Policymakers pay little attention to public comment
The withdrawal last week of proposed new visa regulations that would have eased the way for skilled workers to come to South Africa was an inadvertent illustration of how little public consultations matter in many parts of government.
The regulations were withdrawn because the minister of Home Affairs had inadvertently published them a day before the period was meant to close for public comment on the drafts.
This might seem like merely an administrative error, but I think it reveals how little attention policymakers pay to public comment.
Clearly, from the minister down, the public commentary simply did not feature in the minds of those in the department.
Business Leadership South Africa puts considerable effort into providing public comment on proposed legislation. We sometimes commission expert research to enable us to provide informed input.
We also often call on our members to provide views, particularly when they have in-house expertise on some or other matter. This takes resources, and I like to believe it is a worthwhile investment, leading ultimately to better laws. But when I see events like last week’s reversal, my confidence wanes.
In the case of the visa regulations, the proposed changes were welcomed by BLSA.
However, poorly conceived legislation often works its way into the law books without any apparent notice of the public comments received.
A clear example is the latest Companies Act Amendment Bill, about which both BLSA and Business Unity South Africa provided significant input.
There are positives to the amendments such as embracing technology to improve the efficiency with which businesses can operate, but there are some significant negatives that will have unintended consequences, increasing the compliance costs, particularly for small businesses, and in some cases making it impossible for companies to operate.
For example, the “one-strike rule”, which requires that non-executive directors serving on a remuneration committee must step down in the event that shareholders do not approve the implementation report of a remuneration policy, will make it very difficult for all but the biggest companies to retain competent non-execs and make their remuneration committees effective.
There are also several parts of the bill that are simply ambiguous and will create unnecessary litigation as stakeholders turn to the courts to get clarity.
Despite our detailed submissions on all of these issues, Parliament simply approved the draft bill without change and submitted it for the president’s signature where it now sits.
Even worse was the National Health Insurance Bill.
“Poorly conceived legislation often works its way into the law books without any apparent notice of the public comments received.”