We’re still missing the real issue

A recent Moneyweb article, “Mohai defends B-BBEE against the ‘false narrative’” has once again brought the B-BBEE debate back into focus.

In it, Deputy Minister Seiso Mohai pushes back against the idea that B-BBEE has only benefited a select few, arguing that much of the criticism is ideological or rooted in misunderstanding.

At the same time, there is an important admission:
Government acknowledges that, in some cases, empowerment initiatives have not delivered a broad-based impact.

That tension is where the real conversation should be happening. Because the question is no longer whether the policy exists.

It’s why the outcomes remain inconsistent.

Ownership doesn’t equal participation

For years, the focus of B-BBEE has been on:

• Ownership
• Procurement
• Compliance

And those levers matter. But they don’t automatically translate into a functioning, inclusive economy.

The article reinforces this gap indirectly. Even where access has been created, the impact has not always been broad-based. That’s the signal.

Access alone is not the constraint anymore. Capability is.

The uncomfortable truth we avoid

There’s a pattern playing out across the economy:

• Opportunities are created.
• Structures are in place.
• Scorecards are met.

But outcomes don’t scale. Not because the policy is irrelevant. But because something more fundamental is missing.

Empowerment without capability doesn’t compound.

This is where the debate often loses depth.

It becomes a binary argument:

• B-BBEE works
• B-BBEE doesn’t work

When in reality, both sides are reacting to the same underlying issue.

Growth and inclusion are not in conflict

Part of the tension highlighted in the article is the idea that criticism of B-BBEE is driven by ideology or economic self-interest. But step back from that for a moment.

The real economic question is simpler:

How do you turn inclusion into measurable growth?

Because without that link:

• Inclusion feels symbolic
• Growth remains concentrated
• Frustration on all sides increases

And that link is not ownership.

It’s capability.

Where skills actually change the equation

Skills development is often treated as a secondary pillar in the B-BBEE framework. In practice, it should be the central one.

Because it is the only lever that directly impacts:

• Productivity
• Business sustainability
• Employability
• Long-term economic participation

It’s the difference between:

• Being part of the system
• Being able to perform within it

From compliance to competence

One of the most consistent criticisms of B-BBEE is that it has become compliance-heavy. The article hints at this through the gap between intent and outcome. But compliance is not the real issue.

Shallow capability is.

If skills development is approached as a requirement, it produces minimal results. If it’s approached as a growth strategy, it changes trajectories.

That’s the shift most organisations have not fully made.

A more honest way forward

If the goal is truly broad-based economic participation, then the focus has to evolve. Not away from B-BBEE, but deeper into what actually makes it work.

That means:

• Aligning training with real economic demand
• Measuring success through performance, not participation
• Treating skills as an investment, not a scorecard line

Because: Policy can create access. Only skills create traction.

The bottom line

The debate highlighted in the Moneyweb article will continue. And it should. But until capability becomes central to that conversation, we will keep seeing the same pattern:

• Access without scale.
• Participation without progression.
• Intent without impact.

Because without skills, empowerment remains theoretical. With skills, it becomes economic participation.