Special Hearings — Business Hearings — 1997-11-12

CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Mr Kesani.  Mr Glamini?

MR GLAMINI: Thank you, Mr Chairman, I've got quite a few questions here.
 Perhaps let me start with the last recommendation of isolating the so-called collaborators.  How do you get that information?  How do you identify them?

MR KESANI: How do we access the information to find out who the collaborators were?

MR GLAMINI: Well, that's a very difficult one.  I think at the time we're going back pre-'94 that we were aware of certain people and certain activities, but it is very difficult to find concrete evidence, proof that these were the - that these were the activities that these were the people.
 I can only say generally there are people who are engaging in bringing in oil, for example, into South Africa at the time when the mass movements called for a boycott of our implementation of sanctions, but it is very difficult.
 It would be very difficult other than to point out from past knowledge.

MR GLAMINI: Yes, thank you.  Yes, I thought so that it was going to be a very (indistinct) exercise to identify them.
 My next question are on page two of your presentation, where you allege that the business sector did not do anything to oppose or to protest against the Apartheid system and I'm not so sure whether that is accurate.
 Some of the presentations that we have had for the past two days and there were - there was an evidence to that effect.  I think what struck me was that it was not enough.  It didn't go far enough, but yes, I would like your comment whether you still maintain that nothing happened whatsoever?

MR KESANI: I think firstly, our view, our chamber's view is the following;  that had big business use sufficient muscle in 1948 they could have nipped the Nationalist Party in the bud.
 We believe that the capitalist powers of the day, those who operated in South Africa together with their friends in the capitalist countries, could have rooted the Nationalist Party and it's not a question of we could have done a little more.  I think they could have gone for the jugular right at the beginning.

MR GLAMINI: Look, I accept your view, although I still feel that something was done, but for example just one, one recalls amongst others the presentation by the Rupert family and you could see that there were pitiful and direct challenges to the - to what was happening at that time, but as I said that look, I respect your view and that of your chamber.
 Also can I check with you your - on page two again, no page three rather under corporate social responsibility? (indistinct) there was a strong evidence of expenditure in the social responsibility area and yes, you refer to it as minimal.  
 What criterion are you using to measure the effect?

MR KESANI: I'm not particularly using any criteria other than to say that hard evidence at the time suggested that Black employees were not enjoying the same benefits of their White counterparts.
 I know in companies certain benefits Black people are altogether excluded from.  They did not even enjoy minimum benefits such as medical aid and pension funds.

MR GLAMINI: Well, look, I wouldn't like to talk on behalf of the business community, but I'm sure if the statistics were to be revisited, a substantial percentage of the social - corporate social responsibility budget went to the Black communities, because of the nature of the policies governing the social responsibilities, namely that it was meant to assist disadvantaged communities etcetera and by definition it went to the Black communities.
 I just wanted to share that with you and otherwise I thank you, Mr Chairman.

DR BORAINE: Thank you for your presentation.  There are a number of first in your presentation.  I've been trying for these last two days and before to understand the position of some of the business groupings and individuals who argue quite convincingly that Apartheid was bad for business.
 On the other hand there have been some other groupings who have made very forceable statements indicating that in some measures White business, corporate business benefitted from Apartheid and there's quite a lot of confused thinking about this.
 What you've done is to set out from page two, or I beg your pardon, page one, very crisply the corporate sector's benefits.  The whole question of cheap labour for example.  I don't think anyone can deny that this was a fact ... (power failure) ... not only 1985 to 1994.
 You've listed them so I'm not going to repeat them.  I find it very helpful, because we have got to try and pull together without making conclusions right now.  So, I thank you for that.
 The second is that you have raised the whole question of the Reserve Bank and you have made a number of very strong criticisms of that bank and it just happens that amongst the banking fraternity who will be speaking immediately after you, will include the Reserve Bank.
 So, perhaps I will reserve as it were, my comments until I hear their comments to some of the charges you have made.  This is the first time we've had any of this.
 You've also gone out of your way to make some suggestions about the way forward and I'm interested in your comments about the proposed wealth tax on the one hand;  those who are opposed to any of it at call and your own views which are different of course from Prof Terblanche.
 Of course you also go on to talk about the Registrar of Banks and Banks Supervision Division and you give some instances of what happened in specific areas.
 Then a final first is that Ann Bernstein and I had some major differences with her, but I also think that she made some extremely relevant comments.  The one comment that she made was that you know you can't just talk about the good guys and the bad guys and there's an area of grey in this here as well.
 So far we've heard that the White community of business was evil and Black business was doing its best to off set that.  What you are suggesting, which is not a very popular thing to do, is that during the Apartheid era members, some members of the Black business community were in the self same kind of boat.
 I think that's another issue that we're going to have to look at and obviously we will try and find out, because you painted with a very broad brush and we'd like to try and get some more specifics and if you have any more specific information relating to any of these that I've referred, I would be very grateful to you.
 Finally I've made a lot of comment.  I just want to ask one question and that is;  and I risk this and I really don't want a long reply, so I don't want to get in trouble here and that is;  you have not told us anything at all about your own organisation, about its origins, about the date when it first started, where you see your place and your role, whether you are - will be a separate institutions for all times or whether this was an accident of history, because of the racial situation in our country or whatever?
 I really - I mean I - you must forgive me, I don't want a long history, but it would certainly help me if you could just position yourself against the background that we have heard from many other groupings.

MR KESANI: Dr, you're asking about the history of the chamber?

DR BORAINE: Yes, where it started, what sort of membership you have and what the future looks like?