After watching the Germany/England match with its atrocious refereeing, I have to take back what I said about SANAS. I asked tongue-in-cheek if SANAS accredited FIFA referees. However SANAS are... Read more...
ABVA is a membership organisation that represents the views and interests of its members - it is a marketing organisation and has no standing on the Codes of Good Practice. Nowhere in the B-BBEE Codes of Good Practice do they mention ABVA. Not all verification agencies are members of ABVA. Recently the DTI took ABVA to task over its policy pronouncement, which it has no right to enforce on anybody, even its own members.
Ironically many members of ABVA have not managed to get their own companies accredited, and their "pre-assessment letters" have expired.
ABVA recognises that they do not make policy which is why it is quite surprising to hear ABVA board members still using the ABVA name in their company's decisions to accept or reject "valid" certificates. Wade van Rooyen's portfolio at ABVA is accreditation. He is a director of IQUAD, a SANAS accredited verification agency. IQUAD has supplied us with the following definition on which BEE certificates can be accepted, in response to a formal request by ourselves:
- BEE Certificates that can be accepted for purposes of awarding preferential procurement recognition
- Any BEE Certificate issued before 18 July 2008.
- If issued after 18 July 2008, then only from those Agencies that
- have been accredited by SANAS.
- are ABVA members and have applied for accreditation.
- are not ABVA members, but have proof that they have applied to SANAS for accreditation. (Evidence to be requested from Agency to provide this proof, and proof to be attached to applicable BEE certificate.)
- Any Agencies that do not fulfil requirements above.
- All members of NABC (National Association of BEE Consultants).
As stated above nowhere do the codes even mention ABVA.
He is biased: Amongst others he states that certificates will only be accepted from agencies after 18 July 2008 that are "ABVA members and have applied for accreditation". He also says that if they are not ABVA members they must have proof that they have applied to SANAS for accreditation. (Evidence to be requested from Agency to provide this proof, and proof to be attached to applicable BEE certificate.)
One wonders why he is so lenient on ABVA members, and sets a higher requirement for non-ABVA members.
Either way he is also wrong: The minister stated in his notice 32467 that all certificates issued by non-accredited verification agencies prior to 1st February 2010 will remain valid for 12 months from date of issue. The notice does not mention the date of 18 July 2008 (which happens to be the date that the DTI issued its framework for Verification document).
Wade van Rooyen's company makes the further error of ignoring this important notice and the date of 1st February 2010. The minister stated that after that date only BEE certificates issued by accredited verification agencies or verification agencies that are in possession of a valid pre-assessment letter from SANAS will be valid. IQUAD's policy does not even mention valid pre-assessment letters. A pre-assessment letter is issued by SANAS, for a particular period and effectively states that SANAS have performed an initial assessment of the proposed verification agency. It goes a lot further than a company simply applying to SANAS to become a verification agency and paying its initial fees.
IQUAD's written policy is to accept a certificate from a fellow ABVA member who has put in their application, whether or not they have a valid pre-assessment letter. According to the DTI website, the ABVA chairman's company (Andile Tlhoaéle of Inforcomm) no longer has a valid pre-assessment letter, but IQUAD policy states that they will accept their certificates.
Suggestion to IQUAD
Use the minister's notice as criteria for accepting valid certificates.
The codes define fronting as misrepresenting one's BEE position. If you allow your verification agency to accept an invalid certificate or disallow a valid one, this is also fronting albeit in a different context to the "usual suspect" type of fronting.
If your customer or your verification agency mentions the word ABVA in conjunction with their decision to accept or reject your scorecard, please let us know.
We are true to the codes and we do not like organisations that do not follow the codes.
It's no wonder that ABVA and some verification agencies do not like us - we know the codes, the DTI, SANAS and how to deal with the verification agencies. Learn from us at our "Prepare for Verification Conference", avoid the pitfalls and earn the BEE points you deserve.
|Using B-BBEE to Improve your Bottom Line
Many businessmen view B-BBEE as an administrative annoyance; and it is also misconstrued as one which could cost you the majority share in your business. A more optimistic view of B-BBEE is an opportunity to grow your business and ultimately improve your bottom line. When all factors of your service / product are equal to that of your competitor, such as price, quality and reliability - your B-BBEE rating could be the major deciding factor in the deal.
The challenge to many business decision makers is that they do not fully understand the requirements of the BEE scorecard and as a result there are various misconceptions surrounding black economic empowerment. Commonly businesses feel that BEE is a burden that consumes many hours of admin. The tragedy is most of these businesses don't realise that the required admin task already exists internally and that producing a BEE scorecard is often an easy task that genuinely results in sustainable growth.
While there is demand for a B-BBEE Scorecard someone will be taking advantage, shouldn’t that someone be you...
|Not sure how to get a BEE Scorecard, click here to see a demonstration of how best to produce your own BEE scorecard.
Turnover below R5 million - find out how to get your BEE Exemption.
Is BEE procurement a pain? Sort it out quick and easy - click here.