Scrap NEEEF, says private sector
The resounding sentiment from targeted stakeholder discussions on the New Equitable Economic Empowerment Bill was that the proposed legislation should be scrapped because it is not only an expensive undertaking but will scare off potential international investors.
Stakeholders meeting in Windhoek last week felt the proposed bill, especially in its current format, is not the right vehicle to bring about the stated intent of correcting economic inequalities created by past discriminatory laws and practices.
Comments were also made that such a bill would take five to 10 years before it is practicably implementable.
The deadline for comments is 11 August, after which the Law Reform and Development Commission (LRDC) will prepare a report to Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila before the end of this month. It is anticipated that it will be tabled in parliament as early as September.
The general consensus at last week’s discussion was that the bill is more restrictive than the black economic empowerment legislation in South Africa, where it has not been successful. Participants instead proposed that the focus be shifted to the Namibianisation of the economy.
They felt that the bill would be more palatable if all its pillars, including ownership and management, are voluntary with an incentive-based implementation.
Concerns were expressed that many white-owned companies would not be able to comply with the bill because they do not have enough resources, particularly small sole proprietors, trusts or family businesses, and that there are not enough skilled workers employed at their establishments.
A proposed solution was that only businesses above a certain annual income, and employing a certain number of workers, should be required to comply with the bill.
Some discussants felt that small enterprises should be exempted and that implementation should start with big corporations with, for example, an asset base of more than N$50 million and turnover of more than N$100 million per year.
Moreover, it was suggested that listed companies be exempted because they do not have control over their shareholding, while 15% to 35% of those companies listed on the Namibian Stock Exchange (NSX) already belong to previously disadvantaged persons (PDPs).
Others felt state-owned enterprises and those “serious” about training should also be exempted.
AGRI CONCERNS
The Namibia Agricultural Union (NAU) proposed that commercial farming and hunting be altogether excluded from the policy framework NEEEF and subsequent NEEEB because the transformational process to redress the past is since 1995 included in the Agricultural Commercial Land Reform Act.
This Act stipulates that farmers must pay land tax and that farms may not be sold on the open market before being offered to the government, while farming remains a high-risk business.
The NAU commented that it is unfortunate that the policy framework, NEEEF, with its key objectives such as poverty alleviation and greater equality, does not address principles and strategies to ensure an increase in economic activities and sustainable income streams from the bottom up.
It said this should have been the core purpose of NEEEF, especially focusing on rural communities trying to make a living from agricultural activities, which are in need of support and development in their whole value chain.
“Funds being made available should as a matter of priority first be utilised for this purpose instead of ownership schemes requiring billions of Namibian dollars,” the NAU said.
CONSTRUCTION
In its submission to the LRCD the Construction Industries Federation of Namibia (CIF) stated that empowerment initiatives should not lead to distinctions based on race as it would negatively impact race relations in the country.
Instead, it proposed, poor Namibians, regardless of racial origins, should benefit through increased focus and monitoring of existing empowerment efforts and that any new initiative be aligned with the overarching development goals.
CIF proposed that small to medium-sized enterprises should get better access to finance, training and support in respect of marketing to be geared to secure contracts in the industry.
One comment was that the government had allowed foreign-owned entities to dominate particularly the construction industry, which prevented local business from growing and creating jobs.
Another observation was that the mostly unemployed youth, those in most urgent need of training and business opportunities, do not appear to be classified as PDPs.
CATHERINE SASMAN
Stakeholders meeting in Windhoek last week felt the proposed bill, especially in its current format, is not the right vehicle to bring about the stated intent of correcting economic inequalities created by past discriminatory laws and practices.
Comments were also made that such a bill would take five to 10 years before it is practicably implementable.
The deadline for comments is 11 August, after which the Law Reform and Development Commission (LRDC) will prepare a report to Prime Minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila before the end of this month. It is anticipated that it will be tabled in parliament as early as September.
The general consensus at last week’s discussion was that the bill is more restrictive than the black economic empowerment legislation in South Africa, where it has not been successful. Participants instead proposed that the focus be shifted to the Namibianisation of the economy.
They felt that the bill would be more palatable if all its pillars, including ownership and management, are voluntary with an incentive-based implementation.
Concerns were expressed that many white-owned companies would not be able to comply with the bill because they do not have enough resources, particularly small sole proprietors, trusts or family businesses, and that there are not enough skilled workers employed at their establishments.
A proposed solution was that only businesses above a certain annual income, and employing a certain number of workers, should be required to comply with the bill.
Some discussants felt that small enterprises should be exempted and that implementation should start with big corporations with, for example, an asset base of more than N$50 million and turnover of more than N$100 million per year.
Moreover, it was suggested that listed companies be exempted because they do not have control over their shareholding, while 15% to 35% of those companies listed on the Namibian Stock Exchange (NSX) already belong to previously disadvantaged persons (PDPs).
Others felt state-owned enterprises and those “serious” about training should also be exempted.
AGRI CONCERNS
The Namibia Agricultural Union (NAU) proposed that commercial farming and hunting be altogether excluded from the policy framework NEEEF and subsequent NEEEB because the transformational process to redress the past is since 1995 included in the Agricultural Commercial Land Reform Act.
This Act stipulates that farmers must pay land tax and that farms may not be sold on the open market before being offered to the government, while farming remains a high-risk business.
The NAU commented that it is unfortunate that the policy framework, NEEEF, with its key objectives such as poverty alleviation and greater equality, does not address principles and strategies to ensure an increase in economic activities and sustainable income streams from the bottom up.
It said this should have been the core purpose of NEEEF, especially focusing on rural communities trying to make a living from agricultural activities, which are in need of support and development in their whole value chain.
“Funds being made available should as a matter of priority first be utilised for this purpose instead of ownership schemes requiring billions of Namibian dollars,” the NAU said.
CONSTRUCTION
In its submission to the LRCD the Construction Industries Federation of Namibia (CIF) stated that empowerment initiatives should not lead to distinctions based on race as it would negatively impact race relations in the country.
Instead, it proposed, poor Namibians, regardless of racial origins, should benefit through increased focus and monitoring of existing empowerment efforts and that any new initiative be aligned with the overarching development goals.
CIF proposed that small to medium-sized enterprises should get better access to finance, training and support in respect of marketing to be geared to secure contracts in the industry.
One comment was that the government had allowed foreign-owned entities to dominate particularly the construction industry, which prevented local business from growing and creating jobs.
Another observation was that the mostly unemployed youth, those in most urgent need of training and business opportunities, do not appear to be classified as PDPs.
CATHERINE SASMAN
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article