subbing.
This can go under Nompumelelo's name if you agree.
regards,
H Ghosh

I can't figure out who Nompu is, I suspect she was either a new age journalist or opinion contributor.  But it does show that the new age and other gupta media companies were very happy to write inflammatory opinion pieces and credit to a black woman.  This is almost perfect fake news.  

The top five richest men in South Africa are breeds of “White privilege.” Johann Peter Rupert,Nicky Oppenheimer,Christoffel F. Hendrik Wiese,Koos Bekker and Stephen Saad.This in fact proves that the white elite still own South Africa even if it is just 9% of them. Economic apartheid and its associated policies still remain.  Not only that but they create a strict racial hierarchy.

White people in South Africa have continued to reap the benefits of unearned privileges from the system that was. The mistake made was assuming that black entrepreneurship will soar amid white privilege again, wrong.This resonates with the fact that blacks never had the privilege to get educated, pursue self employment and were racially restricted, creating space for underdevelopment. Which brings me to my next point...

Black entrepreneurship will not develop because of the lack of skills that could not be embraced when  the white privileged ruled. Even so, when a black person tries to build their own economic success, and if it is in the same sphere as that of white dominated; it is bound to be sabotaged. According to them you should remain swimming with the small fish, while the whites remain in full reign. Apartheid is to blame, white privilege is to blame for black entrepreneurship not developing in South Africa.

It's not clear if this was published - although the Maverick would have certainly published it as an opinion piece.  Whether it was published or not, it pushes the white monopoly capital story hard.  I find it brilliantly ironic that the owners of this media are bolstering the most corrupt politicians in the country by stealing from the same black people that this article refers to.  They themselves appeared to make no attempt do the opposite of what this story posits.

gupta's giving exposed - such generosity

You might have heard that the gupta-leak database is being made available to any investigative journalist who may have an interest in our dear country trashers.  Alec Hogg sent out a notice last night telling us that 

But even worse came later for the plundering friends of president Jacob Zuma. At the request of the SA Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Public Enterprises, a chunk of documents from the incriminating #GuptaLeaks have been made publicly available online.

Published by the Platform for the Protection of Whistleblowers in Africa (PPLAAF), a selection from hundreds of thousands of emails, documents and invoices is there for everyone to see, neatly divided into easily searchable sections. So if you ever fancied yourself as an investigative journo here’s your chance to “join the dots.”

PPLAAF says the site will be accessible for the next 10 days, so no time to tarry. The link to this veritable treasure chest is here.  Happy hunting.

Amongst the numerous emails are a number of BEE mails. I haven't really looked through them in much detail but the ones I did look at were about their 2016 BEE scorecard and information that had been requested by the verification agency.  This prompted me to have a look at the BEE scorecards I could find that belong to our atpug adversaries.  I found two - TNA (the new age) and Sahara Computers - both done by a reputable verification agency who have told me they've since cut ties with them.  I'm not going to question these scorecards because I know the guys who did them and I have huge amount of respect for them.  But take a look at them.

Sahara Computers (new codes)
Element	Weighting	Score
Ownership	25	19.29
Management Control	23	5.4
Skills Development	25	0
Enterprise and Supplier Development	55	0.52
Socio-Economic Development	12	0
Overall Score  (non-compliant)	140	25.21
The New Age (old codes)
Element	Weighting	Score
Ownership	23	15.24
Management Control	11	10
Employment Equity	13	7.12
Skills Development	17	13.6
Preferential Procurement	26	9.45
Enterprise Development	11	0.18
Socio-Economic Development	12	0
Overall Score  (level 5 expired)	113	55.59

I hope that the good reader sees what I see.  No score for socio-economic development (SED) and nothing for enterprise (etc) development (ED).  For the uninitiated SED is charitable donations and ED is the development of black businesses.  They obviously don't feel as though they need to contribute to these two elements because it detracts from their core business of taking stuff.   We shouldn't be surprised at all.  But next time their supporters like andile half-pint (who is obviously terrified of the Israelis and he should be) tells you how great they are just consider that in both cases their businesses turned over the QSE threshold (over R50m under the revised codes) and they are remarkably ungenerous.

But there is a bigger story here, one about how the government will turn a blind eye to "empowerment" to further their own corrupt needs.  The guptas are obviously so confident in their government connections that they do not need to even make a vague attempt to comply with government's empowerment requirements.  Take a look at their potential competitors.

Sahara probably competes with companies like IBM (level 2 revised codes), Dell (level 3 revised codes), HP (level 2 revised codes) and others.

the new age, apparently derives its advertising revenue from government sponsorship.  Besides the fact they we have no idea what their readership is they would compete on a BEE level with Times Media (level 3 revised codes),  Media24 ( (level 3 revised codes), CTP (level 4 revised codes) - and iqbal but he's up there with the discredited atpugs, I'm not going to bother with his company.

This is pretty much in the same league as the Waterkloof landing - it's extreme arrogance and another atpug finger.

 

 

 

Related articles

FBI opens investigation into South Africa's Guptas: FT

HSBC accused of 'possible criminal complicity' in South Africa

Has Treasury been captured by the black business lobby?

Transformation is out - this is about survival. Compliance is the way

It's the 31st of March 2017.  zuma has fired Pravin and we wait and see what happens now.  zuma's radical economic transformation policy has exactly nothing to do with empowerment. It's about gupta crony capitalism.  Why then should you concern yourself with an empowerment process that rampant racists like jungle jim (manyi) will discount as either fronting or white monopolist expedience.  I'm not discounting the necessity of empowerment, what I am saying is that it is not endorsed by the zuma regime, a regime that now operates entirely independent of the anc (the party will be written in uppercase when they show a little balls).  Back to empowerment - South Africa cannot afford not to empower the disempowered.  It is an economic and social necessity, but until government (under zuma) plays its role as a partner in this process I will advocate compliance over empowerment.  Tread water with me here.

Compliance differs to empowerment in intention.  Empowerment requires an intention to make a difference, it's more hands on and probably more meaningful.  Compliance is a measurement process.  It's squeezing the maximum number of points out of the least amount of money.  It's selfish in nature but does produce results and ultimately does contribute to empowerment.  It's not as easy as mere compliance, bolshie bob's revised codes have made a gallant attempt to push empowerment.  The SANAS verification process is both onerous and thorough (for now) which makes compliance a little more difficult.  But in our favour, the codes (all of them) are so badly written that it comes down to interpretation.  Just make sure that you know what you are doing and have your justifications ready.

Interpretation 

When interpreting the codes you must never lose sight of the founding principles.  There are a number of them but these are the significant ones.

BEE codes

• substance takes precedence over legal form.  The fronting clause.  It refers specifically to ownership but has a broader application.  This clause permits those who doubt to dig deeper than the legal structure of a deal.  Classic (and patently stupid) fronting puts an unsuspecting person on the shareholders' list or as a director. That's the legal status - the substance states that this person is not that in fact.  However there is a converse. Let's say you do your 51% deal and you sign the shareholders' agreement, create the trust, or even sign a MOU; but it takes CIPRO months to reflect these changes.  The substance of the deal is that it exists - the legal form has not happened yet.
• any reasonable interpretation (of the codes) must be consistent with the objectives of the Act and the B-BBEE Strategy.  Note the words "reasonable interpretation" this is a subjective measure.  SANAS or the verification agency might not agree but must entertain that interpretation if it is consistent with the Act and Strategy

 BEE Act

The act lists its goals (amongst numerous others) as

• promoting economic transformation for meaningful black participation;
• substantial change in the racial composition of ownership, management structures, skilled occupations

 BEE Strategy

This is a really good document that predates the Act.  The dti refer to it often but it's not easy to find. So I've posted it here.  My good friend Chris van Wyk tells me that it's not an official document even though it's referred to often. Perhaps Chris can explain that in more detail.

• BEE is broad-based.
• BEE is an inclusive process.
• BEE is associated with good governance.
• BEE is part of our growth strategy

 Notice the second principle.  It's inclusive.  Not according to bolshie bob and his crafty crew of drafters.  You see empowerment is a white problem - not your problem if you are black and turn over less than R50m.  I've said this before.  I wonder if jungle knows that white monopoly capital is being made to pay for everything as well. 

The next post will discuss the modified flow through principle and how you get to 51% black ownership without actually doing it.

 By the way, this is what I am wearing today

Zuma promises more changes to boost BEE - now it's changing the PPPFA

Speaking to the Black Business Council, which has signaled strong support for Zuma, South Africa’s president said that the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act will be changed “to continue the quest for a transformed economy”. More people must be brought into the net to benefit from government contracts, he said.

via www.biznews.com

We've heard this before.  Remember how seriously Dud took the doos's obiter remark about set-asides in his 2015 state of the nation (of no fixed) address?  I think this is another platitude from the mouth of a moron who no-one likes nor respects (other than Hlaudi of course).  As Jackie Cameron wrote

The president’s words will be music to the ears of the tenderpreneur brigade, though not so sweet to the small army of entrepreneurs who aren’t black but play a meaningful role in job creation and economic growth and are already doing their bit for BEE. An amended public procurement bill is set to be released for discussion next month and tabled in Parliament early next year.

I can't see this happening.  Zuma lacks the political clout to do it.  Perhaps he is prodding Treasury to see what their reaction will be.  Perhaps he thinks that the useless and tailcoat-riding BBC will start lobbying to get rid of Pravin because he's not going to agree to this.  Thinking about it, this is probably what Zuma is doing. The strategy now is to create huge dissatisfaction with Pravin, specifically amongst those who are not competent enough to provide services to the private sector and have settled for government work that worries neither about quality nor price.

Now he's attempting to placate the completely irrelevant jungle jim, who is threatening to go to court (yeah right) to get the PPPFA scrapped.  He's saying the regulations that Treasury published earlier this year are going to be promulgated at the end of this year as an interim measure, and then they are going to change the Act (not repeal it jungle).  Here are the words of the thickest human being next to Hlaudi.

In the past five years as part of advancing BBBEE procurement, government amended the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act or the PPPFA Regulations to provide for BEE preference points. We thought this would work and would make an impact. However, you pointed out that it does not work.  We are now aware of the shortcomings. We agree that the preference points system prescribed in the PPPFA is rigid and is not responsive to government objectives.

Due to the shortcomings, the preferential procurement regulations have failed to substantially re-shape the skewed ownership and control of the South African economy. It is the intention of government to ultimately repeal the PPPFA and its associated regulations and introduce a more flexible preferential procurement framework that is responsive to government objectives. 

In this regard, the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act will be repealed by the Public Procurement Act. The Public Procurement Bill is now going through the different government stakeholder engagement processes before it is tabled in Parliament. This is targeted for early 2017. I trust that the BBC has made its inputs to the National Treasury.

In the interim, government is to produce regulations that will improve the PPPFA to make them more responsive to the economic transformation imperatives.

One of the main changes contained in the proposed new Preferential Procurement Regulations is the introduction of a compulsory sub-contracting clause.

It will be compulsory to sub-contract a minimum of 30% of the value of the contract for all contracts above 30 million rand, to small and emerging enterprises owned by the women, youth, black people or persons with disability. The intention is to finalise the Preferential Procurement Regulations for approval during October 2016, and for these to be promulgated by 1 November 2016.

Will this actually materialise? Zuma is a lame duck, it won't happen.  

 

Related articles

Ownership uber alles - can anyone confirm this?

Something very sinister is happening here

Draft PPPFA regulation disgust (discussed and cussed)

Regional and national EAP, Bolshie Bob content

[E]mployment opportunities are accessible to people only where they live.  The objective of the EE Act is not to induce racial migrations to accommodate the statistics.  Its objective is accessibility of employment opportunities and it achieves that objective only if it takes account where applicants for the posts are located.  Statistics that serve as a tool for that purpose will be statistics that reflect the reality of the population, and the reality is that the races are not distributed uniformly throughout the country, which is not reflected in the Department’s Plan.

The Employment Equity Act has since been changed and it no longer requires an employer to take into account regional demographics when devising EEP targets – it merely allows it to do so if it wishes. It may be that this amendment is unconstitutional because it effectively encourages migration of people far away from their families and communities, thus containing echoes of the apartheid migrant labour system. But a future judgment will have to determine whether this is so.

via feedly.com

So sayeth Pierre de Vos in another of his insightful posts.  As those who are scholars of Rob's Folly also known as Bolshie Bob's Botched Borscht will know that our Stalinist deludinist has found it fit to include the economically active population (EAP) as a target for his racially representative nation. As we have come to expect from the brains trust at the iDioTIc, the document is big on ideology and short on the most basic clue as to how to implement it.

The ConCourt has come to our aid when it comes to regional and national EAP.  You can use both.  The ConCourt referred specifically to an EE plan.  But I feel confident that we can extrapolate this conclusion into the meat of any BEE scorecard scenario.  But you have to read this plan into the IMF's David Lipton's recent speech on the state of the South African economy.

But there is something else going on that has developed with the evolution of the economy. This involves issues that I know are very familiar to you: infrastructure bottlenecks; skills mismatches in the work force; regulations that stifle competition and entrepreneurship and keep that one-third of the labor force unemployed or too discouraged to seek work.

The end result is that a huge part of the labor force is left on the outside looking in, undereducated and with no opportunities for advancement. I’m told, for example, that there are township youth who not only cannot find work, but who grow up without knowing anyone in their circle of family and friends with a job either!

The formal economy is not absorbing them, nor are they able to strike out on their own. There is a crucial structural issue at play here: those included and successful in the advanced economy — large businesses, banks and unionized workers — maintain entry barriers against their potential competitors — small and medium-sized enterprises and the unemployed.

These paragraphs actually refer to the 79% of the EAP that the Prison's Department wants in its employ.  Lipton is telling us that the government has in effect let these people down, both through their historical neglect and their ongoing burdensome policies. And once they have washed their hands of these people by pushing them out the school system the private sector is expected to absorb them and make up their educational shortfall by blowing humongous amounts of cash on skilling them, 6% of payroll to be precise.

We are being taken for fools, policies created by buffoons who are not required to understand how an economy or a spaza shop runs.  This doesn't specifically mean that we can point fingers at Zoomer and his band of incompetents. We are part of the solution but government needs to make the first move - and that move should be axing Zoomer and his cabinet without a pension.

And no, I don't feel better for writing this.

 

 

 

In which I praise Rob Davies – and racism gets mentioned

The reader may have thought I have lost my mind. A post praising Rob Davies would be shorter than this post (my most widely read post I stress). I won't use the term racist when it comes to Bolshie Bob, because he's not cut from that cloth but what I will say about him is that I think the architects of apartheid would be most impressed with him. Can you imagine if they had found a black man who was so hell bent on destroying black people as Bolshie Bob is with destroying white people.

Anyway, let's get to the crux of the post. This thing called RACISM and how the ANC government would be nothing without it. Zimbabwe is the same with colonialism and Mugabe's disdain for Breetawn. When you are a government made up of the most corrupt and inept people you need a scapegoat and this scapegoat is the SCOURGE OF RACISM, other terms for it are COUNTER-REVOLUTIONARY (although this is often levelled at black people who speak out against the government) or ANTI-TRANSFORMATION. The latter term is being used by Dud Miyeni-millions-to-plunder-from-SAA. It's a thin veneer of an excuse for killing the national carrier (as those in government love to call it).

The emphasis on fronting has a similar hollow ring to it. Please don't think that the so-called BEE Ombud/Commissioner is going to listen to your constructive commentary on the various iterations of their un-implementable codes. She's not interested in the fact that you just don't find Xhosa radiographers in Pofadder. She's only interested in hearing complaints of fronting. I have this completely untested suspicion that she will be more amenable to allegations of white people fronting by black people and not the other way round. It plays back into the racism argument – as John Robbie so correctly (my arse) observed "only white people can be racist because it's all about power." Whatever that means. But, he hastily pointed out, black people can be bigoted. How's that – white people can be both, and all at the same time. Such talent.

And so this country can never move on. It can't move because the ANC doesn't want it to. If it drops the perennial racist allegation then it has to take responsibility for its own mistakes and fuck-ups, Jacob Zuma being the most colossal of the latter.

This was going to be a longer post – but there's no hope here. Whilst white people live in this country racism will thrive, irrespective of whether they are racist, bigoted or not. That is unless the ANC actually wants to make a difference to lives of people in South Africa. Let us hope that Rob doesn't scare off all the white taxpayers too quickly - because when they go the BEE Commissioner will suddenly be without a job.

Related articles

Piercing Zuma's bubble: Mantashe and Gordhan's grim tasks on State Capture and Nkandla

How can a leader of any country be so derided by one of the most influential publications in South Africa

Has Treasury been captured by the black business lobby?

Draft PPPFA regulation disgust (discussed and cussed)

In his 2015 state of the nation giggle session our very competent, intelligent and decisive president made the following announcement.

Government will set-aside 30% of appropriate categories of State procurement for purchasing from SMMEs, co-operatives as well as township and rural enterprises.

We are quite used to this esteemed personage's platitudes and incredible decisiveness so it might be quite strange to the average person when he does actually deliver on his promises.  He has in fact in the new draft PPPFA regulations.  A Bardot delivery had these same regulations sent to me, it would be wrong not to post them up here for your perusal.

Here are a few of some of the features:

1. 80/20 works for R10m to R50m
2. 90/10 for more than R50m.  If you are seeing new QSE patterns emerging you would be on the money
3. 50/50 points' system for less than R10m

The 80/20 and 90/10 systems work on standard BEE points' allocations.  However the 50/50 system is a lot more interesting. This is what it looks like

Points will be allocated in accordance with the table below

No.	Criteria	Points
1	Price	50
2	Specific Goals:
2.1	Individuals who had no franchise in national elections before the 1983 and 1993 Constitutions	12
2.2	51% or more ownership by females	12
2.3	51% or more ownership by persons with a disability	12
2.4	SMME (Small, Medium and Micro-enterprise)	6
2.5	LED (Local Economic Development)	8

This harks back to the 2001 PPPFA regulations. No franchise before the two constitutions effectively includes all black people as defined. Africans had not vote before '83 and '93. Coloureds and Indians didn't have the vote before 1983. The reference to disabled and women includes ALL women and disabled people.

I do rather like the inclusion of SMME and Local Economic Development because the issue with the current regulations is that it didn't favour regional businesses. What Zille and Kane-Berman missed is this paragraph

(2) (a) For the specific goals under 2.2 to 2.5 in the table above, the Minister of Finance (Minister) may, from time to time, prescribe targets that must be procured from certain categories of person or commodity groups. Therefore, the number of points, as well as the groups referred to in the specific goals in sub-regulation (1)

What this says is that Nene may use set asides. Something that the Constitution would not be happy with (as if that has ever been a problem for our literate and competent legislators), and something that Treasury banned in 2006.

Now onto some of the more interesting features of 2.1 above (you will see on page 8 that this requirement may never be removed from any tender). You'll notice the word "INDIVIDUAL", this is a very specific word, it refers to individuals and not classes of people. As I mentioned African people did not have the vote until 1994. This means that only individuals who are over 21 years old and African can qualify. Indians and Coloureds get a rawer deal. They would need to be 31 years and older (as if they haven't been shafted enough under the revised codes). As this regulation gets on in the years so will the age of the black person increase.

This is pure BBC – a subtle attempt at favouring Africans over other black groups.

Another issue which plagues me is the value of the tender. What the 50/50 system does is give certain types of people up to a 100% price advantage. If they tick all the boxes under 2 above and get 1 more point for price they could 51 points which beats the bidder that only offered the best price (cost effectiveness is a vital ingredient of section 217). The rules are that they should win the bid. But this system is only for bids for less than R10m. If that bidder comes in a R10,000,000.01 then they are no longer part of the R10m scheme. In effect this system will only work for bids less than R5m.

The whole system is completely open for abuse. It is absolutely unconstitutional and unaffordable.   Related articles

Has Treasury been captured by the black business lobby?

State of the nation - indeed. No foreign land owners and set asides

What happened before Zoomer started speaking showed the real state of the nation.  What a despicable person and the party that he represents is rapidly descending into a neo-Nationalist party (the old PW Botha version).  It would seem that our dearly beloved president is now considering how to pay off his Nkandla loan - there are three possible payment options, cash, EFT or eWallet.

But what then of his bland presentation, what of the content.  I don't know if you noticed that his partisan audience wasn't actually clinging onto his every word,  if it wasn't for Blade's sycophantic applause, he would have received no applause whatsoever.  I think Blade pissed off Pravin because every time the  hysterical one applauded it woke Pravin up.

For those who have now returned from the Gupta's Taj Mahal after evicting them from their compound because they are foreign nationals and foreign nationals are no longer allowed to own land in South Africa, you might have noticed this little statement

Government will set-aside 30% of appropriate categories of State procurement for purchasing from SMMEs, co-operatives as well as township and rural enterprises.

This is good idea - of course we understand the term SMME to mean BLACK SMMEs  but that is detail.  But in order to do this you'd need to amend my favourite section of the Constitution, 217.  I have blogged about this often.  To change the constitution you need a 2/3rds majority.  Last night's performance will result in an even sharper drop in the ANC's majority.

The rules have changed now.  The ANC/government is no longer relevant or reasonable. 

Related articles

How can a leader of any country be so derided by one of the most influential publications in South Africa

No Nkandla report said I squandered money - Zuma

How can a leader of any country be so derided by one of the most influential publications in South Africa

Quite simply because he is not respected by the business community.  You cannot assume that the FM is speaking in isolation here.  Just take a look at the cover page of this week's issue.  The lead article is equally damning. 

JACOB Zuma’s Presidency has taken on a particular flavour. Exposés of capricious political interference in important arms of the state such as the prosecuting authority, the police and the intelligence services have become commonplace: there is little shock factor left in the abuses of power and process committed by his friends in his name; and there is no parallel with any other SA president in the extent to which he has personally benefited from holding office.

This article appears at the same time when Eskom is loadshedding the life out of the economy.  The impact of this loadshedding will be felt for a long time yet, and yet it is this moron's face that graces the cover of the FM.  Today is the State of the Nation Address, we are anticipating fireworks from the equally moronic Malema.  It's very strange how the adage - the enemy of your enemy is your friend, rings true almost all the time.   

And the ANC does nothing - no wonder I am patently anti-ANC.  I can't imagine that any logical person who either fought against apartheid or is relieved that it is over could have wished for a South Africa that looks like this with this destructive imbecile  at the helm.  Please come back  quickly Jesus, Christ knows we need you more than ever.

Related articles

In the spotlight: The ANC on the issues of land, Eskom and xenophobia

Beware of the bull in the SONA shop

The underlying stench is overwhelming

A rumour is now doing the rounds that the period for comment for the second round of codes has been extended to the full 60 days – I can't find this notice on the DTI's website but it is an embarrassment for them and probably won't be put up. I think we have until 9 Dec 2014 to submit our comments. To a certain extent the extension of the period to 60 days, which the act requires the minister to do, is a victory for us. A small victory but it has a significance. History has shown that the minister and his goons minions at the DTI have little regard for process or the law, and by offering a 35 day period they're just shoving dodgy legislation up our backsides. Someone must have said to them that if they don't follow that part of the act then the whole process can be thrown out. It is a surprise that they actually considered this, their past behaviour shows that they are not concerned about such things.

So we've been given the requisite amount of time to submit comments, and we should submit comments. But you must remember that the underlying codes that the new codes are built on are rotten. At face value the draft codes appear to have been drafted by someone who has not gone through the DTI's in-house training system. They might have actually used a word processor with a spell checker for a change. And it's also possible that someone with a legitimate matric certificate actually checked the wording (what am I saying, of course that person had a legitimate matric, it's only those in position of power who lie about their educational qualifications. As an aside, Zoomer has no issue with his standard three, he doesn't feel that people need to call him Dr or Prof Zuma because of his numerous honorary doctorates.)

Where was I, it's so easy to distract yourself with the incompetence that is Zoomer. The draft codes rely on the existing codes for clarity, but there is no clarity under the revised codes. The perfume that is being sprayed on the draft codes cannot hide the stench that the revised codes emit – something akin to Thandi's pig farm. And then there's the fact that the DTI is so hell bent on shoving shit down our throats that they won't consider our comments – as one large company said to me, they did not consider a single sentence we sent them. In other words, why should we bother sending through comments when we know that anything that highlights the folly of Rob's delusion will be disregarded. Armed with this fact, we still have a duty to let him know that he is living in cloud communist land.

Here are a few corkers from the draft codes.

Statement 003

Par 3.1.6 - a sector code...must set targets which are over and above the minimum targets set out in the generic codes (as if the targets contained in the revised codes weren't onerous enough, no sector charters have got to outdo them. You can imagine what the ICT Charter would look like under Dilly, skills' development would go up to 8% of payroll on African females alone)

3.1.11 - no transition period shall be provided for the implementation of a sector code (now here's a thing, 3.1.6 tells us that the targets must be higher and you still haven't got a transition period to get used to this. Actually the reason for this cause is far more sinister than that – what it is saying is that the draft is in FACT the final document, irrespective of the comments. You can imagine looking at a draft and knowing your business well enough to know that these targets are unachievable and you send your well thought out comments to the DTI, hoping that they'll see reason. They won't and they'll go ahead and publish whatever please them and then tell you it's effective immediately. Don't laugh – this is what will happen.)

5.4 - a section 9(1) code is legally binding on the applicable sector, organs of state or public and private entities (this means that you HAVE to implement a sector code that is applicable to you. In other words, BEE is now a legal requirement for all companies. This differs to the current understanding that a code is a guideline and if you want to do business in this country it would be a good idea to get a scorecard. Here is a constitutional challenge waiting to happen)

I have looked through the rest of the draft and there are little niggly things that could bother some, Chris van Wyk has told me about the different requirements for South African multinationals vs international multinationals. The QSE scorecard is far more lenient than the large enterprises scorecard, for instance the EAP targets don't apply to the QSE scorecard. But this does not detract from the fact that the underlying codes are wrong, illegal, unconstitutional and a product of a whim. If the revised codes are allowed to go through then we are simply FUCKED. Not a little fucked – TOTALLY FUCKED and completely FUCKED OVER. It's not often that I apologise for using profanity but I do under these circumstances because it emphasises the extent to which this incompetent government is rapidly eroding the democracy that we think we have. We are very simply frogs in rapidly boiling water (obviously not being heated by Eskom) and the temperature is starting to get uncomfortable but not enough to climb out and protest. It's almost too late.

Almost

Related articles

Zuma appoints new BEE council. Really?