Publications
Partners
Themba Dlamini, the forum’s managing director, said radical transformation of South Africa’s economy required courage.
“We believe the dti lacks the courage to deracialise our economy.
“The flaccidity and floppiness with which the dti is managing broad-based BEE leads us to conclude that the dti either lacks the courage to champion radical transformation or the advocates of economic transformation – those who believe in socioeconomic justice, fairness and equity – have become weak and are therefore taken for granted.
“Either way, we are annoyed and rudely reminded that the dominant class in South Africa whose opinion matters is what [political economist] Moeletsi Mbeki calls the economic oligarchy,” he said.
Dlamini mentioned that the turbulence of the past few weeks showed that BEE issues were being badly managed by the dti demonstrating that little or no attention was given to the redress of the legacy of apartheid, which left control of major businesses under the management and control of whites.
Dlamini detailed the delays and setbacks that had frustrated and disappointed aspiring black business leaders since the initial publication of the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act in 2004.
It took three years for the codes to be published and another three years before they were implemented.
Amended codes followed in 2013 with another year allowed for implementation.
And when the start date arrived this month, 11 years after the first laws were passed, sector codes had not been amended, small enterprises were not dealt with and there was no provision for state-owned enterprises.
Dlamini said it took another long time for the dti to issue a notice of clarification.
This stated: “Black participants in broad-based ownership schemes and employee share ownership programmes holding rights of ownership in a measured entity must only score points under paragraph 2.2.3 under the ownership scorecard.”
Dlamini said consternation and threats of litigation from the business establishment prompted the dti to issue a statement noting that it would appoint a technical task team to explore the appropriate balance between active (direct) and passive (broad-based schemes) ownership.
“And few days later, there was the Davies bombshell; firstly abruptly withdrawing the notice and later describing the clause in Parliament as using a sledgehammer to hit a fly,” Dlamini said.
“And the fly in the eyes of Minister Davies is the fronting and abuse of broad-based BEE schemes and employee share ownership schemes.
“Where Davies sees as a fly, an irritant that can simply be ignored, we see what frustrates every effort to economically empower black people.
“The lack of appreciation of the harmful effects of fronting on broad-based BEE and the minister’s attempt to reduce it to a small fly is a serious cause for concern.
“The eddying cloud of confusion within the dti talks to the country’s ineptitude in the calamity of racial inequality that has characterised our economy for so long.
“It saddens us that we have not heard or seen any major real BEE deals initiated and driven by black entrepreneurs since the advent of the codes in 2007.
“All the latest BEE deals concluded are at the behest of big business with small insignificant stakes given to black entrepreneurs.
“As the BMF, we appreciate the relevance and importance of these broad-based BEE schemes but they should never be seen as an alternative to active or direct ownership.
“These passive schemes have been comprehensively abused by big businesses that do not want to transform.
“We need to remind everyone, including Minister Davies, that the primary objective of the broad-based BEE Act is to ensure meaningful participation of black people in the economy.
“The challenge with these passive ownership schemes is that they are prone to superficial fronting arrangements, which limits the meaningful participation of black people,” he concluded
