How does the previously disadvantaged spend a million dollars?
A few have multiplied opportunities, building companies that employ people
Where does the previously disadvantaged entrepreneur-cum-businessperson put their millions, when most do neither run functioning companies nor create jobs or wealth?
For 35 years, the government has invested hundreds of millions in tenders, loans, and contracts aimed at empowering black Namibians.
And yet, why do many still cry foul when the government closes the taps, as former finance minister Calle Schlettwein did in 2015, and again now with the health minister’s latest measures?
Looking back, what the government has done over the past 35 years mirrors what colonial administrations did more than a century ago.
Yet most of the companies founded back then are still operating, even expanding under the stewardship of the founders’ descendants or executives.
By contrast, a “previously disadvantaged” person’s business collapses within days of their death, or starts to decline the moment they fall ill?
Too often, empowerment ends in squandered fortunes, collapsed projects, and communities left no better than before.
In the parable of the talents, some servants multiplied what they were entrusted with, while one buried his gift and returned nothing.
Namibia’s empowerment story echoes that lesson. A few have multiplied opportunities, building companies that employ and add value. But many others have buried theirs in consumption, leaving no wealth behind.
Entrenched inequality
The Erongo/Ernecon case is a stark reminder: men who once handled millions now plead for bail amounts under N$100 000. What does the “previously disadvantaged” person do with a million dollars? Too often, the answer is not investment, but waste.
“So until when?” asks Swapo’s Windhoek East regional council candidate Flip De Bruyn.
He says Namibia must reform its Black Economic Empowerment framework because, in 1990, race was the clear marker of exclusion.
By 2030 or even 2090, he argues, the definition will need to evolve.
“Will it always hinge on skin colour, or must it evolve to include education, geography, and poverty in all its forms? If the definition is never revised, loopholes will continue to feed the same well-connected elite, while the poor remain poor,” he said.
The system meant to redistribute wealth has instead entrenched inequality.
Namibia has created some black millionaires, but how many of them came from Rundu, Katima or Okakarara? Most emerged from Windhoek’s political and business circles.
Meanwhile, rural youth remain jobless, factories unopened, and opportunities unrealised.
Reimagined model
Yet the solution is not to abandon empowerment. Namibia remains scarred by landlessness, unemployment and inequality.
De Bruyn argues that what is needed is a reimagined model that links empowerment to measurable outcomes: jobs created, factories built, skills transferred, and communities uplifted—not another cycle of tenders that collapse under inexperience or greed.
“While the legacy of apartheid must always be acknowledged, the country cannot continue to measure disadvantage solely on the basis of race,” he said.
Political analyst Ndumba Kamwanyah also noted that Namibia lacks an official BEE policy like South Africa, instead relying on the Affirmative Action Act and the proposed but never enacted National Equitable Economic Empowerment Framework (NEEEF).
“These policies have helped create some jobs and supported a small number of previously disadvantaged individuals to enter business and leadership positions. However, the broader impact on economic development and wealth distribution has been limited,” he said.
Swapo veteran Helmut Angula agreed that empowerment was often undermined by poor capacity.
“That led to the failure of some projects because the beneficiaries were not capable,” he said.
The lesson from the parable of the talents remains relevant: the actual value of empowerment lies not in how much is given, but in what is produced.
Until when will Namibia continue burying its abilities?
For 35 years, the government has invested hundreds of millions in tenders, loans, and contracts aimed at empowering black Namibians.
And yet, why do many still cry foul when the government closes the taps, as former finance minister Calle Schlettwein did in 2015, and again now with the health minister’s latest measures?
Looking back, what the government has done over the past 35 years mirrors what colonial administrations did more than a century ago.
Yet most of the companies founded back then are still operating, even expanding under the stewardship of the founders’ descendants or executives.
By contrast, a “previously disadvantaged” person’s business collapses within days of their death, or starts to decline the moment they fall ill?
Too often, empowerment ends in squandered fortunes, collapsed projects, and communities left no better than before.
In the parable of the talents, some servants multiplied what they were entrusted with, while one buried his gift and returned nothing.
Namibia’s empowerment story echoes that lesson. A few have multiplied opportunities, building companies that employ and add value. But many others have buried theirs in consumption, leaving no wealth behind.
Entrenched inequality
The Erongo/Ernecon case is a stark reminder: men who once handled millions now plead for bail amounts under N$100 000. What does the “previously disadvantaged” person do with a million dollars? Too often, the answer is not investment, but waste.
“So until when?” asks Swapo’s Windhoek East regional council candidate Flip De Bruyn.
He says Namibia must reform its Black Economic Empowerment framework because, in 1990, race was the clear marker of exclusion.
By 2030 or even 2090, he argues, the definition will need to evolve.
“Will it always hinge on skin colour, or must it evolve to include education, geography, and poverty in all its forms? If the definition is never revised, loopholes will continue to feed the same well-connected elite, while the poor remain poor,” he said.
The system meant to redistribute wealth has instead entrenched inequality.
Namibia has created some black millionaires, but how many of them came from Rundu, Katima or Okakarara? Most emerged from Windhoek’s political and business circles.
Meanwhile, rural youth remain jobless, factories unopened, and opportunities unrealised.
Reimagined model
Yet the solution is not to abandon empowerment. Namibia remains scarred by landlessness, unemployment and inequality.
De Bruyn argues that what is needed is a reimagined model that links empowerment to measurable outcomes: jobs created, factories built, skills transferred, and communities uplifted—not another cycle of tenders that collapse under inexperience or greed.
“While the legacy of apartheid must always be acknowledged, the country cannot continue to measure disadvantage solely on the basis of race,” he said.
Political analyst Ndumba Kamwanyah also noted that Namibia lacks an official BEE policy like South Africa, instead relying on the Affirmative Action Act and the proposed but never enacted National Equitable Economic Empowerment Framework (NEEEF).
“These policies have helped create some jobs and supported a small number of previously disadvantaged individuals to enter business and leadership positions. However, the broader impact on economic development and wealth distribution has been limited,” he said.
Swapo veteran Helmut Angula agreed that empowerment was often undermined by poor capacity.
“That led to the failure of some projects because the beneficiaries were not capable,” he said.
The lesson from the parable of the talents remains relevant: the actual value of empowerment lies not in how much is given, but in what is produced.
Until when will Namibia continue burying its abilities?
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article