It is now
official, coming directly from the Deputy State President. South African State-owned companies are
properly managed and so will not need to be privatised. The glib statement was made by Cyril Ramaphosa
during a question and answer television discussion which included a large share
of the top brass of the ANC. The fact
that there were no gasps of astonishment from the ANC leadership, no cries of ‘Liar!’
entitles one to believe that those leaders all subscribe to the view of
Ramaphosa, supposedly an experienced, competent businessman, that the
State-owned companies are in fine fettle.
An item on
the news today mentioned that Citibank has withdrawn a R250 million facility previously
granted to South African Airways, on the ground that the risk of collapse of
that State-owned company and default on the loan was too high. The suggestion was made that the facility
would be reinstated if a Government guarantee were to be made available. A recent letter of the Legal Advisor of SAA
stated unequivocally that the company was de facto insolvent and trading illegally
in an insolvent condition. SAA recently
made a spirited attempt to subvert the directions of the Treasury to honour an
agreement to lease five Airbus aircraft from Airbus, a deal struck when SAA
found that it could not pay for the purchase of ten aircraft, preferring to lease
them through a local company. The
proposed lease would have cost SAA significantly more, and it would have
provided those involved with a very lucrative source of corrupt funds, and yet
the Chair of SAA, rumoured to be a close friend of Jacob Zuma (possibly even to
have had a child by him) remains in office, enforcing a lunatic and illegal
policy of demanding a 30% share in the companies that do business with the
airline. That policy alone acts to push
up the operating costs of SAA dramatically.
Another
news item referred to the fact that PetroSA, another ‘well-managed State-owned
corporation, was in a similar position after having cost the country (I.e. the
taxpayers, not the ANC) about R1,5 billion in the past two years, with more to
come.
Recent
experience with the South African Post Office, with a registered letter posted
from Midrand to Pretoria, a distance of less than 50 kilometres, taking more
than five weeks for delivery, while the delivery service to a post-box in the
Bryanston Post Office was unaccountably suspended for more than three months,
after a year in which postal strikes interrupted service for about eight weeks,
all with no notification to the customers.
Spoornet,
which provides (?) essential rail services to mines, refineries, forestries and
agriculture, undertook to provide a specified number of rail trucks per week to
a mine, exporting a valuable bulk, semi-processed mineral to Durban
Harbour. When the first train was called
up in accordance with the agreement with Spoornet, it simply failed to arrive,
with no explanation. Many telephone
calls were made to track down the reason for the failure, with no result. Eventually, a Director of the company
discussed the matter with his partner and close confidant, a Black advocate,
who informed him that the matter could be speedily resolved by payment of a fee
to the advocate of R300 000 (approximately four days demurrage on the
freighter waiting to be loaded in Durban Harbour. Payment was made and the train arrived within
three hours. Subsequently, the advocate
advised that the delay in service was the result of the mine company not
employing a Black company to arrange the delivery of the trains. Seeing the obvious illegal blackmail, the mine
employed such a company, and the trains ran smoothly for a few deliveries, and
then stopped again, unaccountably and without notification. After a day spent walking the corridors of
Spoornet Head Office in an attempt to find a responsible Manager to resolve the
impasse (one of the people interviewed who referred the two Directors of the
mining company to someone else, and they were referred again to him after seven
hours of fruitless effort, was asked by one of the Directors what work he
did. The reply? “I hold down a position.”) the two Directors
barged into a meeting of the General Manager of Spoornet with several Heads of
Departments and demanded to know the reason for the refusal of service. The reason was given the following day. The Black company arranging the service had failed
to pay an amount to Spoornet. After
proving that the company had met every obligation to Spoornet and to the Black
company, the General Manager was adamant.
The mine had to pay an amount of R260 000 to settle the debt of the
Black company to Spoornet. Payment was
made under protest, and the service resumed.
A visit to the Black company to resolve the problem and recover the
money revealed that the three Directors of that company had each purchased a
new 7 Series BMW. Numerous companies,
employing tens of thousands of workers, have withdrawn from South Africa as a
result of the high cost, unreliable service and outright dishonesty they have
experienced in their dealings with Spoornet.
Of course,
the prime example of a well-managed State-owned corporation is Eskom, which has
single-handedly brought about a significant share of the decline in the GPD of
the country by its inability to provide a reliable supply of electricity to
industry. The very high cost of that
electricity has had effects that are more long-term in character, driving away
companies that might have invested in new industrial capacity. In case there is a statement from the ANC
that we don’t really need investors from the USA or Europe (no longer favoured
sources of investment, in view of the country’s developing rapprochement with
Russia and China), many of those investors are South Africans, who would have
liked nothing better than to invest in a way that will benefit their homeland,
if only there was a Government they could trust, managed by politicians who
they could believe to speak the truth!
If Cyril
Ramaphosa can claim that these examples of State-owned corporations are well
managed, one must have strong doubts about his ability to manage the country,
and one must further take extreme care to check the accuracy and veracity of
any statement he must make in the future.
On the evidence of this statement alone, Ramaphosa has disqualified
himself from any future position of trust in the Government of South Africa, as
much as his boss did when his indiscretions were revealed in their nakedness!
No comments:
Post a Comment