Who owns lonmin mining

Are we committed? South Africa and the UK would both be very short of water in the future. Brian Beamish replied that water is a major issue, especially potable water.

People come before industry and potable water is crucial. We spend much time looking at how to use less water and recover more water from tailings facilities. We also look at how to move water across the property. We have had opencast mining over the past decade.

Because you move solid rock you create a porous volume and rain water sinks in and we are recovering this from mined-out pits. But in when the Massacre happened, you had built just three, uninhabitable show-houses. At the time of the massacre, company CEO Ian Farmer was earning times more than the mineworkers were murdered for demanding in How many genuinely affordable accommodation units and apartments have now been built?

What has happened to all the money Lonmin accumulated over decades of plunder and extraction? Why are Black lives so cheap to white mining and finance capital?

Regarding pay differentials — the reality is that for the executive management there is a market and you have to attract and retain the level of skills available in that market. Regarding the general workforce there is also a market for labour. This is the way the world works. Unions negotiate for their members in the market. The famous rock drill operator level which has been much spoken about especially by the union: Lonmin pays a base salary of just over 12, rand per month and when you add allowances it comes to just under 20, rand.

The 19, we pay compares with a national average of just over 14, We are a good payer, over the average nationally and in the mining industry nationally. There are markets for senior executives and another market for workers. This is exploitation. Nima Mudey, also from student movement Decolonising Environmentalism, asked about the period of notice for shareholder meetings.

Our friends Bishop Jo Seoka and lawyer Andries Nkome applied for visas to visit the UK to attend this meeting but as of Friday afternoon they had not received them, making it impossible for them to attend.

What is this double standard? Another way, perhaps, for Britain to remind the world of its status as a former coloniser, who can still freely move around the world without visas to restrict them, but will not allow a reciprocal relationship, instead creating huge hurdles through extortionate visa fees and slow processing times — with no guarantee of acceptance — to prevent those especially from the Global South entry in the name of protecting its borders. How will you make sure that community representatives are able to attend the next EGM?

Will you commit to giving much more than the statutory minimum legal notice — which is two weeks for EGMS — of the meeting so that community representatives from South Africa have time to receive their visas? Our calendar is fairly well known. We do operate transparently. It is well known that in March we have our AGMs. It is not a matter of total ignorance. In and the AGM was in January. It was going to be in January in , but was postponed to March. As the last one was in March, there was no legal reason why it should not have been postponed as late as June The date was entirely unpredictable.

It is well known when we hold our meetings. The EGM is a difficult one. It is dependent on the legal process in South Africa and unfortunately AMCU appealed the decision of the Competition Tribunal to allow the transaction to proceed, and the date for the appeal set as 2 April. There is a sizeable delay to that transaction. We cannot dictate the timing of report from the appeal. We will do our best to give the maximum notice but cannot commit to more than three weeks.

Another long-term shareholder asked whether there would be another rights issue and whether Lonmin would be delisted from London. Brian Beamish replied that the board believed that the transaction with Sibanye Stillwater offered a comprehensive solution to the issues facing Lonmin.

They had no expectation of a rights issue. The transaction would give the company the money it needs to diversify to withstand the current difficult conditions, which is why the board recommends it. It would take place according to the Scheme of Arrangement. All Lonmin shares would flow to Sibanye Stillwater and Lonmin would then be delisted. When would Lonmin publish its audits? When will you do so? Beamish, Mr. Magara: Please explain to the shareholders of Lonmin how justice could be done to the widows of the miners, the workers who survived the Marikana massacre of 16 August and the community of Marikana.

Five and a half years after the massacre the issue of compensation for the widows still is not finalized. This is very painful for these women and their families. Mr Beamish, Mr Magara, what did the Lonmin management do to accelerate this never-ending process?

In December , activists started a trek from Marikana, in the North West province of South Africa, to the Union Buildings in Pretoria, demanding compensation for the widows of the 34 killed mineworkers.

They handed over a list to President Cyril Ramaphosa in which they demanded the finalisation of the compensation to widows of the Marikana massacre. Perhaps he could personally help the widows. They have been in discussion with the state for a long time. It is understood that the state made a settlement offer, which the wounded and arrested miners accepted on August 29 last year.

To date they have not given us one. They clearly do not believe us when we say there has been no payment. Magara, is the Lonmin management ready to make a contribution?

To get it clear: Bishop Seoka and the Marikana people do not want a museum of mining — as you seemed to understand last year! The Koppie is the site in Marikana where 34 Lonmin miners were shot and killed by the South African police on 16 August Do you agree that the Koppie would be the appropriate site for a monument?

We have fully dealt with all the issues they found to be unacceptable and have responded to all of their requests, and I see no reason why we should or can make the audits public as they are not our property. We then set up a trust to provide education for children in all of the affected families, people. The company did what the company could do to ameliorate the horrible effects though nothing makes up for the loss of a life.

Regarding what the government has done, we cannot help you as they do not consult with us about any payments they make and we do not know. We did the best we could to apply our minds and included all stakeholders and put it to interested parties but we have made no progress.

We do want a memorial and we will fund it and it should be at koppie but the holdup is with AMCU. We have asked AMCU to help us but it is they who are holding it up. This meeting has been disrupted for the past few years. Can we get on with the resolutions of this meeting?

People can speak to directors after the meeting. You are complicit. Let us keep it that way. Another shareholder asked that directors should publicise how many shares they own in the company. Brian Beamish pointed out that this was on page 97 of the annual report. What is the total amount of platinum and other products sold to BASF?

And can you also name the other products and the respective amounts sold? What is the total percentage of production sold to BASF? To which subsidiary company of the BASF enterprise exactly are you selling the metals?

Brian Beamish replied that there are over 30, workers in total. When we employ contractors we only use reputable companies who do not exploit their workers. Brian Beamish said that this was a snapshot of the year-end figures. He said that as the company had reduced the work force, both employees and contractors, the ratio had stayed broadly similar. The relationship with permanent employees is more stable than that with contractors.

Generally our mining teams underground are our own employees but on occasion we use contractors. He moved on to the issue of sales figures. He said that the number of ounces or percentages sold to particular customers were commercial issues which the company does not divulge.

As for awareness of the transaction with Sibanye Stillwater, Lonmin had spoken to all its customers. Contracts would all go with the business to Sibanye Stillwater if transaction were approved. Tilman Massa, of German Ethical Shareholders, asked about environmental impacts. You should ensure that people in the communities around the mine have sufficient and clean water, proper sanitation and electricity.

One severe incident took place on 26 February , when approximately 4, tons of slurry from a bulk tailings treatment pipeline spilled into the environment, also entering a river at Marikana. You submitted a rehabilitation plan that should conclude this year. Are you on track with your rehabilitation obligations and how will you make sure those incidents will not happen again? But your scope 1 and 2 GHG emission increased by almost 2, tons last year. How will you make sure you will reach even your own, very modest goals to fight climate change?

They used heavily to pollute the river Rhine in Germany for decades. Zero harm philosophy is not just about safety but about the environment. We did have an incident last year. We were commissioning a new tailings facility, pumping inert slurry across the property along an extended distance. The pipeline sprang a leak at one of the joints. Slurry escaped into the environment and we notified the authorities and came up with a clean-up plan which will be implemented this year.

It will all be taken care of as expected. Everything will be made good. We have targets, which we publish. Regarding greenhouse gases, most are produced off the property, through the electricity which we purchase. So we only control a small percentage of our greenhouse gas emissions so our challenge is to use less energy. His introduction to royalty and to Lonrho came from the same person, the Honorable Angus Ogilvy, husband to Queen Elizabeth's cousin, Princess Alexandra, and the director of Lonrho.

Ogilvy recruited Rowland, convinced that the year-old mining consultant could cure Lonrho's ills. At the time, Lonrho was a modestly sized ranching and mining company that was not doing very well. Once Rowland joined the company, however, torpid growth became a thing of the past.

In a few short years, his actions would outstrip what had taken a half-century to achieve. Once named a managing director of Lonrho, Rowland moved quickly to expand the company's interests, using his own portfolio of African holdings as a map for Lonrho's expansion and diversification.

The company's involvement in mining and ranching was deepened, and forays into automobile and oil distribution were made. Concurrently, the geographic scope of the company was widened considerably until it embraced nearly all of the African continent. Expansion took Lonrho out of Rhodesia, north of the Limpopo River, and into neighboring Malawi, Zambia, Kenya, Zaire, and Tanzania, transforming the company into an African conglomerate without rival.

It was during his crusade to broaden Lonrho's geographic base that Rowland displayed a talent no one could match, an ability that gave Lonrho a decisive advantage over other companies competing in Africa and made its flamboyant leader a legend. While shuttling throughout Africa in search of business opportunities, Rowland struck lasting personal and political friendships with the men who became leaders of their respective nations.

Rowland's ability to win over Africa's disparate political personages was astounding, the stuff of the greatest diplomats, effective no matter what the ideological leanings of others involved. With these powerful allies generally amenable to his business plans, Rowland was able to secure vast and diverse holdings for Lonrho, creating a tangle of operating companies that numbered in the hundreds. Annual sales increased exponentially as a result, and soon Rowland reigned over Lonrho's operations with resolute and absolute control, his rule autocratic.

As Rowland shaped Lonrho into a corporate archipelago and his power grew, the aggressive, confrontational managing director gained his detractors, perhaps the inevitable outcome of his singular influence over the fortunes of Lonrho and the way in which he exerted such influence. Feuds with both those within the company and outside its ranks were rampant during Rowland's stewardship of Lonrho, the most notable of which stemmed from a deal Rowland engineered during his first year with the company.

In , Rowland obtained the lucrative Beira oil pipeline connecting landlocked Rhodesia to what was then the Portuguese colony of Mozambique. The control of the pipeline was regarded as a coup of sorts, but when Rhodesia's Ian Smith announced his Unilateral Declaration of Independence in , British sanctions forced Rowland to shut down the pipeline. Rowland evidently did so, but when a faction of Lonrho insiders were trying to oust him during the early s, the question of whether or not Rowland had complied with British sanctions touched off a highly publicized investigation by the British government, the timing of which did not strike Rowland as a coincidence.

The British government launched an investigation into charges that, among other violations, Lonrho had not honored the Rhodesian sanctions, and against this backdrop a power struggle waged by pro-Rowland and anti-Rowland factions ensued.

In , the British government gave its answer, issuing a page report that essentially cleared Rowland of the sanctions-busting charges. Prime Minister Edward Heath took the opportunity to utter his much-quoted feelings on the matter, however, declaring that Lonrho was "the unpleasant and unacceptable face of capitalism," a characterization that in the years to follow was used to describe Rowland.

One African leader offered his own riposte, referring to Rowland as "capitalism with a human face," but Rowland did not let others do his fighting and launched his own attack on Britain in , charging that Britain, through its half-ownership of British Petroleum, was violating Rhodesian sanctions itself.

Further acrimony followed, leading to an inclusive end, but the power struggle within Lonrho ended with a decisive victory.

From the early s forward, Rowland was in charge as he had never been before. With a firm grip on the reins of command, Rowland guided Lonrho along the path of expansion and diversification, increasing the breadth and scale of the company's operations. In , he purchased one of Britain's largest Sunday newspapers, the Observer, which he would use as a bully pulpit to articulate his stance on controversial issues stemming from Lonrho's activities.

Myriad deals were made during the s and s, each strengthening Lonrho's position in a wide spectrum of businesses that included mining, farming, ranching, automobile distribution, sugar production, communications, financial services, and nearly anything Rowland could get his hands on. The continuing sprawl of Lonrho carried the company from its base in Africa into North America, Europe, and Asia, creating a genuine multinational conglomerate crowded with a labyrinthine assortment of subsidiary companies.

Lonrho, as one industry pundit observed, was like Rowland, "perplexingly diverse and hardly seeming to make a comprehensible whole. Despite Lonrho's stature, Rowland's personality and his propensity never to stray too far from controversy made the development of Lonrho, even as it was growing by a billion dollars in sales a year, a subsidiary story next to the highly publicized life of its creator.

This was true during the s, when the acrimony over the Beira pipeline erupted, and it was true during the s, when Rowland's pursuit of a prestigious British retail business stole the headlines.

The trouble began in the mids when Rowland was attempting to add another plume to Lonrho's hat. For years, Rowland had wanted to acquire House of Fraser plc, the parent company of, among many other retail properties, London's Harrods department store. On several occasions, his efforts to acquire the prestigious retail business had been parried by the British government on technical grounds, and by the mids, when he held Rowland wanted to launch another bid for the company, but he was afraid his bid would be rebuffed again by the government, which, he thought, would reduce the value of his stock once the denial was made public.

Consequently, Rowland sold his stock in House of Fraser to an Egyptian businessman and former sidewalk Coca-Cola vendor named Mohammed Al-Fayed, whose rise in the business world was a mystery to many. Al-Fayed, Rowland figured, lacked the resources to acquire House of Fraser on his own, and, furthermore, would have great difficulty in gaining the nod of approval from the British government.

Rowland was incorrect on both presumptions. Rowland, vigilantly on the prowl for suspected conspiracies and seemingly in pursuit of fostering corporate intrigue, was furious. In essence, he had attempted to use Al-Fayed to launch his own attack on House of Fraser, but before he knew what was happening Al-Fayed had tucked House of Fraser into his pocket. Never one to turn the cheek, Rowland bitterly opposed the deal, touching off a feud with Al-Fayed that lasted nearly a decade.

Five publicly funded official investigations were undertaken into the acquisition of House of Fraser before Al-Fayed and Rowland settled their dispute behind closed doors in , by which time Rowland was involved in the fight of his life. As the dispute between Al-Fayed and Rowland occupied the interests of industry observers, Lonrho held sway in a variety of industries. There were subsidiary companies composing Lonrho by this point, and more than , Lonrho employees were scattered throughout the globe.

It was the third-largest producer of platinum in the world through its ownership of Western Platinum mines in South Africa, which turned out more than one-quarter million ounces annually, and a major gold producer from mines in Ghana and in Zimbabwe, which yielded nearly , ounces a year. Lonrho also ranked as the largest single producer of food in Africa, owner of 1. Rowland's acquisition of the Observer had been supplemented with the addition of 23 provincial newspapers in the United Kingdom, adding to the might of the company.

There were scores of other businesses within the company's fold; together, they created a hard-to-follow tangle of companies all contributing to the coffers of Lonrho.

The massive armada of Lonrho companies exited the s at their peak. The early s witnessed the beginning of serious difficulties for the company, but its problems did not stem from the loose amalgamation of businesses that stretched across the globe--they were born from the company's core business, the mining operations that predated Rowland's arrival.

Prices for precious metals began to slide as the decade began, such as the precipitous drop registered by rhodium, a platinum-group metal used in catalytic converters and mined by Lonrho. For a company as diverse as Lonrho, depressive market prices in one of its many sectors should have had no adverse effect on the company's balance sheet. The wide range of the company's business activities presumably would mitigate the effect of slumping business in one area, but this was not the case.

Although mining accounted for only a marginal 7 percent of Lonrho's total revenue volume, the proceeds derived from mining contributed a significant 36 percent toward the company's total profit. Moreover, Rowland's seemingly endless feud with Al-Fayed was still raging on, and investor confidence began to wane as considerable effort, cash, and attention were devoted to the resolution of Rowland's contentious struggle.

Profits began to slip, and then they plummeted. Changes were needed, and many considered that Rowland would be unable to take the actions necessary to restore Lonrho's financial health. Though few questioned Rowland's power as a merchant-statesman, his conduct was perceived as part of the problem contributing to Lonrho's woes.

The stage was set, and the drama that followed disappointed no one. Enter Dieter Bock, a German financier who made his reputation by dealing in property in Germany. Well known only to a tight circle of German financiers, Bock was described as cautious and self-effacing, a mild-mannered businessman without the vociferous aplomb characteristic of Rowland.

Bock, as he later related, discovered Lonrho "by coincidence" while doing research into large companies during the s. Though he lacked any appreciable experience in international business on the scale and breadth of Lonrho, he was nevertheless interested in the company.

Bock met Rowland in the fall of for the first time, and from there the two began to negotiate; what they would agree upon would surprise nearly all those who watched from the wings. Bock, it was announced in late , would become Lonrho's largest shareholder by January Perhaps more surprising, he would also share the chief executive's position with Rowland from that month forward. When those familiar with Lonrho heard the news, they were shocked by this turn of events.

Not only had Rowland allowed someone else to eclipse his commanding position as the largest shareholder, but he had evidently conferred upon Bock--a little-known businessman young enough to be his son, with negligible international business experience--the title of heir apparent to the Lonrho empire. It was odd, but soon normalcy--the Rowland breed of normalcy--returned to reassure those who were distressed by the mysterious upheavals within the company.

Bock immediately took the initiative. Bock wanted to change Lonrho's management structure, a plan met by stiff resistance from Rowland. Bock cited Rowland's never-ending feud with Al-Fayed as a deleterious drain on company resources, but Rowland's unexpected appeasement with Al-Fayed in ended the effectiveness of Bock's rallying point before it could gain momentum.

Next, Bock claimed that several directors of the company were beyond retirement age and drawing substantial pensions on top of already substantial salaries.