Special Hearings — Business Hearings — 1997-11-13

MOOSA MOOSA: ... in Chatsworth."  Unquote.
 If what Ster Kinekor stated in this submission is true, then if Ster Kinekor is of the view that it did not have to apply for a group areas permit unless it was asked to do so, anyone else who wished to operate as a disqualified person in a particular group area, would have had to obtain an appropriate permit before being allowed legally to occupy premises in that area.
 What was it about Ster Kinekor or any other company for that matter, that they did not have to follow this course of action as was required by the racist laws of that time?  If what was therefore said, is true, that Ster Kinekor or any company only comply with the laws when they were asked to do so.
 As a member of the disadvantaged, dispossessed and abused persons of the time I would never have been granted a permit to take up a cinema in a White group area.  I certainly would not have been allowed to occupy such premises by any land lord without such a permit being issued to me.
 Had I therefore taken such occupation of premises in an area where I was disqualified, without having applied and obtained a permit, I would have faced certain prosecution and the danger that my assets will be confiscated by the state.
 I believe the Avalon issue is manifest example of many such abuses and restrictive practises which took place in various spheres of the economy during the Apartheid era.
 Section two - analysis of business scenario, past and present:  South Africa has historically been a monopolist paradise.  The economy has been dominated by a handful of individuals who have had mass fortunes of gigantic proportions, based substantially, if not entirely on the process of unjust enrichment during the Apartheid period.
 The question that has to be asked is, can we as an intended free market democracy afford to allow the monopolies to continue pulling their economic strings.
 It has been reported from time to time that 14 percent of the population as the privileged sector, effectively controls the excess of 90 percent of the country's wealth.  Since the Blacks, be the African, Coloureds or Asians in South Africa represent almost 86 percent of the population it will seem that eventually they must also account for 84 percent or 86 percent of the nation's wealth and disposable income, or at least a substantial part of it.
 Louis Stager, Chairman of Transnet was quoted in Finance Week of November 3rd 1994 to have said:
"South Africa's system could best be described as monopoly capitalism, because it enable the privileged class to operate in a legally protected environment.  They enjoy all the benefits of capitalism without competition from the majority of South Africans who are excluded by law from participating in the economy.  At the political level, Government and capital ...(inaudible) was protect by a battery of the strictest statutes, notably the Lands Act, the Group Areas Act and the Urban Act which ensured that Blacks would not advance much beyond the status of consumers and that Whites will be producers and regulators."  Unquote.
The fortune top 500 companies in the United States contribute to 10 percent of the GDP of the United States' economy, where as it is believed that the five major conglomerates in South Africa are involved in more than 50 percent of South Africa's GDP.
 If one bears in mind that the revenues or turn over of any one of those top few of these 500 fortune companies alone is larger than the entire GDP of South Africa, it then becomes very significant in understanding the inequity lopsidedness of the South African economy and a lack of competitive environment.
 In the competition board report of 1995 the following was stated in paragraph four, five and six.  The paragraph four refers to certain statistics, Mr Chairman, which I shan't read.  It is suffice to say that I quote paragraph five and which says:
"On the basis of these figures one may conclude that international analysis of the position is unequivocal in its finding that competition in South Africa is not effective."
Paragraph six, and I quote:
 "Various factors have contributed to this state of affairs, including over regulation of the economy, (indistinct) discriminatory race laws that for many years excluded the majority of South Africans from the effective participation in the main stream of the Republic's commercial activity and a competition policy that is deficient in a number of material aspects."  Unquote.
 The tragedy inherent in this entire analysis is that the situation which prevailed in the past continues unabated into the present in that the privileged business establishment is going about its conduct essentially in the business's usual approach.
 Mr Chairman, I want to also add that over a protected period of some years, reinforced by my experiences of the last two days and the hearings I've sat through here, I must say that I leave today with a sense of sadness and desolation.  
 I see no shift in the mind set of the privileged establishment in so far as the genuine desire to really try and make good for what we have experienced in the past.
 Section three - recommendations, the future:  The above scenario which is unsatisfactory, continues to dictate the rest of us all are forced to accept opportunity at the rate at which this corporate establishment finds acceptable.
 Opportunity is our right and we are entitled to it.  Even the Government has confirmed the view from time to time;  that the playing field has to be levelled so that all people of our country may develop equal opportunities.
 Thus brought the rate of change and the magnitude of change even in the economic arena, must be determined through joint negotiations between all segments involved in a given industry and not arbitrary determined by the corporate establishment of South Africa.
 Far more extensive strategies of empowerment must be designed to seek more ways and means by which parity of opportunity in economic participation could be achieved.  That must be our goal.
 Mr Chairman, I would draw your attention to the list of empowerment companies we're all familiar with and without diverting more than a moment, I wish to bring to your notice that one - when one values all these companies cumulatively put together, the total cumulative market value of these companies and we're all familiar with them, we read about them, we've heard about them;  perhaps (indistinct) to enough percent of the (indistinct) market capitalised value of the Johannesburg stock exchange and that too is on the assumption that that market capitalised value of few percent is totally unencumbered and is not being colateralised in some way.
 Obviously their private deals one is not privileged to the deal arrangement.  What I'm trying to say to the Truth Commission;  that even all those deals put together do not begin to even address the issues in my view.  I'm not against the process, I support it, but I'm saying it doesn't go anywhere near to begin to address the problem.

CHAIRPERSON: Mr Moosa, I'm giving you one more minute to finish, please.

MOOSA MOOSA: Chairman, I shan't be two or three minutes.

CHAIRPERSON: One minute.