Four weeks ago, the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) Commission formally requested William Gumede, a professor at the University of the Witwatersrand, to provide the data and research underpinning his claim that BEE policy has benefited only 100 politically connected individuals to the value of R1-trillion.
This request was made in line with the commission’s statutory mandate to monitor the implementation of B-BBEE.
At a B-BBEE symposium held at the University of Johannesburg on April 14, which Gumede attended, I directly asked him for more research details on his claims, hoping he would leave the public better informed on the matter. He failed to provide a satisfactory explanation.
Gumede further wrote that in mining, 46 politically connected individuals secured 60% of all BEE deals and attributed this to a 2015 report by the Minerals Council of SA. Perusal of this report, however, disproves Gumede’s claim, and instead it shows that among the companies that participated in BEE deals of that time is Royal Bafokeng Holdings, as a broad-based ownership vehicle representing over 300 000 members of that community.
The absence of public access to the analysis undertaken in the article in question means that the methodology, assumptions, and findings cannot be independently verified. This falls short of basic standards of academic discipline.
To present definitive conclusions from pre-2015 data as being relevant in 2026 is analytically unsound, not least because B-BBEE policy has evolved significantly since then. In the absence of the latest data, there is a lack of clarity on how conclusions were reached, what datasets were used, and the scope of B-BBEE transactions that were analysed.
Instead, we are left with rhetorical anecdotes from which sweeping generalisations are made that B-BBEE has failed and is intrinsically linked to corruption, job losses and economic decline.
The fact is that BEE has evolved markedly since the 1990s/early 2000s version of the policy, when transactions featured a handful of high-profile personalities. But its form changed from the mid-2000s to the present broad-based BEE, which incentivises a wider net of black economic participation, including women, workers and communities, as well as support for enterprises, suppliers, and skills development, measured by the B-BBEE scorecard.
Broad-based BEE is what is currently being implemented in the economy and followed by businesses and the government. It is thus outdated and misleading to claim that the policy only benefits a few.
Granted, there are issues of concern about the policy, but a narrow beneficiary base, which Gumede claims is not one of them.
The commission monitors a number of BEE policy datasets, which include B-BBEE scorecards of businesses and government entities; ownership transactions of threshold R25-million and above, which are submitted for vetting to the commission, as well as enterprise and supplier development (ESD) of black-owned businesses and skills training investments).
In a recently concluded research, the commission is about to release over 28 000 B-BBEE scorecard certificates, which were evaluated, covering the period 2013 to 2023. The commission has found steady progress across broad-based aspects of the B-BBEE scorecard, even if to varying degrees.
For example, the average achievement of the 25% ownership score-card target rose from 12.4% in 2013 to 21.4% in 2023. Based on this sample size, it is obvious this cannot be accounted for by only 100 black persons.
Similarly, from 2017 to date, 758 ownership transactions have been submitted to the commission worth a total of R615 billion in shares acquired by black people; again contradicting the notion that BEE deals are concentrated. In fact, these transactions feature 251 collective ownership vehicles in the form of employee share ownership schemes and trusts, with Shoprite’s Employee Trust alone valued at approximately R8.9-billion, with over 130 000 employee beneficiaries and more than R1-billion already distributed to workers between 2022 and 2025.
Complementary research by private equity company Tusker further indicates that approximately 870 000 black South Africans hold shares through B-BBEE ownership schemes.
From tracking of ESD and skills development investments of corporates since 2021 to date, as part of compliance with B-BBEE, the commission has found approximately R200-billion combined spent on supporting emerging enterprises and workforce training, directly benefiting a broad base of participants, including youth and job creation.
None of this suggests that B-BBEE is beyond critique. Like any policy, it must be continuously assessed and refined. There are legitimate concerns about its implementation, effectiveness, and the need to deepen its impact. But the policy deserves honest, nuanced evaluation. As shown above, wider evidence, not the choice to be narrow, does not support a verdict of absolute failure nor absolute success. Neither is B-BBEE’s performance to date cause for abandoning the course.
The task instead is to fix identified problems about the policy, re-ignite commitment, and accelerate implementation.
It is also flawed to position B-BBEE as if it represents the totality of South Africa’s economic policy framework, when it is only a part. This is a ploy to blame the policy for shortcomings that are not its own. To reiterate, B-BBEE is primarily concerned with justice for black people as redress for economic exclusion suffered during colonialism and apartheid and to implement the equality clause of the constitution.
Gumede goes to extremely desperate lengths to blame BEE for corruption, which amounts to pure hate of the policy rather than objective analysis. Many laws get abused, and BEE needs to be protected against this.
But company law also gets abused, if the corporate scandals that South Africa has witnessed in recent times are anything to go by, involving the likes of Steinhoff, Tongaat Hulett and EOH, among others. Corruption must be combated as a systemic challenge, which manifests wherever governance, oversight, and accountability are weak.
The B-BBEE Commission recognises that fragmentation and unevenness of data on B-BBEE are vulnerabilities of the policy, which are currently exploited by its opponents. This is a challenge the commission is seized with, including partnerships with academic institutions, to ensure reliable data and strengthen the evidence base for scientific assessments of B-BBEE’s performance and impact.
Public discourse on BEE must move beyond simplistic narratives of failure.
It must engage with complexity, recognise both progress and shortcomings, and remain anchored in evidence rather than fleeting sentiments.
Only then can we have a meaningful conversation about how to strengthen B-BBEE as a tool for inclusion, rather than undermining it through misrepresentation bordering on propaganda.
• Matona is commissioner for B-BBEE
- The B-BBEE Commission requested data from Professor William Gumede regarding his claim on BEE policy benefits.
- Gumede alleges that BEE policy has primarily benefited 100 politically connected individuals.
- The estimated value of benefits to these individuals is around R1-trillion.
- This request for information was made four weeks ago by the B-BBEE Commission.
- Full details of the story are available in the Sunday World e-edition.
Four weeks ago, the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) Commission formally requested William Gumede, a professor at the University of the
At a B-BBEE symposium held at the University of Johannesburg on April 14, which Gumede attended, I directly asked him for more research details on his claims, hoping he would leave the public better informed on the matter. He failed to provide a satisfactory explanation.
Gumede further wrote that in mining, 46 politically connected individuals secured 60% of all BEE deals and attributed this to a 2015 report by the Minerals Council of SA. Perusal of this report, however, disproves Gumede’s claim, and instead it shows that among the companies that participated in BEE deals of that time is Royal
To present definitive conclusions from pre-2015 data as being relevant in 2026 is analytically unsound, not least because B-BBEE policy has evolved significantly since then. In the absence of the latest data, there is a lack of clarity on how conclusions were reached, what datasets were used, and the scope of B-BBEE transactions that were analysed.
Instead, we are left with rhetorical anecdotes from which sweeping generalisations are made that B-BBEE has failed and is intrinsically linked to corruption, job losses and economic decline.
Broad-based BEE is what is currently being implemented in the economy and followed by businesses and the government. It is thus outdated and misleading to claim that the policy only benefits a few.
Granted, there are issues of concern about the policy, but a narrow beneficiary base, which Gumede claims is not one of them.
In a recently concluded research, the commission is about to release over 28 000 B-BBEE scorecard certificates, which were evaluated, covering the period 2013 to 2023.
For example, the average achievement of the 25% ownership score-card target rose from 12.4% in 2013 to 21.4% in 2023. Based on this sample size, it is obvious this cannot be accounted for by only 100 black persons.
Similarly, from 2017 to date, 758 ownership transactions have been submitted to the commission worth a total of R615 billion in shares acquired by black people; again contradicting the notion that BEE deals are concentrated. In fact, these transactions feature 251 collective ownership vehicles in the form of employee share ownership schemes and trusts, with
Complementary research by private equity company Tusker further indicates that approximately 870 000 black
From tracking of ESD and skills development investments of corporates since 2021 to date, as part of compliance with B-BBEE, the commission has found approximately R200-billion combined spent on supporting emerging enterprises and workforce training, directly benefiting a broad base of participants, including youth and job creation.
None of this suggests that B-BBEE is beyond critique. Like any policy, it must be continuously assessed and refined.
It is also flawed to position B-BBEE as if it represents the totality of
Gumede goes to extremely desperate lengths to blame BEE for corruption, which amounts to pure hate of the policy rather than objective analysis.
But company law also gets abused, if the corporate scandals that
Public discourse on BEE must move beyond simplistic narratives of failure.
It must engage with complexity, recognise both progress and shortcomings, and remain anchored in evidence rather than fleeting sentiments.
Only then can we have a meaningful conversation about how to strengthen B-BBEE as a tool for inclusion, rather than undermining it through misrepresentation bordering on propaganda.
• Matona is commissioner for B-BBEE
