Mostly dazed and confused

So the FSB released a media statement last week about the RE exams. The statistics are telling. (Go to the media releases section of the FSB to see the details). I then started receiving emails and calls about what happens after 30 June. 

It appears that 33% of registered FSPs still need to write RE1 exams and 41% still need to write the RE 5 exams.

It also appears that there may be a case to be made to approach the Public Protector to determine whether the FSB can in fact force registered advisors to write the exams and whether they can stop them from practicing and earning a livelihood, should they decide not to write the exam.

Take the poll. Tell your colleagues about the poll. 

So here's a poll...

http://poll.pollcode.com/7557

I'm wondering whether I have any words left in me to write a blog; much like my thoughts as I started kilometre #34 on the 2Oceans marathon last weekend... wondering if my glut would let me finish my race.

I have words and they are driven by a tweet I saw earlier today where someone was asking how they could learn to write the way in which two of their favourite reporters/columnists write. That got me thinking. Does writing 'school' really work? Does it take a special type of person to become a writer, or is it really all about passion, confidence and the ability to process your thoughts in an orderly manner? 

OK, now don't log off. This isn't a lecture on writing. It’s more about how important training and exercise and having a programme is in anything that you do. I found that I like to train (running) to a programme. Does that make me a robot? Possibly. Can I train to be a writer? Probably. Do I have to exercise my craft? Definitely. However, if you don’t have passion, no amount of training is going to help you enjoy what you are doing.

I’ve developed a passion for running. And no, it’s got nothing to do with the camaraderie of running and socialising with other runners during a gruelling challenge.

In fact, I’m a loner. I don’t compete against others; I compete against the race route, the up-hills and downhills, the flat sections and those sneaky little cambered roads. That other people happen to pass me on the way to the finish is immaterial. That I may pass some people on the way to the finishing clock is also irrelevant. It’s about the route and me. One-on-one.

This might sound strange, given that many runners say that the spectators on difficult sections of any race route provide an “upper” with their cheering. I find it distracting, especially when I’m in pain. I want to work through my pain in private.

Back to the training. Having said that I like to be alone with a race route, I realized today how important it is to run socially with a group. I belong to a club, enjoy their time trials, dutifully man water points during our race, and more recently I have seen the benefit of participating in club runs.

It’s during these club runs that the war stories are shared and lessons imparted. Invaluable lessons from seasoned campaigners, who have been there, done that (several times), and are happy to provide guidance to all and sundry, who are on the run. I have realized how important that advice is. You can’t get it anywhere else, except on a social or club run with a group.

So perhaps I’m not a loner after all? Let me know when you see me at the next race…

So SA Finance minister Pravin Gordan is challenging the World Bank to think about changing the tradition of automatically giving the World Bank presidency to an American or a European. He suggests that the top job should be open to all nationalities. But has he received any support from business leaders in South Africa?

The South African Chamber of Commerce and Industry (SACCI) agrees with the minister in that World Bank should cast its net wider. “While we don’t have an official position on the call by the finance minister, it makes sense to look at all nationalities. The focus of the bank is more on developing nations and having a leader from those regions makes sense as they have a sense and a background of the issues.”

Meanwhile a business leader tells me: “While I agree with Gordhan, the chances of a developing world appointment are zero. Remember the IMF announcement last year, when Legarde was appointed.”

Another business leader suggests that the World Bank Convention is clear on who can lead the Bank. No amount of lobbying will change that. It’s a waste of time.”

A local market trader I spoke too, takes a more pragmatic view: “The bank should find the best candidate. It shouldn’t matter where they’re from.

And the final word to a commentator: “The gentlemanly agreement between US & Euroland should come to an end, but they won’t give up the power.”

The lesson here: He who controls the purse strings, controls…

The ining indaba is underway in Cape Town with government ministers clambering over themselves to tell delegates that nationalisation is not government policy. The statements come just days after the ANC announces that the main voice pushing the nationalisation debate, ANCYL president Julius Malema, has essentially been silenced by the ANC.

Mineral resources minister Susan Shabangu was at her best as was national planning minister Trevor Manuel talking taxes and other strategies.

The South African Students Congress - SASCO (affiliated to the ANC) suggested that the two ministers shouldn’t have spoken out on resource nationalisation until the report had been discussed within ANC structures.

One local newspaper this morning carried the draft 30-page executive summary of the recently modified and long-awaited ANC report, which will only be released after the indaba. The newspaper subsequently pulled it from the site, but not before many of its readers had downloaded the document.

The national union of mine workers (NUM) are not excited because nothing mentioned about health & safety, or addressing the transformation issue.

NUM went so far as to call it a talk shop: Well at around $2000 per head to attend, there are 7000 delegates representing 1200 international companies.

A little while ago we were hearing that the networking lounge was full and 2 exclusive dinners tonight are fully subscribed - one on a wine farm and the other at a prestigious yacht club. Tonight also sees the launch of a junior miner network initiative.

SOTN address Thursday evening SA time (19h00): 90 minutes

A trader suggests that the address will focus on jobs & infrastructure but wonders at what point action will follow the words. This is a commonly held view among a segment of the population.

While the high unemployment levels are a concern some commentators are suggesting that the large number of people of social grants is a greater concern. One economist says that South Africa has the highest percentage of people on social grants worldwide.

This SOTN is a challenging one because its less than 10 months to the big ANC elective conference in December in Mangaung. The president and his advisors will have that in the back of their minds.

SACCI - SA Chamber of Commerce & industry wants to hear about:

* Job creation – Youth & to stimulate economic activity.

* Reduce red tape for business and SMEs

* Reduce the cost of doing business in SA

* General business support, promotion initiatives and plans to ease the access to finance for SMEs

* Plans to improve the education system & facilitate greater access to skills for business. 

* Improved crime & corruption prevention strategies, especially regarding crimes against businesses.

* Reassurance to foreign and domestic investors on economic stability specifically relating to concerns on nationalization

* The status of the National Development Plan (NDP) and its implementation program.  This is being debated separately at a round table event tomorrow evening.

In one of the more entertaining angles, there was talk of introducing conscription as a means of creating employment by a columnist in one of our local papers, which was promptly shot down.

On a slightly different note: 2 digital agencies will be monitoring sentiment to the address – live - as people use social networks to comment on the content and the president’s performance. The results will be featured live on various websites. www.brandseye.co.za 

In other news…

SACCI business confidence index dipped to 97.1 in January 2012, after increasing by 1.7 points in December 2011 to 99.1

Old Mutual Asset Management sold Dwight Asset Management to Goldman Sachs Asset Management for an undisclosed amount.

* Share was up 2% at 15h30

Vodacom Group trading statement for the quarter ended 31 December 2011:

* Group revenue up 9.9%*

* Record net customer additions of 5million in the quarter                     

* Group customers up 27.3% to 52.9m                                        

* Demand for data services remains high                                           

* Group data revenue growth of 23.8%                                              

* 41.2% increase in Group active data customers to 13.8m 

* Share was flat trading down 0.24%

CLIENTELE Probably the least traded insurer stock on the JSE said in a trading update that its Headline earnings per share ("HEPS") are expected to be between 25% and 30% higher than the 26.69 cents per share for the six months ended 31 December 2011

People news:

Telkom Lazarus Zim has been re-appointed as the Chairman of the Telkom Board of Directors

* Share flat trading up 0.1%

Retailer Pick n Pay announced today that CEO Nick Badminton has resign from the board of Pick n Pay effective the end of the financial year - August

* Share down 1.2%

* Index up 1.3%, shoprite pulling it up

Boutique financial institution SASFIN: I bumped into Noah Greenhill yesterday – He’s left Altx, where he was head of business development – the start-up market on the JSE, to join Sasfin on Monday.

Earlier this week ( http://angelo2711.posterous.com/2711-what-is-the-fsb-afraid-of ) I had the pleasure of jousting with the FSB about languages. One of the issues they raised was the debate around the SA Languages Bill that was underway in Parliament, and how that will play out and affect their decisions. 

Well, the ATKV earlier today issued this media statement... 

“The exclusion of Afrikaans as an indigenous language in the proposed South African Languages Bill is a big problem for the ATKV,” says Mr Japie Gouws, managing director of the ATKV group. “This is not good news for Afrikaans.”

The proposed 2011 draft act suggests that at least two official languages should be used by the government. During the recent public parliamentary sessions regarding the Bill there were several concerns that two languages are not sufficient and that at least three official languages should be included in the Bill.

Although the department of Arts and Culture now changed their proposal to three languages, they added that two of the three languages should nevertheless be “indigenous languages with historic diminished use and status.”

“This comes down to the flagrant exclusion of Afrikaans. In other words, derogating existing rights which affect millions of South Africans,” Gouws added.

Gouws admits to the complexity surrounding the implementation of the language rights as included in the Constitution, but emphasises that taking away existing rights should be put to an end. “We should work together in finding and developing the best practical and physically possible ways to promote the broader South African community’s language rights.

 “The ATKV is of the opinion that one Nguni language, one Sesotho language, Afrikaans and English will, in the long run, be the most practical approach. We should all work together and address this challenge with favourable attitudes,” said Gouws. “The language diversity in South Africa is one of our national assets and we cannot allow this asset to be incessantly diminished.”

So I wonder where this will leave the FSB? I'll post their response as soon as I get it...

This is a blog about the curious case of the FSB, its regulatory exams, Afrikaans and a parliamentary debate on the South African National Languages Bill…

I have been reporting on, or blogging about the FSB and its regulatory exams for some time now, and it appears that the matter has been resolved, to a certain extent, in terms of the level 1 regulatory exam and the Afrikaans ‘issue’. Or perhaps not…

I received a media statement from the FSB last week, in which it attempts to correct an article that first appeared in the Beeld newspaper. In the interests of transparency, I’ve published the full statement here:

“…The FSB would like to make a correction to certain allegations in an article that appeared in the BEELD newspaper on the 25/01/12.

It is not part of the settlement between the FSB and NAIFA that the FSB will translate any code of conduct or other study material in Afrikaans. However, the FSB has decided, independently from the court case, to translate the Exam Guidelines that are currently published on its website, and to also compile a list of terminology relating to the examination.

The settlement is only applicable to the level 1 regulatory examination and not to any subsequent examinations, the language of which the FSB still has to take a decision on.

As the FSB previously announced, the level 1 regulatory examination will be made available in Afrikaans as soon as possible.

The dates on which the Afrikaans examinations may be taken will be communicated by the FSB to the industry in advance. The dates for the examinations listed in the Beeld are incorrect and misleading.

Information regarding the exams will be announced via the FSB communication-circulars to the industry, and posted on our website, and not through the public media….”

I had some questions. Specifically I wanted to know about a decision on the other official languages and the constitutional rights of those brokers operating in non-English or Afrikaans speaking sectors?

I got this response from Mr G E Anderson, the deputy registrar: financial services providers at the FSB.

“…Dear Mr Coppola,

I am about a 100% certain that you are aware that the recent Court Case, which was brought against the FSB and which was withdrawn, concerned the issue of Afrikaans.  The press release of yesterday relates to that issue.  Please do not correspond directly with me in future.

If you have any enquiries on any matter with regards to the FSB, you are referred to our Head of the Communcations Unit and spokesperson …”

I had a follow-up set of comments:

“…Greetings and thanks for your prompt response, Mr Anderson. So who can tell me about the other official languages that the FSB 'forgot' about, when developing the regulatory examinations? When will a decision be taken to address this matter? Surely if, in principle, the FSB has conceded on the question of Afrikaans, its not a giant leap of goodwill to acknowledge the other languages?

In steps the FSB spokesperson. “Our email refers. Let me start off by pointing out that your reasoning that the FSB somehow “forgot” the other languages is, with respect, incorrect ill-informed and ill-advised. It is also not in line with the provisions of the Constitution. It would serve you well to conduct a little research before you make such statements in future.

In response to your question, the use of language by national public entities is currently being debated in Parliament as part of the considerations of the South African National Languages Bill, which will likely be promulgated this year. When this Act is effected, the Financial Services Board will formulate its language policy as required by the law. At this point in time we anticipate that law to require the use of two of the eleven official languages.

The Financial Services Board has throughout its 20 year history acknowledged all official South African languages in many of its publications. Legislation has also been published in languages other than English and Afrikaans (you may or may not be aware that the Securities Services Act, 2004, for example, was published in English and isiZulu)…”

I left this last paragraph in, in the interests of good will.

I still wasn’t satisfied with the response. So I fired back another email: “…Is it not a fact that it was only due to public pressure and threatened legal action that the FSB conceded the point and allowed the level 1 regulatory exam to be written in English and Afrikaans. 

Its also interesting that the FSB now hides behind an ongoing parliamentary debate on languages, when I ask what is to happen to brokers whose first language isn't English or Afrikaans and who have to write these exams. Will you delay the level one exams until the languages debate and vote has been completed?  

I'm wondering whether the FSB concede that it made an error of judgment when insisting that exams would only be written in English, in the first place? …”

It was at this point that the FSB refused to engage any further.

And it got me wondering. If this is how they deal with a blogger, one shudders to think how they deal with individual brokers, when they question decisions and issues. Oh wait. They don’t deal with individuals, only with associations.

I would really appreciate your thoughts, because I may have missed the boat completely… or perhaps I’m being a little over-sensitive. 

So it appears that brokers will be able to write their level one exams in Afrikaans. That is great news and a result of a concerted effort by all concerned to get the authorities to listen to reason.

But wait. There’s more.

What about the brokers who don’t have English or Afrikaans as their first language and whose client base doesn’t have English or Afrikaans as their first languages, either?

What happens here?

Do those brokers and associations who won this battle have an obligation to turn their attention to support their counterparts? I believe so. But I do have to ask myself why the broker associations haven’t done so already, or perhaps they have done so and they didn’t tell anyone?

What I did find amusing was that I received a media statement from the FSB, which was prepared in response to the Beeld newspaper story on the so-called victory.  And it was in Afrikaans. I wonder if the FSB was trying to make a point, or am I too cynical?

I haven’t had much to blog about recently. Its been relatively quiet, what with trying to make ends meet, trying to keep clients, trying to find new business, and trying to live a balanced life.

But a couple of things have forced me out of my slumber. For one, the debate about reputations and how these can be made, broken or dented, very quickly.

Think Julius Malema vs. the ANC, Frankies vs. Woolworths, NMF vs. the media, McDonalds vs. the blind lady and her guide dog, and Naspers and Boekehuis, and finally a private individual who is tilting his helmet at several established corporate SA windmills, like Don Quixote.

Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE

And then today (19 January) the ANC holds a press conference to explain why they stepped into take control of the affairs of the Limpopo province.  

Now before you get bored and think this is a blog about public relations; take a breath. These are my thoughts about the law and how people and organisations resort to the law to either protect themselves or attack others. You might believe, like me that the United States is known as an extremely litigious society. I’m beginning to believe that certain parts of South African society are displaying increasing litigious tendencies.

Increasingly local, regional and national government functionaries and public servants are resorting to the law in defence of their behavior or to keep their jobs, or more interestingly, get people fired from their jobs. Public figures are ‘using’ the law and lawyers to defend themselves. Now you might say that this is their right. I’m not arguing that point. I’m arguing that perhaps the law is and can only be used by people and organisations that can afford lawyers and legal representation. After all do you know a lawyer that will take on a case in South Africa without payment? I don’t. Let me correct that: I know of very few lawyers or law firms that will do that.

And if you want to see a one-sided fight, simply watch an individual or SME attempt to take on a corporate. It starts off fairly evenly, with both sides arguing their points. And then the war of attrition commences. Inevitably the individual or SME runs out of money. Whatever happened to doing the right thing? Whatever happened to leaving quietly, when you know, in your heart of hearts, that you are wrong?

For me it’s about principles, ethics, integrity and finally honesty. It's about doing the right thing. 

The #ANCYLmarch has made me re-evaluate my middle-aged commitment to the country and its future.

After all, I sit here in my comfortable chair and acknowledge that in general terms I support the principle behind the march, in much the same way as I supported the occupy wallstreet campaign. So what stopped me from getting involved in any part of the march?

Is it because I’m white and don’t have a history of marching when I feel strongly about something? Is it because I don’t support the ANCYL and its leaders? Is it because I’m too scared to get involved and hide behind my familial responsibilities of earning an income? Or is it because I don’t give a hoot about the youth, the unemployed or those in a less privileged position than I am?

The short truthful answer is a bit of all of these thoughts.  The fact is that in my ‘working life’ I have been retrenched, unemployed, underemployed and finally entrepreneurial. The similarity between me and the majority of those that marched is that I am also a product of apartheid. The difference is that I had the benefit of a solid public school education.

The truth is that the issues raised by the marchers aren’t political – they are social and economical. The fact that a fragment of the ruling political party has taken the lead to highlight these issues shows how segmented the political environment is and also exposes the huge vacuum in terms of opposition politics.

Perhaps it’s time I re-evaluated my view that it’s always about politics? Perhaps I need to start thinking about the other SA citizens and stand up and be counted. Perhaps I should stop blaming the government for our current situation. Perhaps I need to start exercising my constitutional rights. Perhaps I need to start thinking like a citizen…

It's been a month since my last post - because I had nothing of import to say. It's also been a month in which I have learnt a lot and didn't have time to reflect on my learnings. 

Now before I carry on, some honest context:

*I've always considered myself a bit of pragmatic liberal with anti-racist tendencies.

*I’ve struggled to understand why people still felt aggrieved about what impact apartheid had on individuals.

*I avoided doing business with government departments and parastatals, rationalising the fact that I didn’t need the aggravation or the lack of payment for work done

* I didn’t want to employ people based purely on the colour of their skin, in order to win “BEE” business.

I worked on two pieces of business that have changed my world-view or at least my view on life in South Africa for the majority of the population. There may have been a lot of water that has past under the apartheid bridge since the first democratic election, but the fact remains that we have at least one generation of people who were directly and indirectly impacted by the ‘previous regime’ and the effects can’t be simply washed away by the acknowledgement of the past by the white population.

My response in the past would have been to tell people harping on about past, to get over it and get on with it. I was steadfast in my approach, until someone I trust and respect challenged me.

He said: “You don’t understand, because you never suffered like we did.”

I said: “But that’s in the past.”

He said: “For you it is. You had the benefit of a good education. You had opportunities”

I said: “But that’s not my fault.”

He said: “No. But its limited my opportunities, and still does. It needs to be fixed.”

I said: “Hell. So what do you want me to do?”

He said: “Acknowledge it and do something about it.”

And that’s when I decided it was time to do something about it. I have started listening to what people were saying. I started hearing the subtext. I also heard a truism spoken by a prominent business leader, which we sometimes conveniently forget. The majority of the people in South Africa are black and the majority of the population have not had the benefit of a good education or the opportunities that I had and occasionally squandered. Not because I was white, but because I’m not always a good entrepreneur.

I'd like to suggest that our view is coloured by the number of successful black people we see either in the media or in the public domain. They are a very small minority.

So I have undertaken to get involved in my community and my country and make a difference. I have undertaken to support causes that will make a difference. I will help where and when I can.

But I still need guidance. What more can I do?