Mostly harmless

I wasn`t the only one to be taken aback when I saw the headline: EIF choosing DTI code over charter?

The ITWeb report stated that the electronics sub-sector of the ICT industry still "supported" the charter, but would at any rate adopt the Department of Trade and Industry`s (DTI`s) Code of Good Practice instead.

The most likely meaning of such a riddle, one would think, was that while the Electronics Industry Federation (EIF) thought the charter OK for some folks, it didn`t count its own members among them.

This was quite worrying. I didn`t like the idea of the entire industry bleeding, sweating and crying for years to get this far, only for the process to be hugely jeopardised by the actions of a smallish band within the industry (it is said to make up 25% of the ICT sector). Why hadn`t the EIF said anything before?

The next day, ITWeb did a follow-up report on the matter, including a statement by Roger Dawes, general secretary of the EIF, venturing that not only did the EIF support the charter process, but it also wasn`t about to leave it. He didn`t say the organisation would not adopt the DTI code, only that it would have to wait and see what steps to take next with regard to its decision to do so.

How very strange. The EIF, it appeared, was straddling two logically opposite camps.

Joe Mjwara, chairman of the ICT charter steering committee, gave the issue some realism. "We feel the EIF may have to re-think the idea of adopting the DTI`s code as opposed to the ICT industry`s charter," he said.

This statement provides a clue as to what actually went down. The EIF, other sector bodies, the American Chamber of Commerce and, separately, other multinationals made representations to the steering committee yesterday. So the EIF`s statements were far from its final word on the matter. It might best be described as an objection for the record (to the content of the charter, which imposes heavier percentage requirements on its constituents than the DTI code).

Further clarity comes from the revelation that a certain somebody within the EIF had sent an e-mail to somebody else in the organisation, remarking that the EIF had "turned its back" on the charter. It now appears that this person had "completely overstated" the issue, and that the EIF merely wanted to make a point - which is that it would have preferred the charter`s provisions to come in line with those of the DTI code.

The charter has survived many crises before, and it`ll survive this overblown one too. People want it to work.

Carel Alberts, Special Editions Editor, ITWeb Brainstorm

Dawes explained that the EIF`s point was intended to be heard at representations to the steering committee of the charter merely as "a starting point to negotiations". That this body is likely to work within the charter negotiations in order to eventually adopt it, rather than turn its back on it, I`m inclined to believe, given Mjwara`s confident assurance.

I`m further inclined to believe that Mjwara`s certainty stems from something else entirely. The ICT charter will, it has been agreed, govern the entire industry. It doesn`t very well have a choice in the matter now. And as another source close to the action told me, they wouldn`t go along with it right to the very end, only to drop it when final touches are being applied.

That`s just as well. Such a putative departure would have been an incredible setback. The actions of the EIF (composed of only 60 members, but comprising huge and influential conglomerates like Altech) might have been the cause of the latest crisis in the charter process. Other sub-sectors, such as telecoms (with members including big, scary names like Telkom, MTN, Vodacom and so on) and broadcasting (SABC and others) might, if a late departure were at all possible, follow their sub-sectoral lead and leave fragments of transformation codes all over the place, with little certainty for anyone.

But Mjwara`s certainty is based on the fact that 95% of the industry supports the charter "process", as it is often rather irritatingly, but correctly, called. It has survived many crises before, and it`ll survive this overblown one too. People want it to work. A better endorsement of South African goodwill can scarcely be imagined.

It is, however, this very issue of certainty about which sector is governed by which framework that the EIF is also addressing with its actions. These aren`t the petulant actions of a child simply wanting its way.

Let`s recap: Dawes and the group wish to have closer alignment between the principles and percentages in the charter and those of the DTI. Should that come about - it`s one of the most reasonable arguments yet in the whole debate - then chances are that an IT company selling to a mining company, in turn governed by the mining charter, wouldn`t follow an entirely different set of rules as the procuring entity. That can only be good for business in general, and ICT business in particular.