Friday, May 27, 2005

Deadly proof...

Here is some facts, as sent to us by the highly renowned reporter, Adriana Stuijt, to support the claims of the previously placed letter:

Black South Africans do not want to farm...
- 'Give us urban houses and urban jobs, not farms'

by Adriana Stuijt, secretary, Foundation for Afrikaner-asylumseekers International ( .

Afrikaner farmers have been saying this for the past ten years, but the ANC-regime's relentless ethnic-cleansing campaign to get all Afrikaners out of the countryside under the guise of "land reform" has marched on regardless -- and caused more than 1-million lost jobs among black farm workers.

Now a new study by the Centre for Development and Enterprise has confirmed that the entire "land reform" programme has been a sham from the start: namelythat most black South Africans do not even want to farm.

* But they do want jobs, houses and effective services in urban areas, according to a new study by the Centre for Development and Enterprise.

"Urban housing reform" next?

What will be next -- will all Afrikaners now also be ethnically-cleansed from their urban homes, this time under the guise of "city housing reform"?

* The Xhosa-ruled ANC-regime is already cleansing Afrikaners out of the entire public sector and job market -- exactly as did the Nazis to the Jews in Nazi-Germany and its occupied territories under the Nazis "Neurenberg racial purity laws".
* Under Nazi-rule, Jews also were not allowed to hold jobs in the public or private sector, nor were they allowed to own land or indeed any private property whatsoever, and they could only run a business with a "Aryan co-partner" as a front.
* This is also what is happening to the Afrikaner in South Africa today, under the ANC regime's so-called "black economic empowerment" programme...

Read report here...

* Also see:

ANC's Neurenberg laws are called "Umrabulo"
- from the ANCs own website, we read how Afrikaners are being cleansed from all public life in South Africa:

"Empowerment charters are a site of struggle
While empowerment charters are highly contested terrains, they present new possibilities to enhance empowerment, improve implementation and monitoring, and develop empowerment as a central component of the national transformation agenda, writes Andy Brown.

The imperatives of economic transformation and empowerment as a condition of national liberation have been a fundamental tenet of ANC policy since the time of the Freedom Charter. While the scope of the concept has shifted over time and varying terminology used to describe its elements, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) has evolved as a central component of transformation.

Measures to redress the imbalances of the past are not only moral and political; our economy will not sustain growth while the majority are excluded from meaningful participation in productive activities and while there are high levels of poverty and unemployment. While BEE is not the panacea for transformation and poverty eradication, it can address a number of the challenges confronting us as part of an overall growth and development plan.

Black Economic Empowerment has developed to incorporate a wide range of interventions and strategies, many of which have been implemented by government over the past ten years. These include improving the capacity of our education system, land reform, rural development, small and medium enterprise (SME) support, skills development, access to finance for business, and preferential procurement.

More recently, government has proposed a comprehensive approach within which the private sector should implement BEE. Greater certainty has been given on definitions and measurement indicators, to enable the implementation of company BEE strategies. Sectors have also been encouraged to design transformation charters.

Black Economic Empowerment is therefore aimed at addressing a number of systemic problems in our economy. These include the narrow base and concentrated nature of ownership and control, inadequate investment in skills development, low levels of entrepreneurship, limited investment in underdeveloped areas and high unemployment.

As we learn from its implementation challenges our understanding of BEE will deepen and the policy is likely to continue to evolve. Despite the differing views, debate on BEE is essential to assist in the evolution of the concept. The need for inclusive engagement is particularly evident where charters are concerned.

Many critics, however, appear to have difficulty in appreciating the value creation that protagonists of BEE believe in. On one hand the approach of most companies, either bound by charters or under pressure by procurers of service, is compliance driven. On the other, increasingly vociferous concerns are raised about the narrow base of BEE, questioning how progressive and broad based BEE truly is.


The ANC's Stellenbosch Conference in 2002 resolved to support the broad-based BEE process (see below). These ANC positions directly led to the adoption by government of the Broad-Based BEE Strategy and Broad-Based BEE Act in 2003. Both the strategy and the Act are based on numerous policy discussions and resolutions adopted by the ANC on BEE, as well as the considerations of the BEE Commission (BEECom) report.

Government has defined broad-based BEE as the economic empowerment of all black people including women, workers, youth, people with disabilities and people living in rural areas through diverse but integrated socio-economic strategies. The government's strategy outlines a number of state-led BEE programmes and includes a balanced scorecard, against which enterprises and sectors can design BEE strategies and measure progress made in achieving empowerment. The current version of the scorecard has three core elements:

* Direct empowerment: ownership and control;
* Human resource development; and
* Indirect empowerment: procurement, enterprise development and corporate social investment.

Government has released a draft code of practice, which includes a revised scorecard.

* The new code provides significantly more detail on measurement indicators, weightings and targets.
* As it is finalised, it is hoped that terminology such as direct and indirect empowerment will be discarded as it gives the impression that enterprise development or other residual elements are less directly empowering than ownership.

The Broad Based BEE Act is enabling rather then prescriptive. It provides for the establishment of the BEE Advisory Council, the publishing of codes of practice and the gazetting of transformation charters. The challenge in implementation of the Act is that it does not compel the private sector to set empowerment plans and report on progress. Although said to be the subject of a future code of practice, the absence of a legislated reporting requirement may lessen its impact.

Notably the Act does give substantially more definition to Broad-Based BEE and its objectives. Firmly turning away from a very narrow definition, BEE is understood in its broadest sense as the economic empowerment of all black people through diverse but integrated socio-economic strategies.

Both the strategy and the Act argue that economic growth and empowerment are complementary and related processes and that if we do not implement BEE, "the stability and prosperity of the economy in the future may be undermined". In other words, the inclusion of black people in economic activities is seen as a necessary element of a growth strategy.

The role of the private sector, particularly in relation to the complementary nature of BEE and growth, may not have been sufficiently emphasised. Unless we understand that BEE is fundamental to the development and growth of our economy, businesses will continue to implement it half-heartedly, not appreciating the real value beyond short term gains of compliance and not fully understanding the benefits of implementing all aspects of BEE well in their own companies.

The inability of the private sector to implement BEE in an integrated and holistic manner may restrict the broad-based impact of BEE and hamper its potential to foster growth.

The South African Communist Party (SACP) has recently argued that the language of the Freedom Charter has been replaced by 'black economic empowerment', which according to the SACP is "a clear divergence, if not contradiction". The same document aligns BEE to 'Black Advancement' and the "co-option of the few to a project of deracialised capitalism".

This characterisation misrepresents the role of black business in meaningful advocacy on transformation of the economy and in the development of a BEE policy. Most critics of BEE, while supporting broad based BEE imperatives, seldom draw adequate distinctions between policy, practice and the various role players. The resultant perception that BEE as a policy framework involves only the transaction activities of black people in business and that it therefore results in black enrichment is incorrect and misrepresents the evolution of the concept in ANC and government policy.


In June this year we celebrate 50 years of the Freedom Charter. Will the charters being drafted today match up to the spirit of the Freedom Charter and more importantly, will they have the desired impact on the will of all South Africans to transform our society?

Initially mooted by the Department of Minerals and Energy (DME), the BEE Commission (BEECom) and the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac), transformation charters are negotiated agreements between stakeholders, aimed at driving transformation in the economy.

Charters have added impetus to BEE. They present the possibility of establishing a transformation framework beyond the parameters of how the private sector has implemented BEE to date. Charters provide opportunities to address a range of challenges confronting the economy on a sector-by-sector basis, while enhancing stakeholder commitment.

Characterised by contested views as to how broad-based the charter should be, they are an important site of struggle.

Charters are provided for by the Broad-Based BEE Act. The mining, liquid fuels and financial sectors have already gazetted charters in terms of the Act, while more are expected in transport, property, construction, the accounting and legal professions, health, agriculture, wine, cosmetics, information and communications technology (ICT), advertising and tourism. The experience of the earlier charters is formative and ongoing review is essential. There are some obvious challenges, which need to be addressed to improve on outcomes.

The charters are drafted in the sprit of negotiation; they do contain standards albeit agreed to in a contested environment. Often, those better resourced with time and skills, as well as financial capacity, come out ahead. Hence the imperative of inclusive charter discussions.

Development of charters has been a contentious issue with confusion reigning among black and white business, organised labour and government about who drives and who constitutes negotiating partners. Until recently most have not effectively involved community and organised labour in their drafting.

In the case of the Mining Charter, the Department of Minerals and Energy initially drove the process, bringing in business and labour later on. The consequence of less inclusive development was negative and impacted on the final charter. This is evident in the scorecard, which is more vague in its commitments than would have been desired by government and labour constituencies.

The Financial Sector Charter was led by business in consultation with government, but with limited participation from labour and social partners. The inadequate consultation threatened to undermine the legitimacy of the charter after it was signed. These stakeholders were interested parties in this charter and they had actively driven campaigns to transform the financial sector. They should have been included as negotiating partners. Today, however, they have equal representation in the oversight structure, the Financial Sector Charter Council.

The ICT, transport, tourism, construction and property charters are being driven by steering committees. Government is playing an active role and Nedlac has been briefed on most of these charters.

Charters are not negotiated at Nedlac. However, a minimum requirement is that charters should be tabled at Nedlac, participation invited and a final report sought from Nedlac for submission to the respective minister on conclusion of a charter, as is done with significant legislation or policy.

Organised labour and community representatives have been invited to participate as negotiating partners in the transport, construction and property charters. The ICT charter steering committee was recently reconstituted to ensure better representation of all stakeholders. Black business is participating in most of the charters through chambers and professional bodies.

While it is not always easy to involve everyone, the inclusion of any stakeholder who is affected by a sector, who would sign a charter and who could implement a charter, should be sought. The absence of representative, inclusive and empowered stakeholder participation in negotiations compromises the potential impact of charters and limits their broad-based scope.


Charters often encompass diverse and large sectors, where the nature and the varying types of firms within it necessitate establishing a common threshold or industry mean on which to set targets. While transformation is built in, the mechanisms don't always capture the interests of all stakeholders. Similarly, the scope and content of charters is difficult to define and its broad-based nature contested.

The indicators of the BEE scorecard - which include ownership, control, employment equity, skills development, targeted procurement, enterprise development and corporate social investment - are always considered. But BEE is about more than narrow change. It must follow that companies and sectors should understand their role and contribution to transformation in the economy and accordingly define relevant indicators for inclusion in the charter.

In line with this, some charters have introduced additional residual indicators. The Mining Charter included beneficiation and mining community development. The ICT charter has incorporated bridging the digital divide and access to ICT. The Financial Sector Charter (FSC) addressed access to transaction banking and savings products and targeted investment in areas of national priority.

In the construction and transport sectors the charters are expected to address job sustainability, workplace conditions and enterprise development. In the property sector stakeholders are discussing the extent to which the charter can include access to and use of property.

The weightings allocated to the various aspects of BEE in some of the more recent charters are indicative of this shift to incorporate broader transformation issues. Many scorecards increasingly place less emphasis on ownership than on the other indicators, with most allocating ownership between 15 and 18 points out of a total of 100 points.

While the recent charter frameworks are attempting to broaden the scope, greater emphasis should be placed on growth generating activities and job creation. For instance, to date few charters effectively address enterprise development, many locating the measurement of performance in enterprise development within procurement. In most competitive economies small and medium-sized enterprises are the lifeblood, creating labour-intensive employment, innovation and increased competition. Adequate solutions in this area should bring large-scale benefits to all. To accommodate all these aspects of BEE, especially in diverse and large sectors, innovation in both qualitative and quantitative instruments and in scorecard design is fundamental.

Most important, given some of the challenges, well constructed reporting, monitoring and review mechanisms are critical. Without reporting, progress can never be evaluated and little is left to implement.


Some believe that charters set defined goals and parameters that are cast in stone and must never change. This is not true. From year to year various aspects of our economic landscape will change and our understanding of particular issues should deepen. These factors could influence the outcomes of charters and we must therefore provide for adjustment of mechanisms by oversight structures when necessary as well as ongoing assessment of the extent to which its implementation meets the intentions and spirit of the charter. In the FSC for example, current research shows that some of the employment equity targets are already easily achievable and the council is debating a review. Such reviews and adaptability of the mechanisms must be recognised.

Perhaps the most difficult challenge confronting the implementation of BEE through charters is the approach of most companies to empowerment obligation s. Few have recognised the benefits of BEE beyond meeting tender or licensing criteria. They therefore do not appreciate the value creating potential of the various components of BEE to an individual business nor the benefits to the economy in general. Charters must become innovative tools to transform workplaces, promote productive environments and grow.

There is vast global experience that demonstrates that economies that increase the participation of people in production and address developmental requirements are more likely to become competitive.

Given the flexible approach to BEE implementation, its success is chiefly dependant on sufficient commitment among companies and industries, champions in government, participation from organised labour and community structures, and effective officials and systems.

There is evidence of growing government success in implementing BEE programmes, including targeted procurement, local economic development and SME support. Examples of private sector progress in implementing BEE, especially through charters, and evidence of real benefits to a wider base would certainly add impetus.

Black Economic Empowerment is firmly located within the national development agenda. The consultative nature, inherent partnership potential and monitoring framework provided by charters adds tremendous impetus to this. While mindsets take time to change, charters provide a framework within which stakeholders can embrace BEE in their sectors and in so doing extend its transformative outcomes.

Andy Brown is a consultant specialising in economic empowerment policy and strategy.

Resolution of the ANC 51st National Conference on Black Economic Empowerment


Despite our efforts, South African society remains characterised by vast racial and gender inequalities in the distribution of and access to productive assets, wealth, income, skills and employment.

Fronting of Afrikaner-owned businesses:

Little progress has been made in achieving greater operational participation and control in the economy by black people, and we have instead seen the rise in so-called 'fronting'.

This limited participation of black people in the economy limits our ability to expand the productive base, sustain economic development, eradicate poverty and contribute to a better life for all, political, social and economic requirement of this country's collective future.

* BEE is defined in its broadest sense as an integrated and coherent socio-economic process located in the context of the RDP. Its benefits must be shared across society, and impact as widely as possible.


That Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is a moral, political, social and economic requirement of this country's collective future.

BEE is defined in its broadest sense as an integrated and coherent socio-economic process located in the context of the RDP. Its benefits must be shared across society, and impact as widely as possible.

That the indicators for success are overall equity in incomes, wealth, increasing levels of black participation - including black women and youth -in the ownership, the extent to which there is operational participation and control of the economy and the extent to which there has been transfer and possession of skills and a retention of assets by the BEE beneficiaries.

To ensure that BEE is broad based, supportive of collective ownership programmes by working people and communities, in the form of collective enterprises and cooperatives, supportive of the creation of an entrepreneurial class, the accumulation of assets by the poor and with a focus on the development of rural economies.

That the ANC will mobilise its membership to mobilise communities in general, and targeted groups in particular - women, institutions working with children, people with disabilities, youth and the elderly - to take up the BEE opportunities and to participate in the debate.

That an essential component of BEE is the involvement of black business people, especially women, in the ownership, control and management of productive capital in all sectors of the economy as well as skilled occupations.

In pursuing this objective the ANC will work with the emergent black capitalist class to ensure joint commitment and practical action to attain increased investment, job creation, employment equity and poverty alleviation.

That the government must intensify its support for small, medium and micro enterprises as a critical component of BEE and ensure that such support reaches them.

That the ANC at all levels must continuously monitor progress in empowering black people, especially black women, youth, children, the elderly and people living with disabilities and ensure government arrives at quantitative targets in order to measure BEE.

That the ANC supports the establishment of a BEE Advisory Council representing all major stakeholders to champion BEE.
To promote the design and implementation of broad based sector or industry empowerment programmes with clearly defined targets, based on agreements between stakeholders.

To enhance the effective use of government's instruments such as licensing, procurement, state asset restructuring and provision of finance, to target BEE.

To ensure government designs an enabling regulatory framework including operational guidelines to promote certainty in the implementation and regulation of BEE.

To ensure that Municipal Integrated Development Plans factor in BEE at community levels and ensure that local government communicates opportunities for BEE.