Namibia throws out black ownership mining requirement

Visser

Visser

Expert Member
Joined
Apr 13, 2010
Messages
1,981
Reaction score
623
Namibia has scrapped a rule allowing only companies partly owned by black Namibians to apply for mining licences, mines minister Tom Alweendo told AFP on Saturday.

The southern African country produces diamonds, uranium and other mineral resources, but a three-year recession has pushed the government into relaxing the rules in the hope of attracting more investors.

Alweendo said the government made the decision last week.

"Our objective is to grow the mining sector where it can continue to meaningfully contribute to our socio-economic development. This can only happen when more minerals are discovered and it is important that we make the progress of mineral discovery as effective as possible," he said.

This, he said, required more investment in the sector.

The Namibian government started giving preferential treatment to black-owned companies in 2006, but eventually that was not deemed enough.
Click to expand...

https://www.news24.com/Africa/News/namibia-throws-out-black-ownership-mining-requirement-20181027
 
Lol, glad to see this worked well for them.... first want to see a regime change and then investors will head back. Current regime, just like ours, are too unstable and cannot be trusted. Investors are funny people. They do not like losing money. Time these countries wake up and realize just that.
 
Visser said:
Lol, glad to see this worked well for them.... first want to see a regime change and then investors will head back. Current regime, just like ours, are too unstable and cannot be trusted. Investors are funny people. They do not like losing money. Time these countries wake up and realize just that.
Click to expand...

Your post doesn't make sense. Please elaborate.
 
Yes, his post was straight forward enough.

It is remarkable that something that was so 'morally right' can be so casually trashed when recession strikes. It exposes the absolute truth. It was never any kind of moral requirement. It was just simply a vengeful racist act, and when they eventually see the cost, like Zimbabwe did as well the philosophy of 'black excellence' and moral thinking goes straight out the window. These countries like SA, Zim, Namibia need to recognise that racist policies are extremely costly, the same way the Nats found that out. Good to see some waking up and adopting one it two non-racial policies. It just needs to go a long way further.
 
Milano said:
Yes, his post was straight forward enough.

It is remarkable that something that was so 'morally right' can be so casually trashed when recession strikes. It exposes the absolute truth. It was never any kind of moral requirement. It was just simply a vengeful racist act, and when they eventually see the cost, like Zimbabwe did as well the philosophy of 'black excellence' and moral thinking goes straight out the window. These countries like SA, Zim, Namibia need to recognise that racist policies are extremely costly, the same way the Nats found that out. Good to see some waking up and adopting one it two non-racial policies. It just needs to go a long way further.
Click to expand...
No it does not make sense, it is just a ramble, at least yours does.
 
access said:
along the lines of this policy change, why what were you thinking
Click to expand...
Ok, proof enough that his post did not make perfect sense, unless you guys are speaking in some Broderbond code that that Forcefare and I can't understand? Since when is a policy change the same thing as a regime change?
 
Last edited:
thechamp said:
Ok, what regime change do investors want to see in Namibia?
Click to expand...

The moment a serious investor withdraw investments from a country due to its government, it is highly unlikely that they will return investments even if policy changes are made. There is too much risks that the same government could pose a threat to future investments. Investors will return when a new government is in place with sound business policies and investor interests at heart.

Namibia will see soon enough that investors are unlikely to return.
 
thechamp said:
Ok, proof enough that his post did not make perfect sense, unless you guys are speaking in some Broderbond code that that Forcefare and I can't understand? Since when is a policy code the same thing as a regime change?
Click to expand...

had a few? :D
 
Milano said:
Yes, his post was straight forward enough.

It is remarkable that something that was so 'morally right' can be so casually trashed when recession strikes. It exposes the absolute truth. It was never any kind of moral requirement. It was just simply a vengeful racist act, and when they eventually see the cost, like Zimbabwe did as well the philosophy of 'black excellence' and moral thinking goes straight out the window. These countries like SA, Zim, Namibia need to recognise that racist policies are extremely costly, the same way the Nats found that out. Good to see some waking up and adopting one it two non-racial policies. It just needs to go a long way further.
Click to expand...

Now, compare this post to post #2. Be objective.

Of course there are multiple reasons why investors might not want to invest in a country. Large mining houses still spent money on expansion projects at the height of Mugabe's land reform program.
 
ForceFate said:
Large mining houses still spent money on expansion projects at the height of Mugabe's land reform program.
Click to expand...

Lol :ROFL: Like who? The 'big' Chinese miners and a couple South African companies with heavily scaled down operations?

Wonder why Zim would even want to lure back mining investments into their country if you are correct - https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/w...harm-offensive-to-win-back-mining-investment/

By the way, things are not going good for Zim on the mining front either. Investors still awaiting regime change.
 
Only an NPC could fail to understand the very exact meaning of both the headline and article while continuing to claim it must be something else. If you cannot recognise the truth in the article then you will never recognise the truth in the posts either.
 
By the way, businesses, even more so investors, are not tjommies you can p!$$ off today and tomorrow turn around asking them to come back and be pals again. Investors want security and assurances that they are safe and protected and that their investments will grow for them and not be shared with poor people. Once that trust is broken, it is game over.

If you want an investors money, or need it desperately, you cannot dictate the terms. An investor does this. If you want to change those terms with laws in future, you are risking what is currently happening in South Africa, Zimbabwe, Venezuela and the likes.
 
Visser said:
Lol :ROFL: Like who? The 'big' Chinese miners and a couple South African companies with heavily scaled down operations?

Wonder why Zim would even want to lure back mining investments into their country if you are correct - https://www.businesslive.co.za/bd/w...harm-offensive-to-win-back-mining-investment/

By the way, things are not going good for Zim on the mining front either. Investors still awaiting regime change.
Click to expand...

I didn't say things were going well. I said investors still spent money. This one for example...

https://m.fin24.com/Companies/Mining/zimplats-spends-669m-on-mine-development-20180301

Of course it's going to be difficult for them to attract investment given the fact that they will have to import skills as well.
 
Last edited:
Seriously said:
Noe explain
Now explain Why the need to import skills? What happened to the skills the had?
Click to expand...

There was no economic activity. Naturally, they left in search of greener pastures. Quite a number of them, black and white, are running businesses here in SA.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X