Something to consider to address the situation:
HOW TO ENSURE SUCCESS OF LEGISLATION AND PROGRAMMES Introduction South Africa has promulgated several progressive and valuable pieces of legislation and programmes since 1994 that favor the emancipation and development of the masses. Legislation like the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA), Skills Development Act (SDA), Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Act (BBBEE), Preferential Procurement Framework Act (PPFA), Employment Equality Act (EE), Labour Relations Act (LRA), and programmes such as the Expanded Public Works Programme (EPWP), Comprehensive Rural Development Programme (CRDP), Accelerated and Shared Growth Initiative (ASGISA), Joint Initiative on Priority Skills Acquisition (JIPSA), to name a few, if enacted and implemented aggressively, could go a long way in achieving the original goals of their intentions. Government has always maintained that in order to deliver quality services and address inequalities of the past, it is crucial that the Private Sector and Citizens work together with Government to create a better life for all. In spite of the enabling legislation, policies and programmes implemented by Government, it is evident that the Private Sector has done very little if anything to contribute to the success of these initiatives. Problem Statement There are several reasons why we are struggling to see the fruits of legislation and programmes: 1. Insufficient or non-existent policing and/or monitoring of the legislation and programmes by implementing government departments. Often, the reason for this situation is that they do not have the capacity or resources to undertake these tasks. 2. Government departments rely on annual (or other periodic) reports from organizations or businesses regarding their own compliance with legislation or programme conditions. In some cases, organizations or businesses send reports to government departments stating their progress in achieving targets that they set for themselves to comply with legislation or programme conditions. Government departments do not have the capacity or resources to verify information supplied by these organizations or businesses. 3. Monitoring or verification functions are outsourced to Private Enterprise entities or other Regulatory Bodies. Where these functions are undertaken by private enterprise, these self same entities are paid by the organizations or businesses that they are monitoring for the services they perform. Since these entities need to compete with other service providers to provide the service to organizations or businesses, they are obliged to produce reports that favor the organization or business they are monitoring. Although they may belong to Regulatory Bodies, the Regulatory Bodies do not inspect or verify the results of the reports they generate. Only when specific complaints are made, do the Regulatory Bodies conduct investigations or verifications. Often, these Regulatory Bodies do not have the capacity or resources to undertake periodic audits or verification of reports or certificates produced by members. 4. In addition to all the above, businesses and organizations almost always include social responsibility commitments when tendering for the delivery of goods and services to Government. Very little or no monitoring of the delivery of these Social Responsibility commitments is done by government departments. Possible interventions 1. Government can ensure that they establish complete units that can perform the policing and/or monitoring functions with all the required resources to conduct adequate inspection and verification of reports received from organizations or businesses or private enterprise entities that conduct these services on behalf of government. This option may require that government invest in training the skills required to perform these tasks or hire qualified experts to undertake these functions. This will result in a cost factor for government, although they would not need to inspect or verify each and every report. They could undertake random verifications but ensure that each and every entity will be inspected at least within reasonable periodic timeframes. 2. Regulatory Bodies must ensure that they acquire the resources to undertake these functions in earnest. Funding for performing regular inspections could be generated from member entities. Even if Regulatory Bodies do conduct regular inspections and verifications of reports generated by private enterprises performing services on behalf of government, government should establish an inspectorate unit to verify, at random, reports or certificates submitted to them regarding compliance with legislation or programme conditions. 3. Government must ensure that all legislation and programmes carry heavy penalties for organizations or businesses or agencies performing services on behalf of government, who contravene legislation or programme conditions. 4. All certificates or reports regarding compliance with legislation or programme conditions must be signed off by the CEO/Managing Director/Owner (or equivalent) and Chairperson of the Board of Directors/Trustees (or equivalent), who shall be jointly legally liable should any report or certificate submitted to government be discovered to be fraudulent or inaccurate. Recommendation 1. All legislation and programmes should/must ensure that there are stringent penalties for entities that do not comply with the specific legislation or programme conditions. 2. Government must reserve the right to investigate or verify any report or certificate presented to government regarding an organization or business’ compliance with legislation or programme conditions. 3. Government must reserve the right to appoint its own service provider to investigate or verify any report or certificate presented to government regarding an organization or business’ compliance with legislation or programme conditions. 4. A special “Inspectorate” unit to perform inspection and verification of reports or certificates to government departments should be established under the Minister in The Presidency - Performance Monitoring and Evaluation & Administration. This “Inspectorate” unit should be all powerful and have all the resources to conduct random inspections and verification of reports or certificates. This “Inspectorate” unit should also ensure that individual government departments and tiers of government establish similar units to perform these same functions and send periodic reports on discrepancies discovered during their own investigations. 5. Organisations or business and the signatories of reports or certificates who are found guilty of providing fraudulent or inaccurate reports or certificates to government should be named and shamed and fined. They should not be allowed to conduct business with any government department or tier of government for a period of 3 years. 6. Private enterprises and their signatories that are found guilty of producing fraudulent or inaccurate reports or certificates should be named and shamed and fined, along with the organisation or business that they performed the service. They should not be allowed to conduct business with any government department or tier of government for a period of 3 years. Their reports or certificates will be not accepted as valid from the date of the fraudulent or inaccurate report or certificate for a period of 3 years. 7. All government departments must ensure that Social Responsibility commitments made by businesses or organizations when tendering for the delivery of goods and services to Government, are delivered. Reports of businesses and organisations that honor and those who do not honor their commitments should be published periodically. 8. Any disputes could be settled by an arbitration body appointed by the Judicial Service Commission. Comradely, Trevor Joseph Mobile: +27 82 946 3877 Fax: +27 86 606 2130 Email: [email protected] From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of morgan phaahla Sent: 28 September 2009 12:30 PM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] Re: The YCLSA commends the Labour department’s firm stance on affirmative action Amandla comrades, Certainly, what remains our quest is to see a significant increase in the numbers of black people who manage, own and control the country’s economy. To a great extent, both Nedbank and Old Mutual do not seem committed to achieving acceptable levels of equity representation on its senior top management — a key transformation measure associated with the management control in terms of the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act. The stripping of powers of the newly appointed CFO of Nedbank Raisibe Morathi and restructured reporting lines of Old Mutual CEO Kuseni Dlamini, it was just the tip of the iceberg. In fact, it provides proof of deep-seated and prejudiced agenda to exclude black people in operational roles. It's high time that we enforce a legal process in an effort to force delinquent companies to achieve acceptable levels of equity representation in order to realise objectives of the B-BBEE. There’s no way we will sit and watch the status quo perpetuating the legacy of the apartheid past. It's commendable that the Department labour continues to name and shame defaulting companies, however it's important that the department be accorded with prosecuting powers to deal specifically with companies that adopt delaying tactics not to comply with affirmation action and BBBEE policies. Otherwise, it will remain a recurring problem impacting on the transformation of our economy to perform below its potential. Action maqabane, transformation is under threat! I remain, Morgan Phaahla Ekurhuleni "Sometimes, if you wear suits for too long, it changes your ideology." - Joe Slovo --- On Mon, 9/28/09, Gugu Ndima <[email protected]> wrote: From: Gugu Ndima <[email protected]> Subject: [YCLSA Discussion] The YCLSA commends the Labour department’s firm stance on affirmative action To: [email protected] Date: Monday, September 28, 2009, 3:47 AM The YCLSA commends the Labour department’s firm stance on affirmative action 28 September 2009 The Young communist League of South Africa (UFasimba) commends the firm stance taken by the Director General of the Labour Department, Jimmy Manyi on affirmative action. Since his appointment, Manyi has asked relevant questions to companies that have previously got away with non-compliance with regards to Affirmative action policies. The recent interrogations include the questioning of why the newly Appointed CFO of Nedbank was stripped of her powers, and now the recent culprits Old Mutual who also restructured Kuseni Dlamini’s reporting lines. There is still a high level of resistance within lily-white corporate South Africa to recognise black candidates as legitimate employees in their companies who are just as competent as their white counter parts. The YCLSA further affirms support for the Department labour to continue to name and shame those that choose to undermine the law and our government. With such an attitude taken up by the Department of labour, transformation is becoming more of a reality for the black majority. We wish the Director-general all the best in this challenging post that he has taken up. Issued by the YCLSA Head office Contact Gugu Ndima (076 783 1516) National spokesperson -- Gugu Ndima +27 76 783 1516 --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
