Since the recent oval office debacle, the conversation around Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) has reached a new crescendo. Those opposed to the policy seemed to have found a new sense of courage to oppose it. But like any other policy, it makes sense to assess its implementation—what has worked and what hasn’t.
The reality is that given the gross exclusion of black people from economic gain and benefit, the purpose for which BEE was established is far from being achieved. The reasons for this are many but they have nothing to do with the validity or necessity of the policy itself.
The crafters of BEE such as our own President Cyril Ramaphosa—who is one of its most prominent beneficiaries—identified key areas where the policy must better integrate the previously disadvantaged into the economic mainstream. Yet, 20 years after BEE was introduced, its core pillars—ownership, management control, employment equity, and preferential procurement—show limited progress. The Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) offers the clearest indicator yet: ownership patterns in the economy have barely shifted.
Those who want BEE expunged ironically use this same statistic to bemoan the lack of impact of the policy. The reality is these statistics, along with painful economic indicators such as unemployment and inequality show that there is still a dire need for intervention in redress and redistribution of wealth. The ownership patterns of the means of production are as good as we haven’t been freed.
In this edition of BBQ Magazine, various voices in politics and business tackle the big question about the future of BEE. Join the conversation as we march towards a national dialogue and make your voice heard on this crucial topic.
Sincerely
Prof JJ Tabane
Editor
No article or any part of any article may be reproduced without the prior written permission of the publishers. The information provided and opinions expressed in this publication are provided in good faith, but do not necessarily represent the opinions of this publication, the publisher or the editor. Neither this magazine, the publisher or the editor can be held legally liable in any way for damages of any kind whatsoever arising directly or indirectly from any facts or information provided or omitted in these pages or from any statements made or withheld by this publication.
