Piet le Roux, CEO of Sakeliga, is pressing Agriculture Minister John Steenhuisen to withdraw Agri-BEE regulations affecting agricultural imports and exports. Leroux argues that applying BEE criteria in trade agreements penalises non-BEE farmers and violates international agreements, urging clarity from the government on its stance.
Sign up for your early morning brew of the BizNews Insider to keep you up to speed with the content that matters. The newsletter will land in your inbox at 5:30am weekdays. Register here.
Watch here
Listen here
Edited transcript of the interview ___STEADY_PAYWALL___
00:07
Alec Hogg: This is a conversation with Piet le Roux, who is the Chief Executive of Sakeliga. Piet, you guys were on the front page of a report yesterday, and this comes after you are now urging, or putting pressure on at the very least, the new Agriculture Minister, John Steenhuisen, to withdraw BEE plans for agricultural imports and exports. In a nutshell, tell us what is irritating you so much.
00:36
Piet le Roux: Well, Alec, we’re not that angry. We’re pretty calm. We just let John know in a letter that the Agri-BEE regulations published by Director General
00:07
Alec Hogg: This is a conversation with Piet le Roux, who is the Chief Executive of Sakeliga. Piet, you guys were on the front page of a report yesterday, and this comes after you are now urging, or putting pressure on at the very least, the new Agriculture Minister, John Steenhuisen, to withdraw BEE plans for agricultural imports and exports. In a nutshell, tell us what is irritating you so much.
00:36
Piet le Roux: Well, Alec, we’re not that angry. We’re pretty calm. We just let John know in a letter that the Agri-BEE regulations published by Director General Mooketsa Ramasodi are not acceptable. They predate his term as minister, but they are nevertheless still unacceptable. John has informed us that he was not aware of the regulations now published by his DG and he’s asked his DG for a briefing. We’ll see about that. But we find it unacceptable that export and import quotas are made subject to BEE criteria. This is now applied to imports and exports to the UK, Ireland, and the European Union, as well as imports from World Trade Organization countries. This concerns a meaningful minority of agricultural imports and exports, up to 200 million litres of wine and up to 500,000 tons of agricultural produce. It’s not about permission to export or import, but about reduced duty tariffs.
02:02
Alec Hogg: So you’re effectively putting penalties on non-BEE farmers. Why do you call it penalties?
02:31
Piet le Roux: Clearly, there is a group that wants to incentivize farmers to incorporate more BEE into their operations. This looks like they’re incentivising them by reducing tariffs, not necessarily increasing tariffs for those who don’t have it. However, what is happening is an abuse of international trade agreements under the World Trade Organization’s Malachese Agreement and the EU Economic Partnership Agreements with the EU and the UK, including Northern Ireland. These agreements have been in place for several years and their purpose is to reduce barriers to trade by lowering import and export tariffs. There’s no intention in these treaties for one country to impose additional criteria and abuse its administrative obligations.
03:28
Piet le Roux: I call it a penalty because that is what it is. It is forcing farmers who don’t comply with BEE to pay an extra three rand per bottle of exported wine. On 200 million litres of wine, if those were all in bottles, that would amount to several hundred million rands in penalties on farmers who don’t engage with BEE. That’s why I call it a penalty. You can call it an incentive, but the government is making one group of people pay for this and favouring another, abusing a trade agreement in the process.
03:58
Alec Hogg: The concerning aspect is that these ideas were promulgated on the 3rd, 4th, and 7th of October, well into the government of national unity. They were issued by the Director General. We’ve heard a lot about the GNU being great, that we can move forward, but if the ministers and the directors general are on different pages, it could hurt us in the long run. Are you seeing it that way?
04:28
Piet le Roux: Yes, Mr. Steenhuisen informed us that he was not aware of this and he seems to find the issuance of these regulations unacceptable. So we’ll have to see how he deals with it. But Alec, this is completely to be expected. There are several million employees in this government and parastatal environment, and they have not changed with the change of ministers. Just in Johannesburg alone, there are around 70,000 employees on the municipalities’ books. Changing the conduct of this machine called the state by changing a few senior positions is unlikely to result in significant improvements in the short run. The ministers in this new government must try their best, but we must be circumspect about our expectations regarding how much can be achieved.
05:43
Piet le Roux: The Director General in agriculture was part of the design of these regulations from the beginning. He was part of the group that established this. It’s unlikely that just because his minister has changed, he and his whole department will suddenly stop doing these unlawful things and stop believing that BEE is a solution to problems in South Africa. I think they’re as convinced as ever of what they’re doing. There will be big tension between these new ministers and their DGs and staff. Our letter was firm; we need to say it like it is. We will apply pressure at the appropriate juncture, which is the minister, and we must ask him to take action. Depending on his actions, we will either express our approval or continue with further steps.
06:41
Alec Hogg: Who has the power here?
06:41
Piet le Roux: This time, the initiative seems to have been in the hands of the DG. We’ve asked the minister to retract these regulations. We’ll have to wait and see. A few weeks or months from now, we may know who really has the power. On paper, it’s the minister, but we’ll see how it unfolds.
07:08
Piet le Roux: There are official plans in the department called their Agri-BEE plan and Agri-BEE enforcement guidelines. These have existed for between five and eight years and were developed under Thoko Didiza and even her predecessor. We exposed these last year after obtaining them through a PAIA request. They were confidential and hidden within the department, not published on the department’s website, even though they are documents of public interest.
07:37
Piet le Roux: These plans are explicit in that the intention of the department is to make all permits for import and export, or licenses like water licenses, and all phytosanitary services subject to BEE criteria. Initially, this is meant to be a penalization, but over time it could become an absolute criterion for allowing or disallowing interactions between government and the agricultural sector. This is explicit in their plans. I’m not interpreting their meaning; I’m stating what they are saying. Our letter to John states our objections to these recent regulations, and we invite him to retract them or meet with us. The larger problem is that the government’s official plans are still in place, and we require those plans to be withdrawn as well.
08:56
Piet le Roux: We’ve put a tough challenge to John Steenhuisen, but it’s appropriate. We must take this opportunity with a DA minister to see whether BEE will stay in place. We’ll find out in the next few months.
09:26
Alec Hogg: Is this not putting the whole government of national unity at risk? There is a National Democratic Revolution program in place, as we’ve heard from Anthea Jeffrey at the IRR, who has even written a book on it. For this to be implemented, it needs approval not just from the ANC, but from its partner, in this case, the Democratic Alliance. What you’re doing could force the issue a bit early in their trust-building relationship. Do you not see it that way?
09:48
Piet le Roux: No, I think we must be careful of hoping for the best within a black box. We can’t just sit back and wait for something magical to happen while accepting whatever comes out. It’s appropriate to require ministries and the government, whether the DA is involved or not, to act lawfully and to ensure that participation in the economy is not subject to race criteria.
10:15
Piet le Roux: Even if someone argues that a DA minister must keep some measure of BEE in place because he has no choice, then let’s clarify what those measures are. This will allow Sakeliga, you, and your listeners, as well as society, to understand the rules of the game. If the government of national unity means BEE stays in place, then let’s know that. From our side, we’re treating this government the same as we would treat any other government. Just because it’s called the government of national unity does not change our expectations.
11:09
Piet le Roux: So we are not angry about it, but we do want to know what’s going on. In other words, hope is not a strategy. Give me the facts.
12:07
Alec Hogg: Thank you, Piet le Roux, Chief Executive of Sakeliga, which is a very powerful voice for business.
Read also:
