ATC130607: Report of the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources on public hearings on the Mining Charter , dated 5 June 2013
Mineral Resources and Energy
Report of the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources on public
hearings on the Mining Charter , dated 5 June 2013
The Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources, having
conducted public hearings on the Mining Charter, reports as follows:
1.
Introduction
The Department of Mineral Resources published
the Amended Mining Charter on 20 September 2010. Consequently, the Portfolio
Committee on Mineral Resources undertook
the public hearings with the
purpose of listening to the mining industry stakeholders, organised formations,
mining communities and mine workers, so as to ascertain whether they are aware
of the revision of the Charter and if they were satisfied with the amendments.
The public hearings were conducted in Carltonville, Gauteng Province,
Klerksdorp, North West Province on 30 and 31 March respectively, and also in
parliament on 24, 26, 31 August and 14 September 2011. The Committee also
conducted hearings on the implementation of the Mining Charter by the top 10
mining companies on 02, 09 and 16 November 2011. This report therefore seeks to
summarize the key issues raised by the organisations during the public hearings.
2.
Background
The Mineral and Petroleum Resources Development
Act (Act 28 of 2002) stipulates that the Minister must within six months from
the date on which the Act took effect develop a broad-based socio-economic
empowerment Charter that would set the framework, targets and time-table for
effecting the entry of historically disadvantaged South Africans into the
mining industry, and allow such South Africans to benefit from the exploitation
of mining and mineral resources.
Accordingly, in 2002, the erstwhile Department
of Minerals and Energy (now Department of Mineral Resources) together with
mining industry stakeholders, including the Chamber of Mines, South African
Mining Development Association (SAMDA) and the National Union of Mine Workers
(NUM) signed the Mining Charter. The stakeholders agreed to meet after five
years to review the progress and to determine what steps, if any, need to be taken
to achieve the objectives of the Mining Charter. In accordance with the
objective of the agreement by stakeholders, the DMR undertook an assessment to
determine the extent to which the objectives of the Mining Charter have been
achieved. The Mining Charter Impact Assessment Report was published in October
2009.
Subsequent to the report, the Amended Mining
Charter was published on the 20
th
September 2010 with the 13
th
September 2010 as the effective date. In a statement issued by the DMR in
response to accusations of lack of consultation, it reported that the relevant
aspects of the
Stakeholders Declaration
on Strategy for the Sustainable Growth and Meaningful Transformation of South
Africas Mining Industry
were effectively migrated to constitute the bulk
of the amendments of the Mining Charter. The declaration document was signed by
all stakeholders represented in MIGDETT, which include the Chamber of Mines,
SAMDA, NUM, UASA and Solidarity.
3.
Composition of Delegation
3.1
Portfolio
Committee on Mineral Resources
The delegation to the Provinces comprised of the Chairperson of the
Committee and Leader of the delegation, Mr MF Gona (ANC) , Ms FC Bikani (ANC),
Mr C Gololo (ANC), Ms DH Mathebe (ANC), Ms N Mdaka (ANC), Ms LN Mjobo (ANC), Mr
MR Sonto (ANC), Adv HC Schmidt (DA).
Support staff
Ms N Skaka (committee secretary), Mr S Ngcobo (committee researcher), Mr
V Mfuniselwa (committee assistant), Mr J van der Westhuizen (committee
assistant), Mr A Sheldon (technician), Mr T Sithole (technician), Mr G Ntshane
(language practitioner), Ms L Molopyane (language practitioner), Mr K Gorata
(language practitioner), Mr BG Mani (language practitioner), Mr A Groener
(language practitioner), Ms CT Hartogh (language practitioner) and Mr L Namzi
(media unit).
4.
Stakeholder
and Interest Group Participation in the Provinces
The participation in the public hearings varied amongst
mining industry stakeholders that were part of the drafting of the charter,
organised formations that were not part of the drafting and interested or
affected individuals. The list of organisations that participated is as
follows:
4.1
Organisations
·
Chamber of Mines
·
National
·
Merafong Mining Community
Forum
·
Merafong Youth Forum
·
Wendela Consortium
·
Merafong Construction Forum
·
Merafong Youth Business
Chamber
·
South African Women in
Mining Association (SAWIMA)
·
International
·
Taung Traditional
Leadership
4.2
The State
·
Municipal representatives
·
4.3
Analysis of submissions
The submissions, majority of which were oral,
were explored in detail for common themes and these were established into units
of meaning.
4.3.1.
Chamber of Mines
·
The mining companies
represented by the Chamber of Mines support the New Mining Charter and are
currently planning how to implement it.
·
The mining companies acknowledge
the shortcomings of the Old Mining Charter, which include lack of clarity on
targets, gaps on health and safety as well as poor consultation.
·
The Chamber hopes that,
unlike in the previous commodities boom,
4.3.2.
The
·
The Gauteng Provincial
Legislature has identified mineral beneficiation as crucial for value addition
and to this effect has identified the OR Tambo International Airport as the
strategic beneficiation zone due to its location as an import/export hub.
4.3.3.
National
·
The National Union of Mine Workers (NUM) pointed
out that transformation is very slow in the mining industry.
·
The NUM also pointed out that the designation of
all women as Historically Disadvantaged South Africans (HDSAs) had an
unintended consequence of promotion of white women to key positions.
·
The New Charter stipulates that all levels of
employment should reflect the demographics of the country.
·
The NUM cautioned that the mining companies must
not wait until 2014 to achieve targets as section 47 of the MPRDA must apply to
those who do not comply.
·
The NUM also raised concern about the lack of
accessibility of royalties to host communities and lack of development of
labour sending areas.
·
A concern was also raised by the union with regard
to lack of progress on ownership as well as procurement element.
4.3.4.
Merafong Mining
Community Forum
·
The Merafong Mining
Community Forum raised a concern about the failure to implement the Old Mining
Charter, which has resulted in continued existence of single sex hostels and
environmental degradation evidenced by, among other things, acid mine draining.
·
The forum complained about
not being invited to participate in the drafting of the New Charter.
·
The forum submitted the
Ghost Town Manifesto.
4.3.5.
Merafong Youth Forum
·
Provision of bursaries to
all deserving students regardless of the field of study is one of the issues
raised by the youth.
·
It was proposed that West
Deep be declared a heritage site.
·
A concern was raised
regarding the employment of foreign nationals at the expense of South Africans.
However, a caution was also raised to avoid a creation of an environment that
is fertile for the eruption of xenophobia.
4.3.6.
South African Women in Mining Association
·
The South African Women in
Mining Association (SAWIMA) pointed inconsistencies when applying the Charter
elements on applications for mining permits/rights e.g. In Limpopo locals are
given priority while in North West only the BEE status is considered.
·
SAWIMA would like to see an
establishment of a specific body/tribunal that monitors compliance to the
Mining Charter.
·
It also proposed the
introduction of rules to govern foreign investments in the industry.
·
SAWIMA also proposed that
the issue of workers who work for contractors need to be addressed as these
workers appear not to enjoy labour rights enjoyed by all other workers.
·
A complaint was raised
about the exhumation of graves by mining companies without consultation.
4.3.7.
Taung Traditional Leadership
·
Kgosi Nyoko Motlhabane of
the Batlhaping BaGa Maidi on behalf of the Taung Traditional Leadership gave
testimony of the assistance his community received from the Portfolio Committee
on Mineral Resources regarding a land dispute with the mining company.
·
The Leadership welcomed the review of the Charter
and the proposed amendments but believed that more can be done to ensure that
the core objectives, i.e. equitable access and improved living standards are
fully achieved.
·
They welcomed the changes in the Mining Charter to
establish targets and to make violations of the Charter violations of the Act
itself.
·
They supported the change in the provisions for
development of mining communities from an approach focused on external planning
to cooperative planning with local communities.
·
They also supported the requirement that
multi-national suppliers of capital goods to the mining industry must
contribute to community development.
·
They wanted some clarification as to some points
related to community development and these were the following:
v
How will the Social
Development Fund receiving money from multi-nationals be managed and what will
be its functions?.
v
What is meant by the
language in the Scorecard referring to communities owing patronage to projects?
·
In order to further strengthen the Charter, the
Leadership made the following recommendations:
v
They noted that the Charter does not discuss the
obligations of government, industry and Traditional Leadership with respect to
mining on land of traditional communities. In these cases, particularly with
respect to communities that are new to mining and lack resources, Government
should play a more proactive and developmental role.
v
Historically, these communities have provided
workers to the mining industry for many generations and the mining industry
should therefore take up responsibilities to assist these communities as well.
v
Government should share with traditional leaders and their structures
for development all information as to mineral resources on traditional land.
v
Government and industry should establish a fund that will provide
grants, loans on favourable terms and technical assistance to communities to
enable them to-
§
Obtain prospecting and
mining rights
§
Mine
§
Develop skills
§
Engage in beneficiation and
marketing
§
Create and manage trust
funds to ensure that the profits of mining are used for the benefit of past,
present and future generations
§
Complete Development
Strategies within the framework of government policies and programmes for
sustainable growth and development.
v
They stated that all of
these recommendations are consistent with South Africas plan for Government to
be developmental as well as provisions of the Amended Mining Charter. These
recommendations will also contribute to achieving the newly added objective,
i.e. Promote sustainable development and growth of the mining industry.
5.
Stakeholder and
Interest Group Participation in Parliament
The participation in the public hearings varied
between the Department of Mineral Resources, mining industry stakeholders that
were part of the drafting of the charter, organised formations that were not
part of the drafting and interested or affected individuals. The list of
organisations that participated is as follows:
·
Chamber of Mines
·
Business Unity South Africa
·
South African Mining
Development Association (SAMDA)
·
National Union of Mine
Workers (NUM)
·
Congress of South African
Trade Unions (COSATU)
·
National Union of Metal
Workers of South Africa (NUMSA)
·
Solidarity
·
Mpumalanga Women in Mining
(WIMM)
·
Western Cape Women in
Mining (WIMWC)
·
Northern Cape Women in
Mining (WIMNC)
·
Capital Equipment Export Council
·
Webber Wentzel
·
Equitable Access Campaign
·
Royal Hlangwana House
·
Sydney on Vaal
Beneficiaries
·
Merafong Mining Community
Forum
·
Bravura Consulting
·
J Rocha Consulting
·
National Youth Development
Agency
·
Joy Global Africa
·
Taung Traditional
Leadership
·
South African Institute of
International Affairs
5.1
Analysis of submissions
The following is the summary of inputs that the Committee received in
Parliament.
5.1.1
Department of Mineral Resources
Mr Andre Andrias, the Director for Mineral Policy and Legislation
Development made the presentation and began by giving a brief background of the
Mining Charter (the Charter). He informed the Committee that
Section 100(2) of the Mineral and Petroleum Resources
Development Act (MPRDA) made provision for the Minister of Mineral Resources
(the Minister) to develop a broad-based socio-economic empowerment Charter to
the mining industry. As a result, mining sector stakeholders signed the Mining
Charter in October 2002. Stakeholders agreed to review the Mining Charter after
five years. In 2008 the Department of Mineral Resources (the Department)
appointed an independent service provider to assess progress made on the Mining
Charter against specific targets. He outlined the results which the assessment
yielded. He then referred to the amendment of the Charter which was aimed at
strengthening and sharpening the effectiveness of the
old Charter in driving transformation and competitiveness in the mining sector.
This was to be achieved through implementation of nine elements, which included
ownership; procurement and enterprise development;
beneficiation; employment equity; human resource development; mine community
development; housing and living conditions; sustainable development and growth
in the mining industry; and reporting (monitoring and evaluation).
Mr Andrias concluded by informing the Committee
that a monitoring and evaluation module was to be developed to ensure higher
levels of compliance with the Charter. He also mentioned the fact that
companies were obliged to report levels of compliance annually and that a
review of the MPRDA to increase penalty provisions that may be imposed on
companies for non-compliance was needed.
5.1.2
Business Unity South Africa
Mr Kganki Matabane, Executive Director for
Transformation Policy made the presentation and began by informing the
Committee that Business Unity South Africas (BUSA) Transformation Policy
Committee promoted broad-based Black Economic Empowerment. BUSA believe that
the mining industry would continue to be an important pillar of the South
African economy for the foreseeable future. The organisation described the
evolution of the Charter from the initial Charter of 2002 to the Revised
Charter of 2010, which they argued was not aligned to the Broad Based Black
Economic Empowerment Codes of Good Practice. This entailed some companies
having to double-report, but had the advantage that the Charter was more
specific to mining. There is no requirement for verification of the scorecard
by an independent body, which is a weakness, but the fact that reporting was
now done annually was a positive development.
Mr Matabane commented that the New Growth Path
(NGP) had specifically identified mining as one of the main economic sectors
with a high potential for creating jobs. He further argued that discussion of
the Charter should be in line with the objectives of the NGP. He indicated that
mining was an industry with a long lead time on investment decisions. He concluded
by emphasizing that rules must be consistent and given enough time for
implementation before being changed and that BUSA remained optimistic that the
mining and other sectors would meet their transformation targets.
5.1.3
Chamber of Mines
Dr Frans Barker, Senior Executive in the Chamber of Mines (the Chamber)
gave the input which focused on the progress with the implementation of the
Charter. He began by reviewing the revised Charter which was gazetted in
September 2010. He informed the Committee that
stakeholders had agreed to
retain the principle of a special instrument for mining. He then noted changes
and new and improved targets in the revised Charter. These included
strengthened annual reporting and a proper scorecard, with provisions to deal
with non-compliant companies. He further reported on progress and challenges
with implementation. He indicated that mining companies could and should have
learned more under the previous Charter.
Dr Barker commented on the Industry Progress Report based on company
reports submitted to the Department. He also reported on progress with
implementation as to ownership, procurement, skills development, employment
equity, community development, accommodation, health and safety, environment,
and reporting and suggested how the Charter could be further improved. He
argued that the Chamber wanted an opportunity for the revised Charter to show
results, rapid feedback from the Department, a guidance document, and alignment
with, for example, the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) Code on
procurement and independent verification. He then gave a detailed progress
report, together with challenges, on ownership, procurement, skills
development, employment equity, community development, accommodation, health
and safety, environment, and reporting. He claimed that no Chamber member was
at less than 15 per cent on ownership, measured against the weighted average of
28 per cent as contained in the Charter. Challenges as to ownership included
the need to ensure that future deals were sufficiently broad-based. It noted
that, as far as it could determine, all its members had reported, and
emphasised that speedy feedback from the Department would be very important.
5.1.4
Capital Equipment Export Council
The Director for Group Strategy and Public Affairs, Bell Equipment Sales
SA Limited, Mr Guy Harris, gave the input and began by giving a brief
background and overview of the Capital Equipment Export Council (the Council).
He informed the Committee that the Council fully supported the need to redress
imbalances created by the unjust system of the past and stated that the biggest
threats in South Africa were unemployment, poverty and inequality. He submitted
that job creation in South Africa and the transformation of the economy was
best achieved by adapting the Mining Charter to give preference to the South
African manufactured product as that would do most in addressing unemployment,
poverty and inequality. This could be achieved by setting targets for
procurement of locally manufactured equipment, with a local content of at least
50 per cent, by mining companies and contractors of mining companies. He also stated
that companies should be able to obtain bonus points for buying locally.
5.1.5
Webber Wentzel
T
he Senior Associate for Webber Wentzel, Mr Jonathan
Veeren, made the submission and informed the Committee that they advised
various mining companies. He informed the Committee that
the legal status of the revised Mining Charter and
the ability of the Minister of Mineral Resources to amend it were uncertain. He
further stated that the revised Charter's failure to adequately define terms
such as "
BEE entity
",
"
Demographics
", and
"
Effective ownership
",
and its failure to define "
core
and critical skills
", "
material
constraints
" and "
services
"
and "
consumer goods
"
rendered the revised Charter vague and uncertain with respect to the referring
provisions. He indicated that the concepts of "
Effective ownership
" and "
Meaningful economic participation
" were contradictory in
material respects and the latter may violate the Companies Act.
Mr Veeren further advised the Committee that the
requirements of mine community development in the revised Charter were not
clearly defined and therefore uncertain. Furthermore, he indicated that the
requirements of sustainable development were currently governed by other
legislation, rendering the provisions unnecessary and as they related to
research facilities were not feasible. The revised Charter also failed to
provide adequate instruction on the use of the Charter scorecard which had
taken on a new and more complex approach in determining the compliance of
mining companies. He concluded by submitting that whether the revised Mining
Charter may purport to give itself the force of law remained debatable.
5.1.6
National Union of Metal Workers of South
Africa
The
Parliamentary Officer for the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa
(NUMSA), Mr Woody Aroun,
gave the input
and informed the
Committee that
NUMSA was
especially concerned with beneficiation and its impact on the metals and
engineering sector. He stated that minerals were a non-renewable 'wasting
asset' and that South Africa was 'well-endowed with metals' but import parity
pricing impeded 'growth and employment creation by the downstream sectors'.
Also electricity pricing hampered downstream steel production as downstream
producers had to pay more.
He further
indicated that there was enormous potential for expanding South Africa's
capital equipment and medium and heavy commercial vehicle industries and, over
time, South Africa should become less dependent on imports.
Mr Aroun
emphasized the fact that, if platinum continued to be exported in large volumes
without being beneficiated, the chances of making South Africa a leader in the
production of catalytic converters was slim. He advised that the revised
Charter should not undermine the objectives of the Industrial Policy Action
Plan 2 (IPAP2), but should be aligned with the key action plans of the IPAP2,
and strategically lever public procurement to facilitate metals beneficiation.
5.1.7
South African Mining Development
Association
The President, Mrs Bridgette Radebe, the Chairperson, Mr Peter Temane and
the Head of Policy, Mr Nkosinathi Ngwenya, for the South African Mining
Development Association (SAMDA), made the input and began by giving some introductory
remarks and also a brief overview of the Association and their submission. They
informed the Committee that SAMDA was extremely concerned that transformation
in the mining industry had not been met and the Charter targets had not been
achieved by the majority of the industry. They felt that extension of targets
from 2009 to some 2010 and others to 2014 was a betrayal of transformation.
They also raised their concern with the fact that the amended Charter made no
reference to women and the disabled.
They
noted that t
he Mining Charter has disturbingly low targets for employment equity and
has no targets for black women. e.g. Mining Companies are required to achieve a
minimum of 40 per cent HDSA representation at all occupational levels. They
were of the view that this 40 per cent target should be revised and new targets
for black people, black women and black disabled employees should be set. These
targets should be in line with EAP (Economically Active Population) targets, as
this will avoid over-representation. They viewed HDSA targets as distorting the
true picture of transformation in the mining industry because of a significant
over-representation of white women in management. For example, the Commission
for Employment Equity (CEE) report of 2011 shows that there are 6.5 per cent
white women in top management (this is well above the EAP target for white
women (5.3 per cent)) compared to three per cent black, coloured and Indian
women. The charter must introduce specific interventions to increase the representation
of women and in particular black women, in management and the industry at
large.
SAMDA felt that the non-adherence to the Housing and Living Conditions
and Procurement and Beneficiation requirements was a problem. They submitted
that
Mine
Community and Rural Development requirements in the Amended Charter were vague
and that there were no specific targets set. This was despite the fact that the
bulk of the South Africans were domiciled in vulnerable rural areas and did not
enjoy the benefits of rural renewal projects that would symbolize the value
that is extracted from the communities in revenue accumulation by mining
investors.
SAMDA proposed
that ESOPs should live and exist through the
life of a mine. They also provided some statistics on ownership, which placed
the total ownership by black people in the JSE at approximately four per cent. They
concluded by saying that the
mining Charter had a lot of weaknesses and
its alignment with the DTI codes would be the best solution, even though, it
was promulgated before them. They also proposed that the Department should
impose more punitive measures for non-compliance.
5.1.8
National Union of Mineworkers
The National
Education Secretary, Mr Zwelitsha Tantsi and the Parliamentary Officer, Mr
Madoda Sambatha, for the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), made the
submission. They began by commenting that the Chamber of Mines submission to
the Committee (in which they questioned the DMR research report that showed a
lack of compliance with the Charter) was 'not innocent' and was an attack on
the integrity of the stakeholders. They stated that it was a deliberate attempt
to rubbish the work of the consultants. The NUM therefore put on record that it
did not appreciate the Chamber's attitude. They then gave a background to the
NUMs submission, followed by introductory comments on the Mining Charter and
its objectives. They commented on the elements or pillars of the Charter, with
reference to ownership and joint ventures, procurement and enterprise
development, beneficiation, employment equity, human resource development, mine
community development, housing and living conditions, and sustainable
development and growth of the mining industry.
Mr Sambatha
concluded by providing NUMs suggested actions required from Parliament after
the public hearings. These included, amongst others, the following:
·
Parliament
should change
the focus on the debate on empowering individuals and introduce a new debate on
empowering mineworkers, host communities and labour sending communities;
·
Parliament must consider
mandating both the Department of Mineral Resources (the Department) and the
Department of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (COGTA) on
development of Mining Community investment policy;
·
Parliament
must fall in
line with the African National Congress NGC, September 2011 resolution, for the
Department and the National Planning Commission to prioritize the
Development and Adoption of the Mining Sector
Strategy
, using the current Departments strategy;
·
Parliament
must mandate the
Council for Geosciences, Mintek and Mine Health and Safety Council to fast
track technological development on possible advanced technology to detect
seismicity occurrences;
·
Parliament should mandate the Black Economic
Empowerment Council and Department of Trade and Industry (DTI)
to develop a common formula to be used when
assessing
Ownership
in the
Mining Industry and that all parties involved should be compelled to use the
same formula;
·
Parliament should investigate possibilities of
making the Mining Charter a concessionary contract to either a Mining Right or
Prospecting Right and this could be made possible by
changing the Licensing regime on the Mineral and Petroleum Resources
Development Act (MPRDA) when amendments are finally presented to Parliament;
·
Parliament
must propose
the introduction of
Minerals
Beneficiation Commission to be under DTI and composing the following
stakeholders: Department of Health, Department of Mineral Resources, Mintek,
Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, DTI, Department of Science and
Technology, Organised Business and Organised Labour in Mining;
·
Parliament should call on the Cabinet to finalize
and call for public hearings on
State
Owned Mining Company;
·
Parliament should request the Ministers of Mineral
Resources, Economic Development, COGTA, and Rural Development and Land Reform,
to consider the development of policy perspectives in the following:
▪ Social labour plan,
▪ Traditional authority or community ownership, and
▪ Community development;
·
Parliament must develop a resolution to exclude
white women as employment equity beneficiaries but allow them only on underground
employment and must also oppose employing black women for menial and less
rewarding jobs while white women were employed for senior administration,
management, costing, and finance, or, if underground, only for skilled work;
·
Parliament must institute an implementation
mechanism for the previous Parliament's resolution on the need to investigate
both living and working conditions of mineworkers; and
·
Parliament must discourage any attempt by employers
to enter into home ownership ventures as a means of alternative income. Home
ownership programmes remained a social responsibility for companies towards
their employees.
5.1.9
Congress of South African Trade Unions
Ms Prakashnee Govender, the Parliamentary Liaison Officer for the
Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) gave the input and began by
giving a brief introduction of the organisations submission. She noted that
the Mining Charter (the Charter) had only recently been amended and asked for
clarity on the role of the Committee in relation to any substantive concerns
that might be raised regarding the text of the new Charter. She stated that the
mineral wealth of South Africa had been exploited with no benefit to the
majority of the country and this was overdue for change. According to COSATU,
the needs of those directly impacted by the mining industry required emphasis
and the mineral-dependent nature of the economy needed to be addressed with the
creation of local value-adding industries. Compliance with the Charter needed
to be ensured. Ms Govender emphasized the need for social ownership and local
value-adding industries needed to get priority over import companies. She
indicated that ethnographic consultation with communities needed to be
implemented in meaningful ways. She further said that skills development should
allow for long-term security, given the finite life-span of mining operations
and that provision should be made for the needs and security of foreign migrant
workers.
5.1.10
Solidarity
Mr Gideon Du Plessis, the Deputy Secretary General for Solidarity made
the presentation and began by emphasizing Solidaritys strong belief
that
transformation was a crucial requirement for the stability of the mining
industry. He informed the Committee that
Solidarity supported the
revised Charter and favoured Employee Share Ownership Plans as a model for
community ownership and wealth distribution. He further indicated that the
average community share ownership should be increased to five per cent and
wherever possible, Black Economic Empowerment Service Providers should be used.
Furthermore, a National Beneficiation Agency needed to be established and the
funding and development of technical colleges to combat the mining skills
shortage was urgently required with greater emphasis being needed on the
development of transferrable skills so that workers could cope with the closure
of mining operations. He emphasized the fact that the Mining Health and Safety Council
needed to meet objectives for the Tripartite Action Plan.
5.1.11
Equitable Access Campaign
Mr
George Nicolaai, the Spokesman for Equitable Access Campaign (EAC) presented
and began by informing the Committee that to date there had been a serious lack
of compliance with provisions of the Charter and a lack of action on this
matter from the Department of Mineral Resources. He indicated that the EAC was
providing an input on behalf of the small-scale marine miners of the Northern
Cape. He then gave a brief background on the marine mining sector and the
severe lack of compliance and transformation in that sector. He stated that in
every element of the Charter, all mines were not meeting the provisions of the
Charter except Alexkor.
5.1.12
Royal Hlangwana House
Mr Mamphye Jan
Moima, a representative of the Royal Hlangwana House made the submission and
informed the Committee that he wished to emphasize two issues. He stated that
the land restitution process was lengthy and prospecting rights would not be
issued on land that would be reclaimed by a community and mined without their
consent. He further indicated that there was no information given to the
communities and while policy development was valuable, compliance urgently
needed to be upheld.
5.1.13
Sydney on Vaal Beneficiaries
Mr Kabelo Bontsi, the spokesperson for Sydney on Vaal Beneficiaries gave
the input and expressed the beneficiaries total support for the review of
current Charter, stating that the previous one had not served its purpose. He stated
that there was a need for community interviews and information sessions before
prospecting rights were approved and that areas involved in land claims should
no longer be mined. He further indicated that historically disadvantaged people
should be given the advantage in benefitting from mineral profits. He also
informed the Committee that the community at Sydney on Vaal remained extremely
poor and were excluded from the profits and benefits of mining. He then
outlined that the new Charter should serve the objectives of mineral
beneficiation and Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) in order to ensure the
empowerment of mine workers and black people, and that social labour plans
should be monitored carefully and should be geared towards infrastructure
development.
5.1.14
Merafong Community Forum
Mr Thabiso
Monyatsi, the Spokesperson for the Merafong Community Mining Forum (the Forum)
gave the input and began by expressing the Forums gratitude for the
opportunity to contribute to the hearings. He then informed the Committee that
the Forum was concerned at the emergence of economic ghost towns in the wake of
mine operation closures. He gave a brief background of Merafong City and its
economic dependence on mining. He suggested that a national Mines Closure Fund
should be set up for community development and that infrastructure investment
was needed as well as more focus on local skills development. He further submitted
that beneficiation industries should be developed in mining communities and a
Minerals Regional Development
Agency for the West Rand should be established to develop strategy for the
region. He emphasized the fact that strong punitive measures were needed to
enforce compliance. Furthermore, mining communities would always have particular
needs and this required long term planning and clarity.
5.1.15
Bravura
Consulting
Ms Alana Bond, the Head of Sustainable Development for Bravura
Consulting (Bravura) made the submission and began by giving a brief overview
of the Company and made several recommendations on how to improve the Mining
Charter. She mentioned key challenges relating to the review of the Charter and
these included the following:
·
The procurement measurement in the Charter was not
broad-based or focused on sustainable transformation and was open to abuse and
fronting;
·
Enterprise Development was barely mentioned and not
measured; and
·
Ownership did not deliver broad based benefits.
Ms Bond noted that Bravura recommended that the
beneficiation element of the Charter be divorced from it and that a holistic,
nationwide strategy be agreed on by government, the mining industry and other
key stakeholders to ensure that it is done properly and in a way that will
create real value and economic growth. With respect to Mine Community
Development, Ms Bond recommended that mining companies had large community
involvement and initiatives needed to be driven by communities. She further
recommended that external bodies for verification of annual reports be created
to help create a more standardized approach and take some of the pressure off
DMR. Ms Bond noted that a high value creation opportunity for the mining
industry to promote holistic approaches that include all the different elements
of its operations, including environmental and socio-economic aspects should be
created. She further indicated that there was a need to clearly state what
constituted compliance, since it would be legally difficult to revoke licenses
without this. She informed the Committee that the revised Charter should
clarify all possible sources of confusion in order to ensure real
transformation occurred, including exactly to which business entities it
applied to.
5.1.16
J Rocha Consulting
Advocate
Jacinto Rocha, the Principal Consultant for the J
Rocha Consulting made the submission and informed the Committee that ownership
as outlined by the Charter was the most emotionally and politically charged and
popular element. He stated that the major debate on ownership was on broad
based ownership as opposed to a wider ownership spread. He indicated that broad
based ownership was politically sound but represented a commercial disaster as
it undermined meaningful participation and was socially misleading with respect
to benefits. In terms of procurement, advocate Rocha stated that the Charter
had set procurement targets but these raised more questions than they answered
and provided a challenge with respect to measuring the outcomes.
Advocate Rocha further informed the Committee that, on beneficiation, BBEE
included ownership of and participation by Historically Disabled South Africans
(HDSA). He indicated that there was no specificity in the Charter as to how
beneficiation offsets would promote the ownership of and participation in the
beneficiation by HDSAs and that was problematic. He also mentioned the fact
that there was no clarity as to whether beneficiation offsets would result in
greater beneficiation in South Africa. He asserted that beneficiation offsets,
where applied, did not promote beneficiation, but undermined HDSAs ownership in
the mining sector. He concluded by emphasizing the fact that transformation in
the mining sector had still a long way to go and that government needed to be
consistent on BEE issues. He said that the Department of Mineral Resources
(DMR) could not be the lone champion on transformation and suggested that DMR
develop a database on Employment Equity, BEE and other areas pertinent to
transformation.
5.1.17
Mpumalanga Women in Mining
Ms Ester Mhlongo, the Chief Executive Officer for the
Mpumalanga Women in Mining (WIMM) gave the input and began by giving a brief
background of the organization. She informed the Committee that her company of
20 black women was seeking assistance to obtain the dormant, non-operational
rights to coal reserves of the old Union Colliery near Breyton in Mpumalanga.
She further said that
if 50 Disadvantaged Black Women participated in the
Union Colliery initiative, each of them would earn in excess of R40 000
per month or R480 000 per year.
She stated that
WIMM was
requesting the Committee to make a recommendation to the Minister of Mineral
Resources and Parliament, to inform BHP Billiton Energy South Africa (BECSA) of
their support for WIMMs initiative, to enable the organisation to obtain or
purchase the mineral right. She indicated that Disadvantaged Black Women
understood and accepted that reserves have to be purchased or exploited in a
joint venture/off-take agreement but requested the privilege, in compliance
with the Charter, to negotiate prior to any public participation.
5.1.18
Western Cape Women in Mining
Mrs Rhona Marashula, a member of the Western
Cape Women in Mining (WIMWC) made the input and began by giving a brief
background of SAWIMA and the deals which were made when the organisation was
established. She also provided the Committee with concerns which they as the
WIMWC had experienced and were still experiencing. These amongst others
included:
·
Women in Mining being used by
BEE groups to get mining rights and varnish with money from the companies;
·
Beneficiaries from the mines
in the Western Cape are top people who use their relatives and SAWIMA
affiliation names to get mining rights; and
·
The picketing in the Mining
Indaba ignited by the affiliation due to its unhappiness about the Indaba.
Mrs Marashula concluded by providing WIMWCs
suggestions to the Committee and these included the following;
·
The National Office should be
in touch with its branches regularly;
·
SAWIMA Western Cape should run
workshops to empower its affiliates, encourage them to seek more information
and do independent research so as to assist them to understand their
involvement in the mining sector;
·
WIMWC needs to be addressed by
both the National office of SAWIMA and Government;
·
There must be clarity and a
way forward with time lines and desirable results;
·
They wished that the Committee
dig up information about the mines in the Western Cape and also Uranium Mines
in Beaufort West.
WIMWC was also surprised that the National
Office of SAWIMA finally called them to a meeting when they heard that they
were invited in Parliament.
5.1.19
Northern Cape Women in Mining
Mrs Mzambo, the
member of the Northern Cape Women in Mining (WIMNC) gave the input which
focused on the challenges, which they as the organisation faced. She informed
the Committee that they were having a lot of challenges as far as the DMRs
Provincial office was concerned. She stated that Women in Mining struggled to
get their licences and DMR was failing to empower them. She emphasized the fact
that economic transformation was lacking in the mining industry. She then
proceeded to inform the Committee of the experience they had with the Mickeys
Mine as they had a lot of problems. She indicated that they were sent from
pillar to post by the DMRs Northern Cape Provincial office when they applied
for the mining right. Mrs Mzambo concluded by requesting that the Committee
visit WIMNC and that DMR also be there so that they are there to give their
side of the story when complaints are raised.
5.1.20
National Youth Development Agency
Mr Siviwe Mkoka, the Executive Director for Research and Policy for the
National Youth Development Agency (the Agency) gave the input and began by
informing the Committee that the Agency expressed its support for the Review of
the Charter. He submitted that they welcomed the progress indicated by the
Review Report of October 2008 and appreciated the acknowledgement made by the
review on the failures of achieving important targets especially on ownership
for HDSAs. He noted that whilst the review report of the charter acknowledged
the absence of disabled people as a designated group, it also failed to
recognize the youth as a designated group. He indicated that the Agency
proposed that the Charter set targets for youth as a designated group outlined
by the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE), Act 53 of 2003 and Codes
of Good Practice championed by Department of Trade and Industry. He further
proposed that the target for youth should be set at
five per cent for all components of the
charter, the target of which was also supported by the recommendation of the
Youth Development Strategy of the Department of Mineral Resources. Mr Mkoka
emphasized the fact that the Charter should also set a target for disabled
people as one of the designated group for all components that are set to be
achieved.
5.1.21
Joy Global Africa
Mr Matimba Mahange, the Manufacturing Director for Joy Global Africa
gave the input and informed the Committee that the organisation felt that the
Charter did not recognize Department of Trade and Industrys (DTI) codes of
good practice and BBBEE scorecards for capital equipment and technology
companies, creating non-uniformity
and confusion. He stated that
the foreign-listed multi-nationals were effectively penalised
for
investing in local manufacturing and that the codes and the Charter did not
recognize the value of foreign manufacturing and technology investment. Mr
Mahange further indicated that the Charter provided inadequate structure and
process for recognition of local value creation, thus creating uncertainty. He
also noted that the organisation was of the view that local procurement created
jobs and should therefore be promoted more extensively by the Charter. He
highlighted that manufacturing was being attracted to China as tempting
benefits were promised to businesses that relocated there. Joy Global Africa
therefore recommended that preference be given for South African manufactured
products that met requirements and that foreign listed multi-nationals receive
recognition for South African procurement and local content.
6.
Submissions by top 10 mining companies on their compliance
to the Mining Charter
In the course of the presentations on the review of the Charter, a
conflict of opinion arose regarding compliance with the Charter. The opinion of
some contributors, notably SAMDA and organised labour, was that the mining
companies fell short of the Charter targets. On the other hand, the Chamber of
Mines reported that its members had exceeded the targets. This prompted the Committee
to invite mining companies to make presentations on their compliance with the
Charter targets. The following ten mining companies, who together employed over
60 per cent of the mining workforce in 2011, appeared before the Portfolio
Committee on Mineral Resources to make presentations:
·
BhpBilliton;
·
Exxaro;
·
Gold Fields;
·
AngloGold Ashanti;
·
Lonmin;
·
AngloAmerican;
·
De Beers;
·
Xstrata;
·
African Rainbow Minerals; and
·
Implats.
Mining Charter: Comparative
sizes of the 'top ten' mining companies
Company
|
Employment
|
Minerals covered
|
Source
|
Anglo American South
Africa
|
88 700
|
Platinum, coal, iron ore
|
Gomwe and Zikhali, 2011:4
- excluding De Beers
|
Gold Fields
|
48 545
|
Gold
|
Gold Fields, 2011:5
|
Lonmin Plc
|
36 500
|
Platinum
|
Farmer, 2011:4 -
including 9 500 contractors
|
Impala Platinum (Implats)
|
36 049
|
Platinum
|
Implats, 2011:12
|
AngloGold Ashanti
|
30 000
|
Gold
|
AngloGold Ashanti 2011:4
|
African Rainbow Minerals
|
28 704
|
Platinum , iron ore, nickel, manganese,
chrome
|
ARM, 2011:42
|
Xstrata
|
25 700
|
Chrome, platinum, coal, vanadium
|
Xstrata South Africa,
2011:17
|
Exxaro
|
9 750
|
Coal, mineral sands
|
Exxaro Resources, 2011:12
|
BhpBilliton
|
5 986
|
Manganese, coal
|
Moodley, 2011b:35
|
De Beers
|
2 801
|
Diamonds
|
De Beers, 2011:3
|
Total employment of 'top
ten' mining companies in 2011
|
312 735
|
|
|
Total mining employment
in 2011
|
513 211
|
|
DMR, 2012: Table 41
|
Percentage of mine
employment accounted for by the 'top ten' mining companies
|
61 per cent
|
Note: the Chamber
of Mines as a whole represents ±90 per cent of the mining industry (Barker
et al
2011:12)
|
6.1
Analysis
of submissions
The Portfolio Committee expected that it would be able to get a clear
picture of the degrees of compliance with the Mining Charter by carefully
analysing the submissions of the top ten mining companies. Each company had
been asked to present their views on and experience of compliance with the
revised Mining Charter. It was hoped that these submissions would provide a
clear map of what the Mining Charter was achieving and whether any gaps in
compliance were evident.
The summaries below, grouped under the Mining Charter scorecard
sections, cover the submissions of each company and include questions and
comments made by members of the Committee during the hearings. But it was not
possible to use the evidence presented at the hearings to produce the clear
map of compliance that was expected. It was also not possible, from the
information assembled, to either verify or dispute the contention of the Minister
of Mineral Resources that compliance with the requirements of the Mining
Charter were very low
[1]
.
The reasons for these differences of opinion reflect on the ongoing
national debate on how compliance with the efforts to promote Broad-based Black
Economic Empowerment is best measured. In the case of the public hearings on
the Mining Charter, there were several factors that combined to make it
difficult to judge the extent to which mining companies had complied with the
Charter or not.
·
First, no particular format was prescribed to the companies
for their presentations to the Committee at the public hearings
[2]
;
·
Second, the companies did not all base their presentations
on the format of the Mining Charter scorecard
[3]
.
They touched on the issues raised in the scorecard in every case, but did not
systematically focus on explaining the actual score for each item. The emphasis
was often on whether the targets set in the Mining Charter had been met, not on
the finer details of how this had been achieved. This meant that the Mining
Charter scorecard could not be applied consistently as a standard against which
to evaluate all the submissions.
·
Third, the companies approaches to reporting varied. Some
companies reported for each mining operation. Others gave results generalised
for several operations across a commodity.
The net result was that Mining Charter scores could not be applied
consistently as a standard to evaluate all the submissions. Beyond the lack of
direct comparability between submissions, the Committee had received views that
the revised Mining Charter remains open to interpretation in many aspects.
[4]
There is no independent authority that verifies the claims made by companies
when they submit their annual progress reports under the Charter
[5]
.
There is also no verification standard that ensures that there is a single
interpretation of how measurements are made.
For all these reasons, it was not possible to assess companies
performance under the Mining Charter comparatively, to identify which companies
were succeeding well (and able to yield lessons for furthering the aims of the
Charter) and which were lagging behind or experiencing difficulties related to
gaps in the Charter (except when the companies themselves pointed to these
issues).
The purpose of the Mining Charter, as stipulated in the MPRDA is to
ensure the attainment of Governments objectives of redressing historical,
social and economic inequalities as stated in
the Constitution
[6]
.
The mining companies confirmed the assertions regarding their overall
positive performance in terms of the Mining Charter which had previously been
made by the Chamber of Mines
[7]
.
The scores and statistics provided by the mining companies were, however,
questioned by the committee members in several respects based on the
observations they had made
during
oversight visits.
6.1.1
Ownership
The measurement of ownership proved to be the most contentious of all
the nine elements of the Mining Charter scorecard. While the target for
ownership was clear rising from 15 per cent ownership by HDSAs for the March
2011 reporting period up to 26 per cent by 2014 there was uncertainty on how
the quality of this ownership should be assessed. The Charter specifies
effective ownership, judged by measures of meaningful economic
participation and full shareholder rights
[8]
.
The presentations by the mining companies echoed the claims of the
Chamber of Mines, which stated that the average ownership by HDSAs across their
membership was 28 per cent and that none of its members was below the 15 per
cent HDSA ownership target set for 2010. The ownership levels reported by the
mining companies were far above the determination of the Mining Charter Impact
Assessment Report of 2009 which stated that available data shows that
aggregated BEE ownership of the mining industry has, at best, reached 9 per
cent.
[9]
This situation suggested that the industry and the Department used different
measures to determine HDSA ownership.
6.1.1.1
BhpBilliton
BHP Billiton reported 26 per cent HDSA
ownership for its mining operations. This was achieved by concluding, Empowerment
transactions with BEE consortiums, Community and ESOPs.
[10]
6.1.1.2
Exxaro
Exxaro reported BEE ownership at 55 per
cent.
[11]
This was the highest percentage of HDSA ownership amongst the top ten mining
companies. BEE entrepreneurs own 52.10 per cent of Exxaro, through BEE
Holdco.
9 200 company employees
hold 2.97 per cent through MPOWER. Each employee who has held their shares
since the scheme was initiated will have received a total of about
R114 000 in dividends. Dividend payments paid to BEE Holdco shareholders
exceeded R2.8-billion in the four and a half years to 2010. The market
capitalisation of Exarro was R64-billion in June 2011 HDSA ownership was
valued at R34.9-billion.
6.1.1.3
Gold Fields
Gold Fields had 15 per cent HDSA ownership in December 2010
[12]
and was able to identify this as excellent performance in terms of the Mining
Charter scorecard because this represented 100 per cent of the target set for
that date. Gold Fields reported its results as the company GFI Mining South
Africa (Pty) Ltd (GFIMSA), a subsidiary of the listed Gold Fields Limited. BEE
ownership of GFIMSA initially comprised a 15 per cent share owned by
Mvelephanda Resources. Three additional empowerment transactions were completed
in December 2010 which brought the HDSA stake in GFIMSA to 26 per cent by
mid-2011. These were an Employee Share Option Plan (ESOP) that involved a 10 per
cent share of GFIMSA for HDSAs and two Broad-based BEE transactions for 10 per
cent of the South Deep mine and 1 per cent of GFIMSA. These investments were by
South Deep Community Trust and Invictus, a vehicle for
BEE business and community leaders, none of
whom had previously been beneficiaries of BEE deals. Voting rights were
established and economic value vested from day one. No funding was required from
the beneficiaries, up-front cash was provided. Immediate dividend payments were
made and guaranteed annually thereafter. Beneficiaries cannot be diluted and no
further cash contribution is required.
[13]
6.1.1.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashanti reported an HDSA
participation figure of 26.8 per cent in 2011, more than meeting the formal
Mining Charter target of 26 per cent by 2014. This calculation comprised
several distinct elements.
[14]
Before 2004, the company disposed of significant gold mining assets in an
empowerment deal with an independent black-owned company, ARMgold. This
accounts for 20.8 per cent of the HDSA ownership claimed by AngloGold Ashanti.
4.5 per cent of the companys South African operations are held by an employee
share ownership plan and 1.5 per cent by Izingwe Holdings (Pty) Ltd, a BEE
company.
The ESOP and Izingwe transactions were
restructured because of difficulties for the financing of the schemes that were
created by share prices that were stagnant or weaker following the 2008 global
financial crisis. The effect was that loan shares vested without real value transfer
and that participants did not get meaningful dividends. The restructuring,
amongst others, guaranteed a minimum payout of R40 per share and placed a ceiling
on value per share payable to beneficiaries to make the costs of restructuring
acceptable to other shareholders.
6.1.1.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin reported an 18 per cent figure for
HDSA ownership in 2011, through its black empowerment partner Shanduka (via the
Incwala structure).
[15]
Its ownership target for 2012 was also
18 per cent and the 2014 target of 26 per cent
was marked with a green circle, signalling On track, no major issues.
6.1.1.6
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American gave details of a succession of empowerment transactions,
covering all the commodities mined by its South African business units. The
minimum HDSA ownership level in 2011, across all enterprises, was 26 per cent.
Business Unit
Effect
of Transaction for HDSA ownership
Thermal Coal
26
per cent of current and future production
Iron Ore
26 per cent of equity
- Kumba Iron Ore
Manganese
26
per cent of equity
- Samancor
Platinum
Greater
than 26 per cent of production
- Anglo Platinum
Other Mining and Industrial
26 per cent of equity
- Scaw Metals, Black Mountain
and
Gamsberg
Diamonds
26
per cent of equity
- De Beers
The Committee members questioned the ownership figures and wanted to
know the real value of shares owned by HDSAs. Anglo American stated that most
of its BEE transactions are broad based. It reported that the value of the BEE
transactions it had concluded since 1994 amounted to about R60-billion. This
calculation combined elements of direct share ownership by BEE partners and by
employees through ESOPs with credits for empowerment transactions which have
led to the creation of flagship black-owned mining companies e.g. Exxaro Resources,
ARM, Mvelaphanda/Afripalm and Shanduka Resources.
[16]
Anglo American stated that community participation is a key focus of
their approach. This includes the direct participation of communities affected
by mining operations in the benefits they generate and transactions aimed at
sustainable, long term economic uplift of mining areas
[17]
.
For example, the community owned three per cent of Sishen mine, which amounts
to R6.3 billion.
The Committee members wanted to know how mining communities were
defined. Anglo American responded that the mining communities are those within
a 50 kilometre radius of its operations.
Members referred to dissatisfaction with the implementation of Employee
Share Ownership Plans (ESOPs) and wanted to know what the barriers were. Anglo
reported that it recognised ESOPs as the broad based model of ownership and
that all its employees in South Africa are members of ESOPs. It informed the
committee that about 5 800 of its employees were to receive dividends from
ESOPs by the end of November 2011.
Members wanted to know about the sustainability of BEE companies
supported by the major mining companies and Project Alchemy in Limpopo. Anglo
reported that it funds BEE transactions itself instead of referring companies
to banks. In many cases, Anglo American has contributed directly towards
vendor financing for empowerment partners to ensure financial viability and
long-term success of the transaction.
[18]
It also reported that its transactions involve trickle dividends (flow through)
to its BEE partners.
The Committee was informed that the Alchemy Project is a R3.5 billion
broad based economic empowerment transaction involving several host communities
and labour sending areas. The project involves eight communities and takes
Anglo American Platinum beyond the targets for legislative compliance.
6.1.1.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
26 per cent of De Beers Consolidated Mines
(DBCM) is owned by Ponahalo Holdings, a collection of Black Economic
Empowerment entities. Ponahalo Holdings comprises Ponahalo Capital (50 per
cent), a key employee trust (15 per cent) and the Equal Allocation Trust (35
per cent). Details were given of the beneficial owners of Ponahalo Holdings
which include individual HDSAs, and trusts representing disadvantaged women,
disabled people and communities.
[19]
6.1.1.8
Xstrata
Xstrata reported that it had achieved the 2014 minimum of 26 per cent
ownership target across the entire value chain of all its businesses in South
Africa with the implementation of an ESOP. Cash dividends have been paid out
from inception and the total pay-out to November 2011 was R2.1 billion.
Xstrata informed the Committee of an
agreement that was concluded on 2 November 2011 between the DMR, organised
labour and Xstrata South Africa to implement a landmark R2.6 billion ESOP that
will benefit almost 12 000 employees for the full life of Xstratas South
Africa operations.
Xstratas
empowerment transactions
[20]
Operation
|
Date
|
Interest
|
BEE partner (s)
|
Xstrata South Africa
|
|
|
|
ESOP
|
Nov-11
|
3 per cent
|
Permanent A-C band
employees
|
Alloys
|
|
|
|
Xstrata Merafe Chrome PSV
|
Jul-04
|
20.5 per cent of PSV
(option to increase to 26 per cent)
|
Merafe Resources (Royal
Bafokeng) - broad-based
|
Mototolo Platinum
|
Jul-06
|
26 per cent of JV
|
Kagiso - broad-based
|
Eland Platinum
|
Dec-07
|
26 per cent of JV
|
Ngazana
|
Xstrata Bakwena Vanadium
PSV
|
Jul-07
|
26 per cent of PSV
|
Bakwena-Ba-Mogopa -
communities
|
Coal division
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xstrata Coal
|
Jul-06
|
ARM 10 per cent
|
ARM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sep-06
|
ARM Coal 20 per cent
|
|
Goedgevonden
|
Jul-06
|
ARM Coal 51 per cent
|
ARM
|
PSV - pooling and sharing venture
There is no downside financial risk exposure
for ESOP beneficiaries the scheme can never be under water (ie where the
debt exceeds probable income flows). It was fully vendor-financed through an
interest free loan with no fixed repayment term.
No capital was required from beneficiaries at
any point. Employee ownership held through an ESOP Trust, controlled by
beneficiary-appointed trustees. The
ESOP
Trust has right to appoint one Xstrata South Africa board member. Xstrata is
listed in Switzerland, not in South Africa.
6.1.1.9
African Rainbow Minerals
African Rainbow Minerals (ARM) is a
diversified mining and minerals company
[21]
which is 54 per cent owned by two fully empowered South African entities
[22]
.
Each of the South African mining ventures that ARM is associated with report to
the DMR independently in terms of the Mining Charter. The main entities have
the following ownership profile, with all companies already meeting the 2014
Charter target of 26 per cent HDSA ownership:
|
Meaningful economic
participation
|
Full shareholder rights
|
||
|
2010 Target
|
Achieved
|
2010 Target
|
Achieved
|
Beeshoek Iron Ore Mine
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
Khumani Iron Ore Mine
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
Black Rock Manganese
Mines
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
Dwarsrivier Chrome Mine
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
41.41 per cent
|
Modikwa Platinum Mine
|
15 per cent
|
31.95 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
31.95 per cent
|
Two Rivers Platinum Mine
|
15 per cent
|
36.03 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
36.03 per cent
|
Nkomati Nickel Mine
|
15 per cent
|
27.35 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
27.35 per cent
|
ARM has a 15 per cent stake in Harmony
(gold), which was not covered in the ARM presentation.
[23]
6.1.1.10
Impala Platinum Holdings Limited
(Implats)
Implats reported that they are empowered above the 2014 target of 26 per
cent. Their shareholding structures are fully broad based, including
communities, employees and BEE partners. They pride themselves in being one of
the largest unencumbered empowerment stakes. BEE ownership was reported
according to mining operations as follows
[24]
:
·
Impala
26
per cent
·
Marula
27
per cent
·
Leeuwkop
26
per cent
·
Two Rivers
55
per cent
6.1.2.
Housing and Living Conditions
The Mining Charter scorecard required performance to be demonstrated on
two elements, the conversion and upgrading of hostels to attain the occupancy
rate of one person per room, and the conversion and upgrading of hostels into
family units.
6.1.2.1
BhpBilliton
BhpBilliton housed 52 of its 5 986 employees in hostels in October 2011.
All the hostels would be demolished and replaced by single units by October
2012. 941 employees were living in family and single units provided by the
company, but home ownership was encouraged by awarding qualifying employees an
allowance of R3 969
per month.
[25]
The company more than met the transitional
targets for housing and living conditions and with the demolition of all the
hostels, the company would be in 100 per cent compliance with this aspect of
the Mining Charter well before 2014.
6.1.2.2
Exxaro
Exxaro housed 24 of its 9 750 employees in shared hostel
accommodation in 2011.
[26]
It had already converted all the other hostels into family units or one person
single accommodation and was on track to meet the targets for 2014. Exxaro
reported as follows on this element:
Houses rented from company
53
per cent
Self-provided accommodation
20
per cent
Accommodation in single
quarters
12
per cent
Home owners (bought company
property)
11 per cent
Family quarters/ flats
5 per cent
Shared hostel accommodation
0.25 per cent
6.1.2.3
Gold Fields
Gold Fields stated that 21 per cent of employees occupied single hostel
accommodation in 2011, and presented
a
R788 million housing and hostel upgrade programme which is in progress for the
period 2006 to 2014.
[27]
This will lead to all hostel rooms being for single occupancy by the end of
2014.
The Committee was informed that
more than 560 family housing units had been completed by end of 2010 and 957
units were planned for 2012. This will double the number of family occupancy
units converted from hostels compared with the baseline (where 58 per cent of
employees live in upgraded hostels/family units). Company-owned housing units
are leased to category 3 to 8 employees at a nominal rental and some will be
available for purchase by the occupant. The Gold Fields home ownership scheme
is open to all employees who are South African citizens.
6.1.2.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashanti did not indicate the number of its employees still
occupying shared hostel accommodation, but it outlined a staged plan to attain
the occupancy rate of one person per room by 2014.
[28]
This would involve converting 6 676 rooms at a cost of some R224-m between
2011 and 2014. In addition, some R68-m will be applied to creating an
additional 278 family units from hostel infrastructure. These investments will
allow AngloGold Ashanti to record 100 per cent compliance with the terms of the
Mining Charter by 2014, and in some cases it will meet the targets before then.
6.1.2.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin did not indicate the number of its employees still occupying
shared hostel accommodation in 2011, but it reported that it had converted
47 per cent of the hostels into bachelor
(single occupancy) and family units.
[29]
68 hostel blocks remained to
be
converted by 2014. The planned hostel conversion spend for 2012/2014 by Lonmin
is R306 million.
The Committee members wanted to know how much it cost Lonmin to convert
47 per cent of hostel blocks into family units. Lonmin informed the committee
that it takes about R200 000 to build a house but also that houses are
unaffordable for most of its employees. This was the reason why there was a high
risk of missing the promotion of Home Ownership targets set by the company for
2014.
However, Lonmin assured the
committee that hostel conversion targets would be met.
6.1.2.6
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American companies housed 12 547 employees in hostels in 2009/2010.
[30]
The target occupancy rate of one person per room by 2014 will be met through a
combination of hostel conversions and facilitating home ownership by employees.
Anglo American reported that they had converted 80 per cent of their hostels
into family and single-occupancy units. About
R2-billion will be committed to employee housing initiatives to be
implemented by 2014. This will include building some 28 000 housing units
(20 000 units in partnership with the national Department of Human
Settlements in the Limpopo and North West Provinces).
6.1.2.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
De Beers has no employees living in hostels. The company has converted
all their hostels into proper accommodation units.
[31]
It was not able to claim any points in terms
of the Mining Charter scorecard for this reason and its score for the component
on Housing and Living Conditions still has to be determined.
6.1.2.8
Xstrata
Xstrata reported that it does not have hostels and therefore the housing
and living conditions aspect of the Mining Charter scorecard was not applicable
to the company. Employees receive a housing allowance that ranges between
R3 000 and R6 000 a month. The Xstrata housing scheme has been developed
in conjunction with and approved by organised labour, namely NUM and NUMSA.
6.1.2.9
African Rainbow Minerals
ARM has hostel accommodation for employees only at the Black Rock
Manganese Mines, but the company did not indicate the number of employees still
in hostel accommodation and whether rooms are single or shared. The existing
hostel accommodation will be fully converted by 2014
[32]
.
ARM actively facilitates home ownership for its employees.
6.1.2.10 Impala Platinum
Holdings Limited (Implats)
Impala Platinum did not indicate the number of its employees still
occupying shared hostel accommodation, or quantify its progress towards the
Mining Charter target of an occupancy rate of one person per room by 2014. The
company indicated expenditure of R1 674-m on housing and living
conditions over the five years to 2011
[33]
.
This included the conversion of hostels to single room dwellings and the
provision of family accommodation.
6.1.3.
Procurement and
Enterprise Development
Mining companies have huge procurement budgets and how they spend them
influences the viability of many enterprises. The revised Mining Charter set
targets for companies to meet related to the percentage of their
non-discretionary procurement expenditure that is made up of transactions with
BEE entities. A "BEE entity" is defined purely in terms of ownership.
It is "an entity of which a minimum of 25 per cent + 1 vote of share
capital is directly owned by HDSA [Historically Disadvantaged South Africans]
as measured in accordance with [the] flow through principle"
[34]
.
Three targets are set in the revised Charter for the procurement of
goods from BEE entities:
1.
For the procurement of capital goods the target was 5 per
cent in 2010, rising to 40 per cent by 2014
2.
For the procurement of services the target was 30 per cent
in 2010, rising to 70 per cent by 2014
3.
For the procurement of consumables the target was 10 per
cent in 2010, rising to 50 per cent by 2014
All the companies that made submissions on this element in 2011 reported
that they exceeded the 2010 targets.
Some capital goods are not available from domestic manufacturers and
have to be imported. The revised Mining Charter stipulates that when a mining
company purchases such goods, it should ensure that multinational suppliers of
capital goods annually contribute a minimum of 0.5 per cent of annual income
generated from local mining companies towards socio-economic development of
local communities into a social development fund from 2010.
The scorecard generates points from two values here:
a)
Your company's total spending on procurement of capital
goods from multinational suppliers operating in SA.
b)
Total contribution by such suppliers to social development
in respect of your company's procurement.
6.1.3.1
BhpBilliton
BhpBilliton reported that it met the Mining Charter targets for 2011 for
the percentage of its procurement spend with companies that were more than 25
per cent owned by HDSAs.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
2011 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE
entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
10 per cent
|
51 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
40 per cent
|
42 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
15 per cent
|
57 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
BHP
Billiton 2011
|
Calculation formulation
underway
|
It was still occupied with the calculation of the percentage of its
procurement spend from multinational suppliers that were being channelled into a
social development fund
6.1.3.2
Exxaro
Exxaro did not achieve the 2010 target set for the procurement of
services. Less than 25 per cent of their procurement spend was with Black
Empowered companies, compared with the 30 per cent target for 2010 (and the 40
per cent target for 2011).
.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE
entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
43 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
24 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
25 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from multinational
suppliers
Exxaro 2010
|
Systems and structures in
place to receive contribution
|
Exxaro said that it had a Focus on raising performance of services
procurement to achieve the 70 per cent target by 2014.
[35]
6.1.3.3
Gold Fields
Gold Fields met the 2010 targets set for local procurement spend from
Black Empowered companies.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spendwith BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
39 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
39 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
44 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
Gold Fields 2010
|
Not mentioned in
presentation
|
674 companies out of a supplier base of 2,200 companies (31 per cent) had
HDSA ownership levels above 25 per cent. Gold Fields reported that it spent
R2.6 billion (41 per cent of total South African procurement) with BEE
suppliers in 2010. Gold Fields is planning to increase number of HDSA suppliers
through various initiatives such as mentorship programmes and SMME incubators
[36]
.
6.1.3.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashanti (AGA) did not achieve the 2010 target set for the
procurement of services. Less than 30 per cent of their procurement spend was
with Black Empowered companies, compared with the 30 per cent target for 2010
(and the 40 per cent target for 2011).
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE
entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
39 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
29 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
40 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
AngloGold Ashanti 2010
|
All AGA multi-national
companies have been briefed to set aside to provide for this requirement
|
AngloGold Ashanti said that in the year to August 2011, it spent R2.2bn
with BEE entities against a total measurable procurement spend of R5.5bn
[37]
(40 per cent) and outlined action items designed to meet procurement targets
under the Mining Charter.
With regard to the required contribution of multi-national suppliers to a
Socio-Economic Development Fund, AngloGold Ashanti said that while it had
informed its foreign suppliers of the 0.5 per cent levy, it regretted the lack
of guidelines.
AngloGold Ashanti raised the issue that municipalities were making
demands that mines procure their needs locally (independent of any BEE
requirements) and that there was a misalignment in BEE legislation between the
Mining Charter (and how it defined empowerment) and the BBBEE Act, 53, 2003.
This leads to misunderstanding in the supplier community about BEE requirements.
Suppliers provide goods and services to other industries. They can comply with
the BBBEE Act and its codes without meeting the over 25 per cent HDSA ownership
requirement set in the Mining Charter.
6.1.3.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin met the 2010 targets set for local procurement spend from Black
Empowered companies.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
28 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
48 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
41 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
Lonmin 2010
|
Not mentioned in
presentation
|
Lonmins BEE procurement spend for financial year 2011 amounted to R4.3
billion. Challenges reported by Lonmin included the small number of black owned
suppliers of capital goods and the limited availability of experienced local
suppliers. Enterprise development programs are in place to address this over
time.
[38]
6.1.3.6
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American South Africa, and the subsidiary mining companies under
its control, met the 2010 targets set for local procurement spend from Black
Empowered companies.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Anglo American Platinum
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
|||
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
50 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
43 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
35 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Anglo American Thermal
Coal
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
|||
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
51 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
50 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
67 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Anglo American Kumba Iron
ore
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
|||
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
25 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
59 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
31 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|
|||
Anglo American South
Africa
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
|||
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
43 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
47 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
|||
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
42 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|||
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
Anglo American South
Africa
|
Not mentioned in
presentation
|
In 2010, procurement spend by Anglo American South Africa (excluding state
owned enterprises and municipalities)
was
some R48-billion. R21-billion of this (44 per cent) was spent with companies
where over 25 per cent of equity was owned by HDSAs.
[39]
6.1.3.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
De Beers did not report on the details of its procurement performance as
outlined in the scorecard for the Mining Charter, although it reported a 15
point score for procurement overall and indicated that all the targets for 2010
had been met.
[40]
In the first part of 2011, 67 per cent of local procurement expenditure was
placed with HDSA owned or empowered firms.
De Beers did not comment on the second aspect of the measure of
procurement and enterprise development. This looks at the annual spend on
procurement from multinational suppliers and requires that 0.5 per cent of this
value should be contributed to a social development fund.
6.1.3.8
Xstrata
Xstrata South Africa, reported that it met the 2010 targets set for
local procurement spend from Black Empowered companies. This was illustrated by
the procurement figures for Xstrata Alloys and Xstrata Coal. The divisions were
said to be well on track to achieve the 2014 targets
[41]
.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
|
|
|
|
Xstrata Alloys
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
50 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
32 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
51 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Xstrata Coal Division
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
38 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
54 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
41 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
Not mentioned in
presentation
|
In 2010, procurement spend by Xstrata South Africa divisions (excluding state
owned enterprises and municipalities)
was
some R18.3-billion. R7.3-billion of this (40 per cent) was spent with companies
where over 25 per cent of equity was owned by HDSAs.
This was reportedly as a result of
significant facilitation afforded by Xstrata. This included the encouragement
of non-HDSA suppliers to partner with HDSA companies (through ring-fencing of contracts).
Larger suppliers were encouraged to permanently partner with local HDSA
suppliers and facilitate skills transfer. Xstrata informed the committee that
its enterprise development strategy is aimed at assisting members of the
communities to establish small to medium sized enterprises and helping smaller
companies to become suppliers to Xstrata. This is achieved through soft loans
on favourable terms and other forms of business development assistance.
6.1.3.9
African Rainbow Minerals
African Rainbow Minerals (ARM) reported that it met the Mining Charter
targets for 2011 for the percentage of its procurement spend with companies
that were more than 25 per cent owned by HDSAs.
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
2011 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
10 per cent
|
49 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
40 per cent
|
51 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
15 per cent
|
32 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
ARM 2011
|
Not reported on - Target
recorded for 2011 and 2014
|
African Rainbow Minerals gave details of the 2010 procurement
performance for each of the mines it reported on:
[42]
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
|
|
|
|
Black Rock Manganese
Mines
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
47 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
15 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
22 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Khumani Iron Ore Mine
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
52 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
13 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
17 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Black Rock Manganese
Mines
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
27 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
28 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
25 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dwarsrivier Chrome Mine
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
31 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
46 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
28 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Modikwa Platinum Mine
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
25 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
43 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
49 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Two Rivers Platinum Mine
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
60 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
77 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
32 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nkomati Nickel Mine
|
2010 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
5 per cent
|
37 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
30 per cent
|
69 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
10 per cent
|
16 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
In all cases the ARM mines met the 2010 Mining Charter targets for
procurement.
6.1.3.10
Impala Platinum Holdings Limited
(Implats)
Implats, reported that it met the 2010 targets set for local procurement
spend from Black Empowered companies. This was illustrated by the procurement
figures for Impala Platinum and Marula Platinum.
[43]
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
|
|
|
|
Impala Platinum
|
2011 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
10 per cent
|
58 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
40 per cent
|
58 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
15 per cent
|
49 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
|
|
|
|
|
Marula Platinum
|
2011 Target
|
Per cent spend with BEE entities
|
|
2014 Target
|
Procurement of capital
goods
|
10 per cent
|
48 per cent
|
|
40 per cent
|
Procurement of services
|
40 per cent
|
55 per cent
|
|
70 per cent
|
Procurement of
consumables
|
15 per cent
|
44 per cent
|
|
50 per cent
|
Multinational
suppliers contribution to the social fund
Target:
0.5 per cent of procurement value
Annual spend on procurement from
multinational suppliers
Procurement spend from
BEE entity
|
Not mentioned in
presentation
|
In 2011, procurement spend by Implats divisions (excluding state owned
enterprises and municipalities)
was
some R9-billion. R4.9-billion of this (55 per cent) was spent with companies
where over 25 per cent of equity was owned by HDSAs.
Over a third of the BEE spend was placed with
local empowered companies, in the vicinity of the mines.
6.1.4.
Employment
Equity
The revised Charter set the targets for employment equity in terms of
HDSA representation. The targets for 2010 (reporting period was March 2011) were
as follows: 20 per cent representation in top management, 20 per cent
representation in senior management, 30 per cent representation in middle
management, 40 per cent representation in junior management and 15 per cent
representation in core skills.
Almost all companies reported that they had succeeded in meeting the
2010 targets for performance in terms of the Charter.
The table below compares the employment equity percentages presented by
the top ten mining companies to the Committee in 2011.
For ease of comparison, they are ranked from highest to lowest, with
rows at the bottom showing the Mining Charter Targets for 2010 and 2014.
Xstrata gave information for its two
divisions separately, so it is listed twice in the table. Grey shades areas
indicate where figures are below the 2010 target.
Comparison of Employment
Equity percentages across the companies in 2011
"RANK"
|
Top
Management
|
Senior
Management
|
Middle
Management
|
Junior
Management
|
Core
Skills
|
1
|
50
per cent Lonmin
|
40
per cent ARM
|
55
per cent Exxaro
|
76
per cent Exxaro
|
87
per cent Xstrata Coal
|
2
|
50
per cent Exxaro
|
39
per cent Implats
|
52
per cent Xstrata Coal
|
72
per cent De Beers
|
82
per cent Xstrata Alloys
|
3
|
50
per cent De Beers
|
37
per cent BhpBilliton
|
51
per cent De Beers
|
69
per cent ARM
|
82
per cent De Beers
|
4
|
46
per cent BhpBilliton
|
31
per cent Gold Fields
|
50
per cent Xstrata Alloys
|
61
per cent BhpBilliton
|
69
per cent Implats
|
5
|
38
per cent Xstrata Alloys
|
31
per cent De Beers
|
50
per cent ARM
|
58
per cent A.
American
|
59
per cent Gold Fields
|
6
|
38
per cent ARM
|
31
per cent A.
American
|
50
per cent A.
American
|
56
per cent Xstrata Coal
|
52
per cent BhpBilliton
|
7
|
33
per cent Gold Fields
|
30
per cent Xstrata Coal
|
46
per cent Gold Fields
|
53
per cent Implats
|
46
per cent Exxaro
|
8
|
29
per cent A.
American
|
30
per cent Exxaro
|
43
per cent BhpBilliton
|
50
per cent AGA
|
42-94
per cent ARM
|
9
|
25
per cent Implats
|
24
per cent AGA
|
40
per cent Implats
|
49
per cent Gold Fields
|
no
data A.
American
|
10
|
25
per cent AGA
|
23
per cent Xstrata Alloys
|
37
per cent AGA
|
46
per cent Xstrata Alloys
|
no
data
AGA
|
11
|
18
per cent Xstrata Coal
|
15
per cent Lonmin
|
26
per cent Lonmin
|
36
per cent Lonmin
|
no
data Lonmin
|
Target
2010
|
20
per cent
|
20
per cent
|
30
per cent
|
40
per cent
|
15
per cent
|
Target
2014
|
40
per cent
|
40
per cent
|
40
per cent
|
40
per cent
|
40
per cent
|
Notes
:
AngloGold Ashanti (AGA) limits the number of
white women classified as HDSAs to 6 per cent - their share of the total
population.
[44]
Lonmin excludes white women
from its Employment Equity calculation. HDSA representation across all
management levels was 43 per cent, inclusive of white women, in 2011.
[45]
ARM gives core skills
figures individiually for each mining operation. The 2014 target is exceeded in
all cases.
[46]
With the exception of Lonmin and Xstrata Coal, all of the mining
companies more than met the targets for 2010 in all the management
categories.
With the exception of Lonmin, all of the mining companies already more
than met the targets for Junior Management in 2014 and most also met the 2014
target for Middle Management. AngloGold Ashanti just missed the 2014 target of
40 per cent, reporting that 37 per cent of middle managers were HDSAs in 2010.
Employment equity in Senior Management is much less evident, with a
single company, African Rainbow Minerals, meeting the 2014 target of 40 per
cent HDSAs by 2014. But companies still have time within which to address this
target.
Four companies already met the 2014 target for Top Management (including
Lonmin).
Lonmin did not give detailed employment data and did not include any
white women in its employment equity calculation. This may account for its weak
performance, missing the 2010 targets for senior, middle and junior management.
In its presentation, Lonmin said that it was on track to meet the 2014
transformation goals for employment equity, with no
major issues.
[47]
Xstrata met the 2010 target for top management overall, but not within
the coal division measured alone.
All the companies that reported on employment equity within Core and
Critical Skills indicated that the 40 per cent target set for 2014 had already
been met. This category is, however, very broadly specified.
These
are skills necessary and inextricably linked to day-to-day operations OR skills
that enhance the performance of an operation and are in scarce supply This
could include artisans; engineers incl. rock engineers; professionals (ie
recognized by a professional body), specialists (e.g. surveyor, safety,
geologist, metallurgist, winding engine driver, environmental, etc.),
technologists, technicians, and persons with mining specific qualifications or
licenses
[48]
Some committee members wanted to know if the statistics on employment equity
included foreign nationals. Anglo American reported that 6 265 of its
91 000 employees are foreign nationals (6.9 per cent). Foreign nationals
are not counted for the purposes of employment equity.
While targets for the employment of women in the mining industry are not
part of the scorecard for the revised Mining Charter, the number of women
employed is included in the reporting template.
[49]
The original Mining Charter of October 2002 committed companies to Ensuring
higher levels of inclusiveness and advancement of women. The stakeholders aspire
to a baseline of 10 per cent of women participation in the mining industry
within 5 years. (ie by 2007 or 2009 from the date the Charter was Gazetted).
Several companies highlighted the small, but growing, proportion of women in
the industry in their reports to the Committee. For example, AngloGold Ashanti provided
data to show that it exceeded the baseline of 10 per cent as at the end of September
2011 by achieving 12 per cent women in mining
[50]
.
Xstrata reported that females comprised 15.6 per cent of total workforce
and 11.9 per cent of total management. De Beers reported that 13 per cent of
their employees were women. Fourteen per cent of ARM employees were female in 2011.
(11 per cent were black females and 3
per cent white females).
6.1.5.
Human Resources
Development
The revised Charter set a 2010 target of three per cent of the total
annual pay roll to be spent on human resource development, excluding the
mandatory skills development levy. This percentage is to be increased five per
cent by 2014.
All companies reported that they had met the 2010 target. Six said they
had already surpassed the 2014 target.
Company
|
2010 HRD expenditure as
per
cent of payroll
|
Exxaro
|
6 per cent
|
De Beers Consolidated
Mines
|
6 per cent
|
African Rainbow Minerals
|
6 per cent
|
Impala Platinum Holdings
Limited (Implats)
|
6 per cent
|
AngloGold Ashanti
|
5 per cent
|
Anglo American South
Africa
|
5 per cent
|
BhpBilliton
|
4 per cent
|
Gold Fields
|
4 per cent
|
Xstrata
|
4 per cent
|
Lonmin Plc
|
4 per cent
|
Target 2010
|
3 per cent
|
Target 2014
|
5 per cent
|
This was reflective of the Chamber of Mines statistics, which stated
that the average spending of its members on skills development as percentage of
total pay roll was 4.6 per cent. However, the Commission for Employment Equity
Report indicated that white males at top and senior management levels benefitted
more from skills development initiatives. At top management level, 48.7 per
cent of beneficiaries of skills development programmes were white males, while
they constituted 37.7 per cent of beneficiaries at senior management level. It
must be noted that these statistics reflected the profiles and movement of
employees across all sectors. The revised Charter score card does not require
the mining companies to report on profiles of beneficiaries of skills
development initiatives, although a race and gender breakdown is required for
the detailed reporting template, which also divides expenditure items into the
following five categories:
·
Learnerships
·
Artisans and apprentices
·
ABET training
·
Other training initiatives
·
Bursaries and scholarships
The material presented to the Committee on Human Resource Development
was informative, but often too varied in its detail to allow for further
comparison.
6.1.5.1
BhpBilliton
BhpBilliton initially reported a 3.5 per cent performance as against the
3.5 per cent target for 2011.
[51]
In response to a request for additional information, the company provided
figures that allowed the following calculation
[52]
:
Human Resource Development: BHP Billiton SA
Mining Operations 2009-2011
|
African, Coloured and
Indian
|
White
|
||||
Three year summary
|
value
|
number
|
average
|
value
|
number
|
average
|
Learnerships and
bursaries of core and critical skills
|
R 34 -m
|
214
|
R 162 109
|
R 6.7-m
|
39
|
R 172 308
|
ABET
|
R 1.8-m
|
434
|
R 4 056
|
R
0
|
0
|
-
|
Other training
initiatives, school and post matric programmes
|
R 99.9-m
|
3 931
|
R 25 409
|
R 20-m
|
1 081
|
R 18 543
|
Combined summary
|
R 136 m
|
4 579
|
R 29 774
|
R 26.8-m
|
1 120
|
R 23 897
|
Total HDSA training expenditure (includes
white women)
R
137 366 415
(A)
HDSA payroll
R 1 816 213 710
(B)
Percentage (A/B)
7.6 per cent
(3.5
per cent mining charter 2011 target exceeded
[53]
)
6.1.5.2
Exxaro
Exxaro reported that it spent R23.7 million on artisan training and
learnership.
An average of 430
engineering learners received training each month. This constitutes 5.4 per
cent of all learnerships in the mining sector even though Exxaro employees only
make up 2.5 per cent of the industry. For 2011, 76 per cent of learner intake
was black. Over the previous five years, Exxaro had qualified over 500 artisans
and 108 engineers. Exxaro was funding 103 bursars who are studying full time at
universities at a cost of R11 million per annum. A total of 88
professionals-in-training are participating in internships at a cost of R40
million per annum.
6.1.5.3
Gold Fields
Gold Fields informed the Committee that it has an academy that manages
its internal training programme with a budget of R275 million per year. The
academy funded over 600 mining and engineering learnerships in 2010. It had
offered 13 150 staff and 3 100 community members ABET opportunities
to date. Over the previous five years, a total of 4 845 employees and
learners received portable skills training.
6.1.5.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold
Ashanti provided data to illustrate the training it had provided for
44 806 employees
and 6 377 members of mining communities in the 2004 to 2010 period.
[54]
It showed the HRD plans for the years up to 2014 and indicated that it would
meet the 2014 target for HRD expenditure as percentage of total annual payroll (excluding
the mandatory skills development levy).
AngloGold Ashanti Human
Resource Development: Actual 2004 to 2010
Category
|
Employee
|
Community
|
ABET (Including RPL)
|
38 530
|
3
697
|
Engineering Learnerships
|
424
|
213
|
Mining Learnerships
|
1 535
|
128
|
Bursars
|
102
|
369
|
Alternative Skills to Mining
|
1 391
|
1
577
|
Management Trainees
|
517
|
|
Community Mining Skills
|
|
393
|
Study Assistance
|
2 307
|
|
6.1.5.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin indicated that it had fallen short of its 2011 targets for the
numbers
of ABET Trainees and
Learnerships but had exceeded the 2011 target of 3.5 per cent of payroll for
expenditure on human resource development.
2011 targets in other categories were met or exceeded and the company
was on track to reach its 2014 targets.
[55]
|
2011 Actual
|
2011 Target
|
Number of ABET trainees
|
601
|
823
|
Number of Learnerships
|
184
|
276
|
Number of bursaries
|
44
|
43
|
Number of sponsorships
|
30
|
27
|
Number of graduates in development programme
|
29
|
29
|
Number of portable skills learners
|
57
|
55
|
6.1.5.6
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American
reported that in
2010 about R810 million was spent on employee training initiatives, bursaries,
ABET, management programmes and re-training despite a headcount reduction.
Anglo American:
Numbers - 2010
|
ABET
Learners
|
Bursars
|
Platinum
|
2 358
|
341
|
Thermal Coal
|
444
|
397
|
Iron Ore
|
95
|
55
|
Other
|
85
|
|
Total
|
2 982
|
793
|
Platinum
c. R441 million
4.3 per cent of total payroll
Thermal Coal
c. R202 million
8.2 per
cent of total payroll
Kumba Iron Ore
c. R167 million
6.8 per cent of total payroll
About 2 600 employees received portable skills training to be employable
outside the mining industry in South Africa. Anglo American stated that it operates
a global world-class technical centre in South Africa, the Technical Business
Coordination Group, which employs 883 personnel in South Africa and the
budgeted cost for 2011 was R 946 million.
[56]
6.1.5.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
The total HDSA HRD expenditure for De Beers amounted to R60 million in
2010. It spent R12.5 million on learnerships, R20.86 million on artisans and
apprenticeships, R12.35 million on ABET, R2.73 million on bursars and
scholarships and R2.62 million on school support and post matric programmes. De
Beers also partnered with the University of Johannesburg on the Maths and
Science Programme for schools. It also financially assisted 375 tertiary
education students at 32 institutions of higher education.
6.1.5.8
Xstrata
Xstrata reported that its commitments to human resource development
exceeded the 2010 Mining Charter target.
About R133m was spent on human resource
development in 2010 (excluding skills development levies). This amounted to 3
per cent of payroll at Xstrata Alloys (R66m) and 5.9 per cent of payroll at Xstrata
Coal (R67m). There had been a 100 per cent increase in total training hours
amounting to 41.7 hours per employee (incl. contractors) per year. The training
was provided on environmental, health, human rights, safety and professional
development / mentorship.
Skills
training centres each costing R30-million, had been built in Mpumalanga and
Limpopo: the
Steelpoort Artisan Training
Centre and the
Kwa-Guqa Learning Centre
(to develop communities literacy and IT skills).
Additional skills development initiatives
focused on youth and learning. These totalled
4 443 apprenticeships / learnerships;
863 bursaries, 507 graduate trainees and 991 student
work placements.
[57]
6.1.5.9
African Rainbow Minerals
While ARM reported that 6.4 per cent of its payroll was spent on
training in 2011, two of its individual mines missed the 2010 target of 3 per
cent - these were Black Rock Manganese Mines (2.9 per cent) and Modikwa
Platinum Mine (2.7 per cent).
ARM spent
over R92 million on training in the 2011 financial year representing an average
of over R4 700 per employee. R50 million was spent on training in the 2010
financial year. ARM is in the process of establishing or has the following
learning academies:
·
Leadership (Management and Supervisory) capacity
150 trainees
·
Mining (Shiftboss/ Mine Overseer) capacity 50
trainees
·
SHERQ (Safety, Health, Environment, Risk and
Quality) capacity 45 trainees
·
Engineering capacity 350 trainees
·
Operator capacity 500 trainees
231 learnerships were in place in 2011 (some two per cent of the total
number of employees) and 220 bursaries.
These include study assistance to own employees (120), and bursaries for
children of employees and community
members.
[58]
6.1.5.10 Impala Platinum
Holdings Limited (Implats)
Implats reported that it spent R357 million on HRD in the year 2011,
which constituted 6.4 per cent of its payroll. The expenditure was channelled
to the following projects in 2011:
·
Engineering learnerships 274
·
Trainee engineers/ Learner mining officials 104
·
Bursaries 78
·
Secondary school bursaries 155
·
Experiential/ Internship 151
The key focus for external HRD support was on engineering learnerships, technical
school support and experiential internships.
[59]
6.1.6.
Mine Community
Development
The component of the scorecard relating to Mine Community Development
comprises two elements: an evaluation of consultation processes with the
beneficiary communities and a calculation relating the amount spent to net
profit before tax.
6.1
Consultation process
(Each yes response is allocated one point)
[60]
a)
Did the company consider the profiles of relevant
communities, and identify credible leaders of the communities?
b)
Did the company consult with such leaders prior to the
implementation of projects?
c)
Did the company consult with the leaders to identify
projects within the needs analysis and prioritise such projects?
d)
Did the company consult with the relevant Ward/Municipality
to determine possibility of partnerships in respect of identified projects and
the Ward/Municipalitys Integrated Development Plan (IDP)?
e)
Has provision been made for the transfer of skills and
capacity building within the relevant community?
6.2
Expenditure on mine
community development projects
Expenditure on community development in R million
as a prercentage of the
Companys net profit after tax in South Africa (NPAT)
(The BBBEE Codes have a
target of 1 per cent of NPAT. One point is deducted for every full 0.1 per cent
below NPAT target. The NPAT of the previous financial year can be used to set
the target.)
In late 2011, not all companies tied their reporting on community
development to the scorecard questions and measures.
6.1.6.1
BhpBilliton
With regard to community consultation BhpBilliton reported that Material
progress has been made in this area, baseline studies have been conducted in
areas where we have operations, stakeholder analysis and engagements and
management are carried out regularly and we record all queries and complaints
arising from our communities and address them appropriately.
[61]
In response to a request from the Committee for additional information,
BhpBilliton reported total Community Development spending in excess of
R300-million in the period from 2009 to 2011 and detailed a list of specific
Corporate Social Investment (CSI) projects in mining communities that totalled
some R146-million for the same period
[62]
The company did not record answers to the scorecard questions or calculate the
percentage of net profit after tax represented by the community development
spending. It indicated an 8 per cent achievement in 2011 for Mine Community
Development.
[63]
6.1.6.2
Exxaro
Exxaro did not comment on the processes around community consultation,
but it reported that 2.5 per cent of its net profit after tax in 2010 went to
community development. This was a total of R39-million and exceeded the target
of 1 per cent.
Some R223-million was
spent on community development from the mid 2007 to September 2011 period. This
expenditure was divided as follows:
[64]
Sustainable Development
|
36
|
per cent
|
Enterprise Development
|
21
|
per cent
|
Infrastructure
|
18
|
per cent
|
Education
|
11
|
per cent
|
Skills development
|
9
|
per cent
|
Environmental stewardship
|
3
|
per cent
|
Health and Welfare
|
2
|
per cent
|
Sport and recreation
|
0.4
|
per cent
|
|
100
|
per cent
|
6.1.6.3
Gold Fields
Gold Fields outlined its philosophy of how a self-sustaining post
mining economy would come about after the closure of a mine. This is based on
plans such as the Environmental Management Plan (EMP) and the Social and Labour
Plan (SLP) for each mine. R86 million was to be spent in 2011 on socio-economic
development programmes. These focussed on Community Health Programmes (Health
Care Centres); Education (Schooling infrastructure and support programmes) and
Agriculture (Animal husbandry and training hubs). A key requirement was to
design projects to be sustainable and independent of the mine.
Gold Fields evaluated its performance under this aspect of the mining
charter as 50 per cent to 75 per cent - marginal to acceptable, noting that
while revised EMPs had been submitted for approval, the targets for the
approval and implementation of community projects had not been met.
[65]
6.1.6.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashanti outlined the Socio-Economic Model that it uses when
interfacing with communities, recognising that every community is different,
but each has structures around five elements:
Land & Enviroment
|
The geographic area is utilised effectively.
|
Infrastructure
|
Infrastructure development is sufficient.
|
Social
|
People are healthy and educated.
|
Economic
|
There is financial liquidity and employment opportunities.
|
Institutional
|
There is a respected governance framework.
|
AngloGold Ashanti has engaged with the Executive Mayors and teams in the
Merafong and Matlosana municipalities in Gauteng and North West Province and OR
Tambo municipality in the Eastern Cape to identify Local Economic Development
(LED) projects and revise Social and Labour Plans.
There is a focus on stakeholder engagement
and relationship building, especially with DMR, as well as municipalities of
host and labour-sending areas.
[66]
AngloGold Ashanti embarked on 616 projects/ initiatives to the value of
R224-million in the period 2004 to 2010. These comprised 13 local economic
development projects, 50 enterprise development projects and 553 social
development projects. Cash disbursements to projects totalled R132-million
while the value of non-financial commitments (infrastructure, buildings &
land) was R92-million. The calculation of the value of these expenditures
compared to net profit after tax was not made.
6.1.6.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin reported good progress, accelerating investment in high
visibility and impact projects in 2011 but acknowledged that it had missed
meeting its 2011 community development expenditure target of R44-million by
R2-miilion.
[67]
Its basic service infrastructure development
projects were delayed by capacity constraints in local municipalities. Lonmin
indicated there was a need to respond to the early warning of potential risk
in not meeting the 2014 targets.
Lonmin invested R194 million in community development projects between
2007 and 2011:
·
Infrastructure
o
Water connections to households - 805
o
Access to sewer treatment 904
o
Eastern Cape Multi-purpose Centre 1
o
Silindini Bridge-Eastern Cape 1
·
Education
o
Schools upgraded 29
o
Computer laboratories 21
o
Science laboratories 8
o
Learners benefiting from learner support programmes
1980
o
Educators trained 180
·
Capacity Building
o
Community Members Trained 1823
·
Health
o
Build and Upgrade Clinics 7
o
Mobile Clinics 2
o
Ambulances - 1
Lonmin did not respond directly to the issues raised in the new 2010
reporting template related to mine community development consultation and the
proportion of NPAT spent on community development.
6.1.6.6
Anglo American South Africa
As required by the mining charter, Anglo American aligns its community
development initiatives to municipal integrated development plans (IDPs).
Infrastructure, Education and Health are the main divisions into which
community development initiatives fall, enterprise development being considered
as a separate area. Collectively, since 2007 Anglo American has spent about
R1.1-billion on various community development initiatives (including corporate
social investment).
2007-2011 Sample of Mine Community Development Initiatives
Supported
·
Road/Bridge construction & upgrading
o
7 areas and 3 villages immediately benefited (incl.
a bus/taxi rank)
·
Community Centres
o
4 community halls / centres built; 1 sports ground
built; 1 multipurpose community centre constructed; 2 traditional courts and
offices built
·
Infrastructure
o
16 schools and crèches constructed and upgraded; 15
classrooms upgraded;
4 science labs
constructed and upgraded; 11 computer centres constructed and upgraded
·
Health
o
6 wellness clinics constructed; 1 area provided
with mobile clinics
·
Water Supply
o
9 areas supplied with fresh water
·
Electricity
o
9 areas in Limpopo, N. Cape and Mpumalanga supplied
with electricity infrastructure; Bethal substation upgrade benefited c. 100 000
people
·
Sanitation
o
6 areas received sewage works upgrades
·
Education
o
R250m annual spend on R&D; R128m spent on
education support (incl. educator training, Maths/Science support and early childhood
development)
Anglo American emphasised the role of consultation processes, but did
not indicate the proportion of NPAT spent on its mine community development
initiatives.
6.1.6.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
De Beers reported a maximum point score of 15 for mine community
development in 2010. It answered yes to all five of the questions in the
report template (recording five points) and obtained the full ten point score
for meeting its target for expenditure on mine community development projects.
The target was of 2 per cent of net profit after tax in South Africa.
De Beers reported expenditure of 2.3 per cent
of its net profit after tax. This amounted to about R23 million in 2010.
[68]
6.1.6.8
Xstrata
Xstrata did not comment on the consultation processes it uses in framing
its mine community development initiatives, nor did it indicate what proportion
of NPAT is absorbed.
Over R500m had been
invested in social development initiatives since 2006, exceeding the
requirements under Xstratas Social and Labour Plans. About R154m was spent on
community projects in 2010 and examples were given of ongoing key community
initiatives in education, health and the provision of multipurpose community
centres.
[69]
Both the alloys and coal divisions reported 100 per cent up to date project
implementation of approved community projects.
6.1.6.9
African Rainbow Minerals
ARM did not comment on the consultation processes it uses in framing its
mine community development initiatives, nor did it indicate what proportion of
NPAT is absorbed.
ARM reported that it
invests in surrounding communities through its Social and Labour Plans, Local
Economic Development and its Broad-Based Economic Empowerment Trust. In the
2011 financial year it invested R142.5 million in mine community development.
In the preceding 5 years ARM invested approximately R300 million in the
upliftment of communities.
[70]
6.1.6.10 Impala Platinum
Holdings Limited (Implats)
Implats did not comment on the consultation processes it uses in framing
its mine community development initiatives, nor did it indicate what proportion
of NPAT is absorbed.
Implats received a Sunday
Times TOP 100 CSI (Community Social Investment) Leadership Award in 2010 and
2011.
Local Economic Development and
housing initiatives totalled R1.8-billion in the five years to 2011 and
R221-million in 2011 alone.
[71]
These included infrastructure development, income generating and other
initiatives.
6.1.7.
Sustainable
Development and Growth
The revised Mining Charter included Sustainable Development and Growth
as new pillar. The intention is that social, economic and environmental
factors should be integrated into planning, implementation and decision-making
to ensure that the mineral and petroleum resources development serves present
and future generations
[72]
.
The scorecard divides the measures for this aspect of the Charter into three,
each of which has a 100 per cent achievement target by 2014. These are:
DESCRIPTION
|
MEASURE
|
Improvement of the industry's environmental management
|
Implementation of approved EMPs (Environmental Management Plans).
|
Improvement of the
industry's mine health and safety performance
|
Implementation of the tripartite
action plan on health and safety
|
Utilisation of South
African based research facilities for analysis of samples across the mining
value chain
|
Percentage of samples in South
African facilities
|
In addition, the reporting template includes many finer elements to
judge whether the measures have been achieved.
6.1.7.1
BhpBilliton
On environmental management, BhpBilliton reported a score of 11 out of
12 points for 2011, and commented that all was proceeding as per the plan (EMP).
[73]
On health, BhpBilliton reported a score of 11 out of 12 points for 2011
and commented that 89 per cent of the tripartite action plan on health and
safety had been implemented.
On sample analysis, the 25 per cent improvement target has been
achieved, but the 2010 baseline was not indicated.
6.1.7.2
Exxaro
On environmental management, Exxaro stated that it was Fully compliant
in terms of Environmental Management.
[74]
On health, Exxaro reported that performance was on track and commented
that 70 per cent of the 2014 tripartite action plan on health and safety had
been implemented.
On sample analysis, Exarro indicated that it had achieved the 2014
target of 100 per cent South African based sampling.
6.1.7.3
Gold Fields
On environmental management, Gold Fields stated that it was implementing
EMPs in terms of the submitted plan and in the process of submitting revised
plans for approval.
[75]
On health, Gold Fields reported that four per cent of the workforce had
been trained as health and safety representatives, compared with the 2010
target of two per cent in the tripartite action plan on health and safety.
On sample analysis, Gold Fields indicated that 80 per cent of sampling
was South African based in 2010 and that it was on track to meet the Charter
improvement targets.
Overall, Gold Fields rated its performance on Sustainable Development
and Growth as 50 per cent - 75 per cent Marginal to Acceptable.
6.1.7.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashanti did not include environmental management as part of
its presentation on the Mining Charter.
[76]
AngloGold Ashanti reported comprehensively on HIV/AIDS and TB actions
but did not cover other aspects of the tripartite action plan on health and
safety.
Sample analysis was not part of the AngloGold Ashanti presentation.
6.1.7.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin did not deal with the Sustainable Development and Growth pillar
in its 2011 presentation on the Mining Charter.
6.1.7.6
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American dealt in some detail with its commitments regarding the
environment, health and safety and research and development. These were not,
however, linked to the Mining Charter scorecard in the presentation.
On environmental management, Anglo American stated that it is committed
to addressing environmental concerns and illustrated how its mines are dealing
with water issues.
[77]
On health, Anglo American stated that management has been working with
government,
unions and peers to find common solutions to achieve a breakthrough in
safety in the industry. The tripartite action plan on health and safety was
now being rolled out to operational level within our own South African
business units
On sample analysis, Anglo American reflected more broadly on its
in-house R&D capability. In 2011, Anglo Americans South African business
units spent R722-million on research and
development, with about 50 per cent spent locally in South Africa.
6.1.7.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
On environmental management, De Beers detailed a full, 12 point score
for 2010, against the Charter reporting template, but awarded itself 10.2
points in a summary of the 2011 scorecard.
On the health components of the scorecard, De Beers indicated a 7.3 out
of 12 performance for 2011 (no results given for 2010), stating that there was
still a need for implementation of leading practices and research findings.
On sample analysis, the 25 per cent improvement target required by the
Charter has been achieved, but the 2010 baseline was not indicated.
6.1.7.8
Xstrata
On environmental management, Xstrata reported that it had implemented 97
per cent of its approved Environmental Management Plans, (100 per cent in
alloys and 95 per cent in coal). Xstrata has also focused on reducing its
carbon footprint and usage of key South African resources in accordance with
its EMPs.
On health, Xstrata reported that it had implemented all its health and
safety commitments as agreed in tripartite action plan. Xstrata reported that
it achieved 49 per cent reduction in total recordable injury frequency rates
since 2005. Its health initiatives focused on prevention and treatment of
occupational illnesses and health epidemics (HIV/AIDS and TB).
On sample analysis, according to its presentation to the committee,
Xstrata utilises South African based research facilities for all its research
needs.
[78]
6.1.7.9
African Rainbow Minerals
On environmental management, ARM achieved 100 per cent implementation of
its approved EMPs on three of its seven mines. Implementation rates were above
80 per cent at another three mines and 42 per cent at the Black Rock Manganese
Mines.
[79]
On the health components of the scorecard all the ARM mines achieved at
least a 93 per cent implementation rate for tripartite action on safety.
On sample analysis, ARM indicated that it had achieved its 2010 target
of 100 per cent of samples being processed in South African facilities.
6.1.7.10 Impala Platinum
Holdings Limited (Implats)
Implats did not deal with the Sustainable Development and Growth pillar
in its 2011 presentation to the Committee on the Mining Charter.
6.1.8.
Beneficiation
One of the most difficult areas in which to judge mining company
performance is that of beneficiation. This component is not included in the
reporting template issued by the DMR in 2010.
[80]
The Mining Charter scorecard refers to the contribution of a mining company
towards beneficiation as an element that will be effective from 2012 and sets
as its measure additional production volume contributory to local value
addition beyond the base line.
[81]
The revised Mining Charter defines Beneficiation to mean the
transformation of a mineral (or a combination of minerals) to a higher value
product, which can either be consumed locally or exported. The term
beneficiation is often used interchangeably with mineral value-addition or
downstream beneficiation.
[82]
Mining companies must facilitate local beneficiation of mineral
commodities by adhering to the provision of Section 26 of the MPRDA and the
mineral beneficiation strategy, but they are not obliged to engage in beneficiation
processes themselves, as miners.
However
Mining companies may offset the value of the level of beneficiation achieved
by the company against a portion of its HDSA ownership requirements not
exceeding 11 per cent.
[83]
Some clarity on Governments thinking on beneficiation was provided by
the Beneficiation Strategy for the Minerals Industry of South Africa,
published in June 2011.
[84]
In August 2011, the DMR told the Committee
that it was still looking at the modalities to provide a beneficiation offset
to against the Mining Charters ownership requirements.
[85]
The seven mining companies which gave presentations to the Committee on
the issue each approached beneficiation in an individual manner.
The summary below is not comprehensive (some
of the presentations were extremely detailed), but reflects the range of
responses.
6.1.8.1
BhpBilliton
BHP Billiton noted that 25 per cent of the manganese that it produces
goes to its Metalloys smelter in Gauteng.
[86]
6.1.8.2
Exxaro
Exxaro stated that much of its involvement in beneficiation was in
partnership with other enterprises and customers. But beneficiation is part of
its core business strategy. One example was the establishment of a local
production facility for new titanium metal production as part of its mineral
sands operations in KwaZulu Natal. It was also involved in downstream
beneficiation opportunities for titanium slag and zircon. Another example was
the production of char and coke by Exxaro Reductants. Exarro supports medium to
long-term research in beneficiation through its involvement with SAMMRI (the
South African Minerals
to Metals Research Institute). This project
develops value-adding
technologies and broadens the skills base in South Africa.
[87]
6.1.8.3
Gold Fields
Gold Fields did not report on beneficiation issues in 2011, noting that
this measure of the extent of local value addition beyond the baseline was only
effective from 2012.
[88]
6.1.8.4
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashantis largest beneficiation commitment is its long-time 25
per cent investment in Oro Africa, South Africas largest manufacturer and
exporter of jewellery. Oro Africa sells 18 000 kg of jewellery per year.
AngloGold Ashanti has 53 per cent ownership in the Rand Refinery, which refines
most of South Africas gold, and in the Gold Zone. The Gold Zone comprises
South African Manufacturing Jewelers, Gold Reef City Mint, Intsika Skills
Beneficiation Project and the Ekurhuleni Jewelry Project.
[89]
6.1.8.5
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin stated that its 2014 plan to contribute to beneficiation goals
under the Mining Charter was still undefined
[90]
in 2011. It outlined several aspects of its involvement in beneficiation apart
from its provision of inputs for manufacturing (Lonmin delivered 16 per cent of
its total PGM production in 2011 to the local auto catalytic converter industry).
Lonmin contributed to the discussions on the government policy framework on
beneficiation through the Platinum Beneficiation Committee and identified
downstream opportunities and made strategic recommendations to the DMR for
local value addition to minerals. Lonmin also identified the factors which need
to be addressed to enable greater levels of beneficiation. These were:
·
Coordinated interdepartmental action from government to advance
viable beneficiation models.
·
Alignment in targeted projects for optimal impact.
·
Infrastructure bottlenecks in transport, energy and water
must be addressed.
·
A more enabling industrial, trade, tax and skills policy
environment is needed.
6.1.8.6
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American commented that the original 2004 Mining Charter provided
little clarification as to the definition and meaning of beneficiation for the
mining industry. Despite this, Anglo American continued to conduct extensive
work and research into formalising its beneficiation strategy and approach at
Business Unit level. In 2009, position papers for the beneficiation of Anglo
Americans core commodities in South Africa (iron ore, platinum and thermal
coal) were developed for approval at ExCo level within each respective Business
Unit (Kumba Iron Ore, Anglo American Platinum and Anglo American Thermal Coal).
Since this process was initiated, work
has been under way to further develop the initiatives already implemented to
enhance beneficiation in line with section 26 of the MPRDA and the new
Beneficiation Strategy
[91]
.
Beneficiation initiatives have been implemented across all of Anglo Americans business
units in South Africa and have directly contributed to job creation.
[92]
Anglo American gave a detailed presentation of beneficiation initiatives
and support measures across its platinum, coal and iron ore operations. These
included:
·
Collaboration with the Department of Science and Technology,
providing seed capital through the R100 million PGM Development Fund to connect
international partners with the South African fuel cell development program.
·
Measures to process coal before sale to make it more
attractive to customers and efforts to find productive uses for the by products
and waste products from the combustion of coal.
·
The upgrading of what was formerly waste material into iron ore.
(20 per cent of iron ore production in 2010 was sold to the South African steel
production industry.)
6.1.8.7
De Beers Consolidated Mines
De Beers reported that it is involved in the following beneficiation
initiatives:
·
Harry Oppenheimer Diamond Training School.
·
Kimberley International Diamond and Jewellery
Academy (in partnership with the Northern Cape Provincial Government).
·
Over 40 per cent of diamonds produced are sold to
local cutters and polishers (2010 average was 53 per cent.
[93]
)
6.1.8.8
Xstrata
Xstrata reported that it had spent R8.5-billion on beneficiation
initiatives in South Africa by 2011. These included R6.5-billion on the two
phases of the Lion ferrochrome smelter in Steelpoort
and over R2-billion on UG2 chromite recovery
and agglomeration facilities. Xstrata saw itself as a meaningful contributor
to the achievement of Government‟s beneficiation strategy through its
leadership position in the global ferrochrome industry. Xstrata is the chief
sponsor of the drive to curb unbeneficiated chrome ore exports in favour of
growth in ferrochrome production and, by implication, job creation in South
Africa.
[94]
6.1.8.9
African Rainbow Minerals
ARM did not report on beneficiation issues.
[95]
6.1.8.10 Impala Platinum
Holdings Limited (Implats)
Implats did not report on beneficiation issues.
[96]
REFERENCES
(Section 6.1)
Submissions by the top ten mining companies
African
Rainbow Minerals (ARM). (2011)
ARMs
implementation of the Mining Charter Presentation to the Portfolio Committee
.
9 November. Available at: <www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 20 March 2013].
AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio
Committee on Minerals: 2004 Current
. 16 November.
Available at: <www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 18 March 2013].
De
Beers. (2011)
De Beers in South Africa:
Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources
. 2 November.
Exxaro
Resources. (2011) Progress Report on the Mining Charter. 9 November. Available
at: <www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 19 March 2013].
Farmer,
I. (2011)
Lonmin plc: Presentation to the
Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources
. 2 November.
Gomwe,
G. and Zikhali, L.(2011)
Transformation
in Anglo American South Africa: Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on
Mineral Resources
. 2 November.
Implats
(2011) <Undated and untitled presentation to the hearings on the Mining
Charter>. 9 November. Available at: <www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 22
March 2013].
Moodley, R. (2011)
BHP
Billiton Implementation of the Mining Charter and Job Creation
. 9
November. Available at: <www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 19 March 2013].
Moodley, R. (2011b)
BHP
Billiton SA Transformation beyond compliance
. 25 November. <further submission
to Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources>
Turner, P. (2011)
Gold Fields: Presentation to Parliament
.
15 November.
Available at: <www.pmg.org.za>
[Accessed 18 March 2013].
Xstrata
South Africa (2011) Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee. 9
November. Available at: <www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 22 March 2013].
Xstrata
South Africa. (2011)
Presentation to the
Parliamentary Portfolio Committee
. 9 November. Available at:
<www.pmg.org.za> [Accessed 18 March 2013].
Other
Submissions and DMR documents
Barker, F., Baxter, R. and Sibiya, B. (2011)
Chamber of Mines Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Mineral
Resources
. 25 March.
Bell Dewar Inc. (2011)
Submission to the
Portfolio Committee on Mining. Review of the Broad-based Socio-Economic
Empowerment Charter for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry. 25
March.
Business
Unity South Africa (BUSA) (2011)
Submission
on the Charter for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (Mining
Charter)
. 24 August.
Chamber
of Mines of South Africa. (2011)
Progress
with the implementation of the Mining Charter
. Presentation to the
Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources. 24 August
Eskom. (2011) Eskoms commentary on the review of the Mining Charter. 11
March. <submission to the
Portfolio Committee
on Mining>.
Webber
Wentzel. (2011) Submissions to the Parliamentary Committee on Mining on the
Amendment of the Broad-based Socio-Economic Empowerment Charter for the South
African Mining and Minerals Industry, published on 13 September 2010 (the
Revised Mining Charter). 26 August. Available at: <www.pmg.org.za>
[Accessed 15 March 2013]
Department
Mineral of Resources.
(2012)
Minerals
Statistical Tables 1990 2011
Directorate: Mineral Economics Bulletin
B1/2012. Fourteenth Edition. November.
Department
Mineral of Resources. (2011)
Beneficiation
Strategy for the Minerals Industry of South Africa
. June.
Department
Mineral of Resources. (2010)
Mining
Charter Impact Assessment Report, 2009.
Available at:
<http://www.dmr.gov.za/mining-charter.html> [Accessed May 26 2011].
DMR
(2010a)
Amendment of
the Broad Based Socio Economic Empowerment
Charter for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry
.
20 September. Available at:
<http://www.dmr.gov.za/mining-charter.html> [Accessed 18 March 2013].
<The Mining Charter >
DMR
(2010b)
Scorecard for the Broad Based
Socio Economic Empowerment Charter for the SA Mining Industry.
Available
at: <http://www.dmr.gov.za/mining-charter.html> [Accessed 18 March 2013].
DMR
(2010c)
Mining Charter Reporting Template
.
Available at: <http://www.dmr.gov.za/mining-charter.html> [Accessed 18
March 2013].
POSA
(Parliament of South Africa) (2011c) Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources.
Public hearings on Mining Charter. E249. 24 August 2011. Disc 1 of 2. [DVD]
PMG (Parliamentary
Monitoring Group) audio recording 1/11/2011 Part 1 of 3: Introductory remarks
and Anglo American South Africa. Length 02:12:32. PC Min: Public Hearings on
the implementation of the Mining Charter and job creation efforts
6.2.
Report by the 10
Mining Companies on their Job Creation Initiatives
In addition to reporting on compliance to the Mining Charter, the mining
companies were also required to report on their job creation initiatives,
especially for the youth. The reason for the request was a result of the
Committee observation during oversight visits and public hearings where such
engagements were conducted during the normal working hours but were largely
attended by the youth. This raised concern of high levels of youth unemployment
among the mining communities.
The mining companies reported as follows:
6.2.1.
BhpBilliton
BhpBilliton reported that it recently completed two projects, namely
Douglas Mine Optimisation and Klipspruit New Mine. It invested R6.8 billion in
Douglas Mine Optimisation and R600 million in Klipspruit New Mine resulting to
the creation of 100 and 916 jobs, respectively. It further reported that it
envisage investing R1.5 billion in Wessels Graben Expansion project, R800
million in Hotazel Town Development and R715 million in M14 project in the
future. BhpBilliton listed the additional job creation initiatives as follows:
·
High school artisan project
·
Artisan learnership
·
Production/ process learnershiop
·
Social and Labour Plan (SLP) bursaries
·
Skills Development youth project
However, the company did not state the number of jobs that went to the
youth. The Committee was impressed about the amount invested but felt that the
investment yielded fewer jobs. The members of the Committee also raised concern
about the commitment of the company to South Africa.
BhpBilliton assured the Committee of its commitment to the country as
displayed by the size of its investment in manganese and coal in South Africa.
6.2.2.
Exxaro
Exxaro approach to youth development is premised on a progressive
approach from Basic Education (Ensuring well-functioning schools and
professional career guidance),Skills Development (technical skills
development), Tertiary Education (bridging programmes bursaries), Business
Incubation (business skills development, mentorship and coaching aligned with
procurement at the mine) to Business Hubs. It is envisaged that each business
hub will incubate 20 new enterprises per annum resulting in 100 new jobs. It is
further expected that by 2015, 38 business hubs will be established thereby
creating 760 enterprises. At a ratio of 5 jobs per enterprise this translates
into the creation of 3 800 jobs. The Grootegeluk Medupi Expansion Project is
expected to create 11 470 jobs by 2012.
6.2.3.
Gold Fields
Gold Fields made the following commitments in support of job creation:
·
To increase bursary awards for engineering students
by 20 per cent in 2012;
·
To expand experiential learning opportunities for
MQA/DMR sponsored engineering graduates. An additional 45 section 18.2
engineering learners will be taken in 2012 in partnership with the Department
of Labour and MQA;
·
To facilitate vacation work opportunities for 250
engineering students per annum, 50 per cent of which are non-Gold Fields
bursars;
·
To establish partnerships with FET colleges to
prioritise technical qualifications for employees;
·
To continue to contribute to the Mining Education
and Training Fund (METF-a fund that sponsors university mining schools) and
considering increasing the annual levy by up to 50 per cent; and
·
To consider giving a once-off contribution to a
National Youth Development Fund.
It was further reported that the R9 billion investment at the South Deep
mine should lead to about 1 000 new jobs by 2015.
6.2.4.
AngloGold Ashanti
AngloGold Ashantis (AGA) job creation and youth development plan for
2012 to 2014 is focused on education and skills development. It involves
funding 2 200 learners and investing R33.6 million in Minerals Education
Trust Fund. AGA intends creating 2 500 additional positions for community
youth.
However, AGA cautioned that the decline in gold mining is inevitably going
to lead to a reduction in the number of jobs. AGA noted that in 2005 it mined
80 000 tonnes of gold and is currently down to 50 000 tonnes. When
asked by members about the number of employees that are currently employed by
AGA, the committee was informed that the establishment consists of 30 000
employees. AGA projected that in future the establishment might be down to
10 000 employees.
The Committee wanted to know about the AGAs expansion plan in South
Africa. AGA informed the Committee that there are two expansion plans that can
only work when experimental technology plan worked. The first aspect is the
increase of speed of mining if new technology worked that would result in lower
ore bodies being mined and thus more jobs being created. The other aspect was
looking into international suppliers of equipment creating capability in South
Africa, which would also lead to job creation.
6.2.5.
Lonmin Plc
Lonmin Plcs job creation initiatives focused on interventions to grow
skills base through successful training directives with a 2012 budget of R260
million. It also reported that it is advancing community initiatives to further
job creation initiatives. Lonmin plans to invest $2 billion over four years in
order to grow production from 700 000 oz and in the process create
approximately 2 000 new full time jobs. It reported that it had created
5 000 jobs in the past two years. However, Lonmin emphasised that the
local and international investment climate impacted on its ability to be
successful on job creation.
When asked to further clarify its job creation initiatives, Lonmin
informed the Committee that there were roads required in its mining areas, and
this could lead to job creation. The Committee also raised concern about the R5
million of the amount earmarked for SLP projects in the North West Province
that had not been spent resulting in possible retardation of job creation.
Lonmin responded that the underspending had resulted from municipal delays,
since the funds had been intended for a water reticulation project.
Lonmin addressed the issue of job creation in general and did not have
specifics for youth employment.
6.2.6.
Anglo American South Africa
Anglo American South Africa (AASA) informed the Committee about the
Zimele Enterprise Development/ Job Creation Funds, which advances loans to
Small and Medium Enterprises (SMEs). The Zimele project was done through 32
small business hubs located across the country and in some labour sending
areas. It reported that the Zimele initiative had created and sustained 18 267
jobs since 2008. There were about 1 300 businesses across the Fund, each
generating about R1.9 billion turnover. The AASA investment had been R519
million. AASA informed the Committee of its commitment to generating employment
in the SME sector. The SMEs were located in the areas around the mines in the
poverty nodes. It was reported that present, 35 per cent of entrepreneurs were
women and 48 per cent were the youth. AASA made a special commitment to the
Call to Action by the United Nations, and it projected that by 2015 it would
have created 25 000 employment opportunities in this particular
initiative.
The Committee expressed concern about high levels of unemployment,
poverty and inequality and wanted more information on job creation initiatives.
AASA informed the Committee that besides the Zimele initiative, the Pipeline
Project involving the investment of R30 billion would generate 19 800
jobs. It further reported to the Committee that 3 000 jobs had been
created through Corporate Social Investment projects. AASA estimated that,
overall, 40 000 jobs had been created. Other job creation projects
included the approved ostrich farming in the Northern Cape, which was expected
to create about 850 jobs.
6.2.7.
De Beers Consolidated Mines
DBCM conceded that the industry might not have done enough, especially
for young people, to ensure that they had hope and opportunities. DBCM had
adopted the AASAs Zimele model, and it had a target of creating 5 000
jobs by 2014. It had started the programme a year and a half ago. It funded 106
companies and employed about 600 people. It reported that 50 per cent of these
companies were owned by the youth and 36 per cent were owned by women. DBCM
reported that it had created five strategic hubs in strategic areas near its
operations. The biggest challenge in these areas was unemployment.
In response to the question on adoption of the Zimele model, DBCM
informed the Committee that the model was adopted as best practice since it was
developed over 20 years and had been proven to work. On the question of
sustainability, the Committee was informed that a number of entrepreneurs were
already coming back for additional funding, which clearly demonstrated the
success of the businesses.
6.2.8.
Xstrata
Xstrata reported that it had invested R68 billion in South Africa since
acquiring Duikers coal assets in 2002, creating a significant number of job
opportunities. It employed 25 700 workers, of which 13 000 were
permanent. It further reported that 7 900 permanent jobs would be created
from new projects. The new projects are Goedgevonden worth R4.1 billion and
expected to create 532 permanent jobs; Atcom East project worth R3.5 billion
and expected to create 263 permanent jobs; Lion II project worth R5.1 billion
and expected to create 1 042 jobs; and Eland project worth R4.5 billion
and expected to create 3 650 jobs. Xstrata informed the Committee that it
intended to increase the number of youth employment through investment in new
projects within the period of four years. The youth is expected to comprise 39
per cent of the employees at Goedgevonden and Atcom East projects. At Lion II
and Eland projects the youth is expected to comprise 52 per cent of the total
workforce.
When asked if the new job creation projects were already in operation,
Xstrata informed the Committee that the projects were approved.
6.2.9.
African Rainbow Minerals
African Rainbow Minerals (ARM) reported that the number of their
employees had increased from 11 805 in 2006 to 28 704 in 2011. For
the 2011 financial year, ARM created three permanent positions per calendar day
and during the last five financial years it created 2.5 permanent jobs per
calendar day. This amounts to 4 553 permanent jobs created in the past
five years. ARM informed the Committee that it was its policy to, as far as
possible recruit locally in order to address high unemployment among local
communities. ARM projected that it will create 10 000 jobs in the next
five years, once logistical constraints are resolved and there is significant growth
in their production volume.
6.2.10.
Impala Platinum Holdings Limited (Implats)
Implats told the Committee that it was concerned about youth
unemployment and in response to this it had put 389 people through the Novice
Training Program and it hoped 140 youth per month could be put through this
program.
The Committee probed Implats on its insignificant contribution to job
creation. In response Implats informed the Committee that the aim of training
140 youth per month was to give 1 500 people annually access to the mining
job market. It however mentioned that the company would have to grow at a
substantial rate in order to be able to absorb them. Implats is therefore
training for the mining industry in general. It is projected that the Leeuwkop
project would create 5 000 new jobs and many other jobs in the process of
developing the project.
7.
Findings
and Observations
7.1
Summary of salient issues raised by different stakeholder
groupings
The Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources, having met with all
stakeholders as mentioned above made the following observations:
7.1.1
Mining Companies/
Business
·
Some mining companies supported the revised Mining
Charter while other companies supported the amendments with some reservations.
·
The mining companies represented by the Chamber of
Mines (COM) were aware of and expressed support for the amendment of the Mining
Charter. They also expressed appreciation of the reasons behind the amendments.
·
The mining companies represented by the South
African Mining Development Association (SAMDA) were aware of the amended
Charter but concerned about the failure of the majority of the mining industry
to meet the transformation targets. They pointed to what they described as
disturbingly low targets for employment equity. There is a lack of clear targets
for black women in the revised Charter. SAMDA recommended that new targets for
black people, black women and black disabled employees should be set. These
targets should be in line with representation in the economically active
population.
·
Business represented by BUSA was concerned about
non-alignment between the Mining Charter and the Broad-Based Black Economic
Empowerment Codes of Practice, which resulted in some companies having to
double report. This concern was also shared by SAMDA.
BUSA drew attention to an important weakness in the Mining Charter: there
is no requirement for verification of the scorecard by an independent body
7.1.2
Organised Labour
·
All unions were aware of the amendments to the
Charter.
·
The National Union of Mine Workers (NUM) was
dissatisfied with the slow pace of transformation in the mining industry and
recommended that section 47 of the MPRDA be applied to non-compliant companies.
·
The NUM also pointed out that the designation of
all women as Historically Disadvantaged South Africans (HDSAs) had an
unintended consequence of the promotion of white women to key positions at the
expense of other HDSAs.
·
National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa
(NUMSA) was in favour of alignment of the Charter with the Industrial Policy
Action Plan.
·
Solidarity favoured Employee Share Ownership
Schemes as a model for community ownership and wealth distribution.
7.1.3
Youth Organisations
·
Youth organisations that presented were aware of
the amended Charter and were in support of it.
·
Merafong Youth Forum was concerned about skills
development issues and said that bursaries should be provided to all deserving
students.
·
National Youth Development Agency (NYDA) proposed
the inclusion of the youth as a designated group with a five per cent
compliance target for all elements of the Charter.
7.1.4
Traditional Leaders
·
The Taung Traditional Leadership was aware of and
supported the revised Charter while the Royal Hlangwana House was unhappy about
not being consulted.
·
The Taung Traditional Leadership wanted clarity on
the administration of the social development fund to which multinational
suppliers of capital goods for mines are required to contribute.
7.1.5
Mining Communities
·
Some mining communities e.g. Merafong Mining
Community, were not aware of the Charter and complained of lack of
consultation.
·
Communities also complained that the mining
companies favoured non-South Africans over local persons.
·
The small-scale marine miners of the Northern
Cape were concerned that, with the exception of Alexkor, none of the major
mines were meeting the provisions of the Charter
.
7.1.6
Women in Mining
·
SAWIMA was aware of the amended Charter.
·
SAWIMA pointed out the inconsistencies with regard
to criteria for issuing mining permits e.g. some provinces use locality while
others use BEE status as a criterion.
·
SAWIMA also recommended the establishment of a
specific body/ tribunal to monitor compliance to the Charter.
7.1.7
Businesses related to
mining
·
Bravura Consulting noted that there was no
requirement for verification of the completed score card by an independent
agency. This observation was shared by BUSA. Bravura Consulting also wanted
compliance to be clearly defined.
·
The Capital Equipment Export Council wanted the
Charter to be amended to give preference to South African manufactured products
in mine procurement policy. COSATU was also in favour of this view.
·
Webber Wentzel (Law firm) was concerned about the
legal status of the Charter and inadequate definition of terms. Concerns
about the vagueness of the wording of aspects of the Charter were also raised
by Eskom and Bell Dewar.
·
Rocha Consulting wanted clarity on how
beneficiation offsets would promote the ownership of and participation in beneficiation
by HDSAs.
7.2
General observations
·
The slow progress of transformation in the mining industry
was the dominant theme in the hearings.
[97]
Disappointment with the pace, depth and scope
of change was voiced most strongly by people from the mining communities who
gave evidence in the hearings. In most cases, their comments were not directly
about the Mining Charter, but about the mining industry, about the Department
of Mineral Resources and about why such meagre benefits are seen to flow to
ordinary citizens and mining communities from South Africas much vaunted
mineral wealth.
·
All stakeholders support the transformation of the mining
industry in principle.
·
The Chamber of Mines, representing some ninety per cent of
the industry, acknowledged that the mines could have done more in the way of
promoting transformation under the original Charter, but felt that the revised Charter
should be given an opportunity to show results. The Chamber made specific
suggestions on how implementation efforts could be more intensive. These
included clear guidelines and feedback from the DMR and the independent
verification of compliance claims.
[98]
·
Submissions by the department (DMR), the South African
Mining Development Association (SAMDA) and the National Union of Mineworkers
(NUM), for example, all signalled a view that transformation could be accelerated
by attaching strong punitive measures to non-compliance with the Mining
Charter. This could include the suspension or cancellation of rights under
Section 47 of the MPRDA and other penalties under section 99.
·
There were many suggestions for further amendments to the
Mining Charter to include clearer targets for the employment
of
women, youth and people with disabilities; to improve the
quality of consultation with mining communities and to create procurement
incentives so that mines would buy more local and South African manufactured
products.
·
The most striking feature of the hearings was the total lack
of agreement on whether mines had complied with the Mining Charter or not.
·
The Mining Charter Impact Assessment produced by
the DMR in 2009 presented figures that differed drastically from those relied
upon by the Chamber and by the ten mining major companies in 2011.
·
The differences in judgements on compliance are
apparently due to the use of different formulas and assumptions to calculate
the measures. This view was shared by the NUM.
Possible questions for the workshop
·
Many of the people who participated in the hearings
said that the reason for the slow pace of transformation in the mining sector
was the non compliance by the mining companies with the terms of the Mining
Charter. The major mining companies on the other hand, said that they had
largely complied with the Charter. It was not possible, from the available
evidence, to disprove this claim.
·
The question then becomes a different one. If the
mining companies have complied with the Mining Charter and if transformation in
the industry has still been weak, does that not mean that another avenue for
hastening transformation in the mining sector is called for?
·
Is the Mining Charter really an effective tool for
transformation? The hearings on the Mining Charter suggest that it has clearly
failed this test. Calling for more intense implementation of the Charter is not
going to lead to more transformation than what has been experienced since 2004.
8.
Recommendations
The Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources having heard evidence from
all stakeholders listed above, recommends the following:
The Minister of Mineral Resources should ensure that:
·
The DMR considers conducting road shows to inform
the mining communities about the revised mining Charter;
·
The DMR and relevant stakeholders develop a common
formula to be used when assessing ownership in the mining industry and all
parties should be compelled to use the same formula;
·
The DMR strengthens its compliance monitoring
capacity or consider appointing an independent agency to verify the completed
scorecards;
·
The DMR submits summary of bi-annual reports
submitted to the department by the mining companies to determine the level of
compliance and transformation by 05 July 2013 and also make presentation to the
Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources;
·
The DMR should report back to the Committee on all
recommendations submitted; and
·
The Mining Industry Growth,
Development and Employment Task Team (MIGDETT)
makes a presentation to the
Committee on their role and activities at the envisaged workshop pertaining to
Mining Charter.
9.
Conclusion
The public hearings on the Mining Charter and the transformation
process in the mining industry
[99]
were held just one year before the Marikana tragedy brought into sharp focus
the socio-economic problems that confront the mining industry, quite apart from
business difficulties. The phrase ticking time bomb was used several times in
evidence to the Committtee. And the Chairman repeatedly voiced concerns well
known to all members of the Committee:
When we conduct oversights, we come back depressed. Because before you
enter into a mine, you walk through a sea of poverty. ... In our own experience
these Social and Labour Plans are indeed not implemented...Mining communities
lament that here, within our area we extract the wealth of the country but
there is no drop that comes back to us as the mining community.
[100]
To the first set of hearings with the top ten mining companies, the
Chair said:
The Portfolio Committee has had
oversight visits across the country...where we would be overseeing the
compliance on the mining laws but also the mining charter as well as the social
and labour plans implementation. What we have found, which is in our reports
that are in the public domain, is an appalling situation. Mining communities
specifically are trapped in abject poverty. What we have seen is a picture that
is not good at all. It does not auger well for the future of the country...
Your words will not speak more than what we have seen in the actual situation
[101]
The Marikana tragedy and the ongoing lack of peace in the mining
sector in 2013 provides an even more urgent context for the workshop that
will consider the findings and recommendations that emerged from the 2011
public hearings on the Mining Charter.
Report to be considered.
[1] DMR (2012). Ministers Statement.
[2] [Minutes of the PC on Mineral Resources, 13 March 2013 yet to be adopted].
[3] DMR 2010 b and c)
[4] See, for example, Bell Dewar Inc. (2011); Eskom (2011); Webber Wentzel (2011).
[5] BUSA (2011)
[6] Section 100 (2)
[7] See this report, section 5.1.3 above.
[8] DMR (2010b)
[9] DMR (2010:17)
[10] Moodley (2011)
[11] Exxaro Resources (2011).
[12] Turner (2011).
[13] Ibid. In February 2013, Gold Fields unbundled its Kloof-Deelkraal Complex (KDC) and Beatrix mines in South Africa into a separately listed company, Sibanye Gold (formerly the unlisted GFIMSA). <www.goldfields.co.za>.
[14] Anglo Gold Ashanti (2011).
[15] Farmer (2011)
[16] Gomwe and Zikhali (2011) Details given on pages 59 to 62.
[17] Ibid.
[18] Ibid.
[19] De Beers (2011).
[20] Xstrata South Africa (2011)
[21] http://www.arm.co.za/
[22] African Rainbow Minerals (ARM) (2011)
[23] Ibid. In March 2013, Harmony stated that it was Empowered and compliant with 2014 Mining Charter requirements http://www.harmony.co.za/about-us [Accessed 22 March 2013]
[24] Implats (2011) [The presentation slides are not clear on what the actual percentage of HDSA ownership is in Impala. Royal Bafokeng Holdings (Pty) Ltd (RBH) have a 13.4 per cent stake in Implats and there is also an ESOP in place.
[25] Moodley (2011b).
[26] Exxaro Resources (2011)
[27] Turner (2011)
[28] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[29] Farmer (2011)
[30] Gomwe and Zikhali (2011)
[31] De Beers (2011)
[32] ARM (2011)
[33] Implats (2011)
[34] DMR (2010a)
[35] Exxaro Resources (2011)
[36] Turner (2011)
[37] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[38] Farmer (2011)
[39] Gomwe and Zikhali (2011)
[40] De Beers (2011)
[41] Xstrata South Africa (2011)
[42] ARM (2011)
[43] Implats (2011)
[44] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[45] Farmer (2011)
[46] ARM (2011)
[47] Farmer (2011)
[48] DMR (2010c). Reporting Template.
[49] Ibid.
[50] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[51] Moodley (2011)
[52] Moodley (2011b)
[53] Ibid. The data covers both the Coal (BECSA) and Alloy (HMM) divisions.
[54] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[55] Farmer (2011)
[56] Gomwe and Zikhali (2011)
[57] Xstrata South Africa (2011)
[58] ARM (2011)
[59] Implats (2011)
[60] DMR (2010c)
[61] Moodley (2011)
[62] Moodely (2011b)
[63] This is against an apparent target of 15 per cent.
[64] Exxaro Resources (2011)
[65] Turner (2011)
[66] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[67] Farmer (2011)
[68] De Beers (2011)
[69] Xstrata South Africa (2011)
[70] ARM (2011)
[71] Implats (2011)
[72] DMR (2010a)
[73] Moodley (2011)
[74] Exarro Resources (2011)
[75] Turner (2011)
[76] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[77] Gomwe and Zikhali (2011)
[78] Xstrata (2011)
[79] ARM (2011)
[80] DMR (2010c)
[81] DMR (2010b)
[82] DMR (2010a)
[83] Ibid.
[84] DMR (2011)
[85] POSA (2011c: at 56 minutes), read with DMR (2011:21).
[86] Moodley (2011)
[87] Exxaro Resources (2011)
[88] Gold Fileds (2011)
[89] AngloGold Ashanti (2011)
[90] Farmer (2011)
[91] DMR (2011)
[92] Gomwe and Zikhali (2011)
[93] De Beers (2011)
[94] Xstrata South Africa (2011)
[95] ARM (2011)
[96] Implats (2011)
[97] Meeting of the Portfolio Committee on Mineral Resources: Draft minutes of proceedings. 08 February 2012.
[98] Chamber of Mines (2011). 24 August 2011.
[99] Mr F. Gona, 1 November 2011 <PMG recording Part 1 at 01:23>
[100] Mr F. Gona, Public hearings on Mining Charter. 24 August 2011. (POSA 2011c 45:00)
[101] {direct quote from recording: PMG 1/11/2011 Mr F. Gona 0:05:10 ... 0:06:12.}
Documents
No related documents