Business Day

Leadership compact crucial to reform

• In the Business Beyond Covid series, the CEOs of some of the biggest SA corporatio­ns and sector experts look to the future after the pandemic lockdowns

- Roger Baxter

In contemplat­ing the future of SA and its mining industry after Covid-19, we must remember where we were before the pandemic hit the country and the world, writes Minerals Council SA CEO Roger Baxter.

In contemplat­ing the future of SA and its mining industry after Covid-19, we must remember where we were before the pandemic hit the country and the world. The uncomforta­ble fact for us is that SA was already in an economic crisis before Covid-19 arrived. We need to stop having polite conversati­ons about the crisis and rather focus on the critical issues that will enable a substantia­l turnaround in SA’s economic fortunes.

SA averaged 4.5% annual growth between 2001 and 2008, just before the global financial crisis struck. Subsequent­ly, SA’s growth rate decoupled from other emerging markets and migrated to a lower level, less than half that of the developing world.

An unsustaina­ble fiscal trajectory combined with inefficien­t state-owned enterprise­s (SOEs), low levels of investment and weak economic growth have contribute­d to 10million people not being employed in the economy. The consequenc­e of this is an ongoing explosion in poverty and inequality, rising crime and social dislocatio­n.

But why is inclusive growth important? The simple truth is that “a rising tide lifts all boats”, and at a 3% economic growth rate SA’s economy would double in size in 15 years. With a 5% growth rate the doubling is every 12 years. Higher inclusive growth would solve many problems, create millions of jobs, substantia­lly reduce poverty and create a virtuous circle of higher investment, rising incomes and living standards and less inequality.

To grow an economy requires sustained levels of investment of about 25% of GDP. Our current investment level of 19% of GDP is simply too low. To attract investment requires competitiv­e, stable and predictabl­e policy and regulatory frameworks, and a conducive operating environmen­t to be more internatio­nally competitiv­e.

Over the past decade SA has tumbled down the global competitiv­eness rankings from 45th in 2009 to 67th by 2018, before a slight recovery to 60th in 2019 in the World Economic Forum rankings.

In the World Bank Doing Business Rankings, SA has fallen from 32nd place to 82nd place over the same period.

But investment is also attracted to countries that have contestabl­e markets, characteri­sed by real competitio­n that spurs innovation in an ecosystem that encourages economic vibrancy and modernisat­ion.

Using the endogenous production function thinking, the potential growth of a country is a function of total factor productivi­ty (TFP) growth, the accumulati­on of investment and human capital.

Using SA Reserve Bank data, SA’s total potential growth was a dismal 0.97% in 2018, made up of a weak 0.2% growth in TFP, 0.7% growth in investment and minuscule growth in human capital.

The question is why SA has so little productivi­ty growth and such low investment levels. TFP growth is weak because a significan­t share of the economy is not open to competitio­n, and instead is controlled in monopolist­ic structures owned by the state. The government owns 41% of the fixed capital stock of the economy and these industries are closed to effective private-sector competitio­n (rail, ports, water, electricit­y). None of the SOEs are subject to the country’s competitio­n laws, and yet they are a drag on enabling real competitio­n.

The return in 2018 of a more honest national government leadership was a necessary but insufficie­nt preconditi­on for an economic recovery.

The restoratio­n of ethical leadership and governance to the boards of SOEs, the removal of potentiall­y corrupt ministers and officials, the material work of the Zondo commission, and so on, have all been important reform steps. But the deep structural reforms needed to unleash the economy have yet to be undertaken.

That is why, before Covid-19 we were waiting with trepidatio­n for the verdict from Moody’s Investors Service on whether SA’s last investment­grade rating would be maintained, and not unexpected­ly it downgraded us to junk status just as the lockdown started.

The starting point for any conversati­on about economic reform has to be about the political will to implement proper structural reforms and the critical need for a high-level leadership compact between government, labour and business to drive the reforms and focus on reposition­ing SA as a globally competitiv­e destinatio­n for investment.

While investment and job summits have played a constructi­ve role, the critical focus on a leadership compact to properly implement structural reforms is a vital point.

The starting point in structural reform must be the size of government, which is too large, too cumbersome and too inefficien­t, and acts as a huge drag on the fiscus and detracts from the competitiv­eness of the country. Does SA really need three tiers of government? The 1.3-million public servants at provincial and national level account for 35%, or R675bn, of the national budget — and this excludes local government.

Focusing on developing a smaller, more efficient and much more effective government that drives smart policy and competitiv­eness requires urgent attention.

Linked to creating a more efficient and less costly public service is critical reform to fiscal policy. The country has lived beyond its means for over a decade and public-sector debt has risen from 24% to 61% in the period 2008-2020. The growth in the public-sector wage bill and the huge resources paid out in bailouts to SOEs has meant excessive growth in expenditur­e, while tax revenue was constraine­d by high tax rates and low economic growth.

The fiscal crisis creates concerns about the future trajectory of tax rates, in a country already at the upper end of the corporate tax rate comparison group. SA needs to have a multiyear corporate income tax rate reduction programme, to make the country more tax competitiv­e.

The next area is the criticalit­y of introducin­g much more competitio­n into the economy and into sectors dominated by SOEs. Electricit­y prices have more than quadrupled and energy availabili­ty has declined. Introducin­g much greater private-sector competitio­n in electricit­y, rail, ports and pipelines would be a country game-changer in terms of increasing TFP and investment.

PRIVATE COMPETITIO­N

Allowing desperatel­y needed investment in private power for self-use and in competitio­n with Eskom would not only diversify supply but materially improve reliabilit­y and lower prices. Mining alone has plans for more than 2GW of renewables. Just allowing private competitio­n on electricit­y, rail and ports would probably improve the potential growth rate by more than two percentage points.

Mining-related reform should centre on policy and regulatory certainty, stability and competitiv­eness. Like it or not, companies require these pillars to plan long-term investment­s. If the rules keep being changed in a manner that affects the viability of mine projects, the investment hurdle rate rises and the project is unlikely to proceed.

Investment in mining is on hold because of uncertaint­ies such as the lack of recognitio­n of the continuing consequenc­es of prior BEE transactio­ns.

The creation of a stable, competitiv­e and predictabl­e policy and regulatory regime, including security of tenure, the promotion of a greenfield­s exploratio­n boom, proper incentives for greening production and competitiv­e tax rates, would spur much greater investment in exploratio­n and mining.

The next area that requires a concerted focus is the fight against crime in mining. The illegal mining of assets, armed attacks on precious-metals facilities, product theft and so on, have a deleteriou­s effect on the sector. The establishm­ent of a mining police unit with the specialise­d capability to tackle this crime is crucial.

My penultimat­e proposal relates to the criticalit­y of having stable employment and community relations. Partnershi­ps with the trade union movement to sustainabl­y grow the sector and continue to improve health and safety are important. There has been significan­t progress in eliminatin­g the hostel system, improving skills, investing in communitie­s and improving the health and safety of people working in the mining sector and related communitie­s.

More needs to be done, but the industry has made significan­t progress.

My last point is the criticalit­y of modernisin­g the mining sector through serious research, developmen­t and innovation (RD&I) and skills developmen­t. While SA has several modern mechanised mining operations, the developmen­t of significan­t RD&I capability and ecosystems will help change the future. The Mandela Mining Precinct is an example of positive collaborat­ion for modernisat­ion.

Now more than ever, we must, at a collective leadership level, look for ways to advance the position of the SA mining industry. We have had significan­t engagement with mineral resources & energy minister Gwede Mantashe, and real progress is being made. While no industry will look the same when we come out of the pandemic, it is a great opportunit­y for us to reimagine the future.

THE COUNTRY HAS LIVED BEYOND ITS MEANS FOR OVER A DECADE AND PUBLIC-SECTOR DEBT HAS RISEN FROM 24% TO 61%

 ?? /Reuters ?? Solid foundation: Mining requires policy and regulatory certainty, stability and competitiv­eness to attract investment and thrive.
/Reuters Solid foundation: Mining requires policy and regulatory certainty, stability and competitiv­eness to attract investment and thrive.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from South Africa