n Tydskrif vir Geesteswetenskappe - 'n Wending in voorkeurverkryging - : navorsings- en oorsigartikel

Volume 52, Issue 3
  • ISSN : 0041-4751


In hierdie artikel ontleed en evalueer die skrywers nuwe regulasies oor voorkeurverkryging wat deur die Minister van Finansies uitgevaardig en wat in Desember 2011 van krag geword het. Die skrywers gaan van die standpunt uit dat voorkeurverkryging wanneer die staat koop, geregverdig is in die lig van die benadeling van sekere kategorieë mense in die verlede, maar dat regstellende stappe deur die grondwetlike visie van nierassigheid en nieseksisme begrens behoort te word. Die wetgewende agtergrond tot die nuwe regulasies word ontleed aan die hand van die . Die nuwe regulasies verskil van die voorheen geldende regulasies deurdat die bydrae van 'n besigheid tot omvattende swart ekonomiese bemagtiging nou die enigste grond word waarop dit voorkeurpunte kan verdien wanneer dit met die staat sake doen. Dit beteken dat die vermoë van wit vroue om in die mark te kompeteer beslis agteruitgegaan het, omdat hulle nou voorkeurpunte verbeur waarop hulle vroeër aanspraak kon maak. Die rede hiervoor is die rasgedrewe aard van beleidvoering. Dit veroorsaak dat die nuwe regulasies nie aan die nieseksistiese gees van die Grondwet voldoen nie. Benewens die agteruitgang van die posisie van wit vroue word ander gebreke in die betrokke ondergeskikte wetgewing ten opsigte van funksionaliteit en die bevordering van kleinsake uitgelig.

In this article the authors analyse and evaluate new preferential procurement regulations by the South African Minister of Finance that came into force on 7 December 2011. The authors accept that preferential procurement is necessary in the light of past discrimination against certain groups, including women, but maintain that the constitutional vision of non-racism and non-sexism sets limits to affirmative action. This vision was at the core of the struggle for a democratic South Africa. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, is analysed as background to the legislation governing preferential procurement. Section 217 of the Constitution governs state procurement. This provision authorises preferential procurement and lays down the principles of public procurement, namely fairness, equitability, transparency, competitiveness and cost-effectiveness. However, section 9 dealing with equality must also be brought into the equation. In terms of section 9, equality also means the ability to fully enjoy the benefits associated therewith. Equality between sexes and races is crucial. Affirmative action aims to achieve a greater degree of substantive equality in the long term. The Constitutional Court provided guidance in this regard in the 2004 judgement in the case of . The Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act of 2000 provides for the possibility of affirmative action to advance or promote persons that were discriminated against on the grounds of race, sex and disability. However, in terms of the new regulations the preference points that a bidder may gain are calculated solely by utilising the score that the bidder achieves in terms of another law, namely the Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment Act of 2003 and its Codes of Good Practice. The article sets out the fundamentals of the Codes of Good Practice and how the scores of entities are calculated and then transcribed into preference points in terms of the regulations under consideration. The preference points (with maxima of 10 or 20 as the case may be) are utilised in formulae to level the playing field in government procurement. The new method to calculate preference points means that white women as a group are in a worse position than before. In the past they could earn preference points because of their sex when bidding for contracts. Their ability to compete in the market has now been reduced. The authors argue that sufficient reasons exist to still protect or advance white women. One reason is the under-representation of women in the higher echelons of the labour market. The constitutional project is set back when attempts to achieve racial equality function to the detriment of the non-sexist vision of the Constitution. Ironically white men may have gained ground in comparison to white women. Other problems with the new regulations are also identified in the article. The functionality of bids, so necessary in the light of sections 217 and 195(2) of the Constitution is relegated to a mere necessary condition in the evaluation of bids. In this regard the authors are of the opinion that the Minister of Finance did not give full effect to the judgement in the case 2011. The tables translating BBBEE scores into preference points are also SMME unfriendly and are not in accordance with the way in which BBBEE scores are calculated in the Codes. For white women and white disabled people preferential procurement in South Africa has taken a turn for the worse. The concern is that other groups might also be excluded from the fruits of preferential procurement in future. The article concludes by indicating two topics for further research: namely the reasons underlying the way the regulations were formulated and the relationship between formal and substantive equality in affirmative action.

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


Article metrics loading...


This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error