NOTES AND DOCUMENTS* NOTES AND DOCUMENTS* June 1976 SEM/9 International Seminar on the Eradication of Apartheid and in Support of the Struggle for Liberation in South Africa Havana, Republic of Cuba 24 - 28 May 1976 ROLE OF SHAREHOLDER ACTION IN OPPOSING LOANS TO SOUTH AFRICA** by The Reverend David Halsam (Secretary, "End Loans to South Africa", London) ** Published at the request of the Special Committee against Apartheid. 76-11912 * All material in these notes and documents may be freely reprinted. Acknowledgement, together with a copy of the publication containing the reprint, would be appreciated. Introduction The dependence of the South African Goveriment on forep loans has increased considerably over the last few years. This is largely due to changes in the South African econmy, resulting in a concentration an engineering and manufacturing, which tend to be more capital intensive. Loams can be made in three main form., direct to the Goverment, to State Corporations, or to private companies. Sources of such loans may be foreign companies, or more lb y consortia of foreign banks. High interest rates in South Africa, and the increasing strength of State corporations, has attracted a good deal of foreign capitalp especially to the cooratiom*. The inflow of capital to South Africa between July 1974 an July 19T59 according to the South African Reserve Bank, amounted to R 1,000 million, demonstrating both South Africa's net i for capital, and the confidence of the international financial comunit Foreign loans are a major factor in the continued survival of the agmuteld system. The importance of State corporations The extent of State capitaltsm in the econcm of South Africa Is not often realized. It is therefore necessary to stress the extensive influence of the 'paa-stata3ts' or State corporationas such as MUM (the Iron and Steel orporationS) ES00H (the Electricity Supply O amislon) TDC (the Industrial Development Corporation) and UCOR (the Uranium Corporation). Between 1960 and 1970 the public sector share of total fixed investment rose from 41 per cent to 46 per cent. 2 me corporations arose largely as the Afrikaaner response to the British cowtrol of private industry, and are now a vital series of cop in the South African eoocl; machine. For example there is a near-monopoly by the State in steel-wkimn electricity supply and transport. South African Railvays and Heabour is the country's largest employer. Such influence and support by the South African Goverment encourages foreign Investment$ which is thus taking- much less of a risk. An example of the co-operation was the enormous industrial schme' plannd between SASOL (South African Coal Gas and Oil corpoation) and A.3.O.Z, owuned largely by Moperial Chemical Industries (10)ofte nteMiuo and De Beers of South Africa (h2.5 per cent each). 2/ he ten-Year la will involve a total of R I billion on various types of chemical PlaXt, including one inVolving "oil-fro-coal"., oil being South Africa's searcest natural resource. It is the chemical industry more than aa:' other whch Y/EFWeiss, "Role of Foregin Loans in South Africa's Eoona.i 0 VoM , In The Economic Factor - Foreism Investsent in South Africa (publihe WJ the Study Project on External Itvesament in South Africa and. Nkambla, Lodon), pp. 50-1. S/ Ruth Weiss, "Role of Para-statals in South Africa's politico-eeude system", in ibid p. 61. ,/ Ibid p.' has benefitted from deliberate State intervention in the ecOnr. The recent announcement by ICI that another Z 20 million is to be Invested in AECI demonstrates clearly that this form of foreign financial support for the private sector of the aatheid-based South African econa is continuing. Loans by foreign banks play an important part in enabling the public sector of the econmW to continue its develoent. The extent of foreign bank loans Lending by banks is a traditionally secret activity and it is therefore difficult to obtain full information on international loans. Nevertheless it is known that the South African Ooverrment itself is particularly active in the international capital market, closely followed by some of its major corporations, such as ISCOR and ESCCO. A detailed list of such loans as are known appears in the document of the United Nations Special Comittee against Apartheid, "Note on Recent Develeaimets in Foreign Investment and Finance in South Africa" (A/AC.ll5/IlIf of 18 August 1975). This lists 28 series of loans between April 1973 and July 1975, involving all the major para-statals in South Africa, and banks throughout Europe, North America and Japan. Reports over the last few months, however, suggest that South Africa is finding it more difficult to raise large loas * he Jhaflmbe r Star of 20 December 1975, stated that ESCOM was not finding it easy to obtain a $ 100 million loan on the Eurocurrency market. After two umths of negotiations, however, a $ 200 million medium-term loan was raised by a consortium led by Manufacturers Trust (USA), and including ?frst National City Bank (USA), Barclays International and Morgan Guamnte . In a letter to the Church Project on United States Investments in Southern Africa, John A. Waage, the Executive Vice-President of First National, stated that the loan involves 28 banks from the United States of America, Europe and Canada. The Star of 28 February 1976 reported that the loan may well be ESCOM's only fund-raising operation in international money markets this year, "as European banks ... axe caIg close to their limits on South African loans". The series of loans which has attracted the most attention from the point of view of shareholder action, however, was a $ 20 million series, discovered in 1973, to the South African Government, IS0GB ESCOM and METCOR (the Metals Corporation). The loans were oraized by the Europe American Banking Corporation and involved 40 bans in 'the United States, Europe and Japan. Since late 1973 an international capais has built up against the United States and Canadian banks involved and also the European owers of the EABC, Deutsche- Bank, Socit6 Gerale (Belgium) and Soci6t6 G6ndrale (France), Midland Bank (iK), AmosterdamRotterdam Bank and Creditanstalt (Austria). Shareholder action United States of America The 1973 loans were first given publicity in the *nmkrt Documents", published by the Interfaith Centre for Corporate Responsibility (ICCR) of the National Council of Churches of Christ in the US, and included 10 American and 3 Canadian banks. The ICCR then co-ordinated a very successful "Banks Campaign" which over the following two years persuaded eight of the ten banks either to withdraw the loan., or pz'ise to become involved no further. The banks which withdrew included )erchants National of Indianapolis, Wells Fargo of San Francisco and Maryland National of Baltimore. Those committing themselves to no further loans included City National of Detroit, Central National of Chicago ad Vachovia of North Carolina. The pressures leading up to the decision of Maryland National to withdraw are particularly instructive, as the bank at first refused even to consider such a step. A campaign launched by local church and comuity groups included a resolution by the regional United Church of Christ urging member churches to withdraw accounts., cancellation of a $ 500,000 account by the local Federation of Credit Unions and a $ 5,000 account by the Ecumenical Church Council, a boycott of the bank called by black commnity groups, and the threatened loss of another $ 500,000 accont. of Montgomery County Council. The bank first responded by sending a delegation to South Africa to study the situation there, and when the delegation returned announced its decision to withdraw to one of its church shareholders. This was clearly a victory for pressure generated by local account- and share-holders in the bank. Canada Representations have also been made, with perhaps less strength and less success, by Canadian groups to the Bank of Montreal, the Royal Bank of Canada, the Canadian Imperial Bank of Comerce and the Toronto Ioinion Bank. Approaches have been deyeloped over two years by the United Church of Christ, the Anglican Church of Canada and now the "Task Force on the Churches and Corporate Responsibility", which has ccmbined the actions of Canadian church groups- These approaches cu3minated in the attendance of church representatives at the annual general meetings of all four banks in December 1975 and January 1976. The responses of the banks varied considerably. At the first annual general meeting, of the Bank of Montreal, the Chairman repeatedly interrupted the representatives who spoke on behalf of shareholding churches, and finally turned off the microphones when they continued to put their case. This happened despite a previous agreement that time for such discussion should be allowed. At the annual general meeting of the Imperial Bank of Oenere, the Chairman allowed speakers from churches holding 50,000 shaes same 15 minutes to state their case. He then responded with the Banke reasoned disagreement, and invited the dissident shareholders to lmehi The meeting of the Toronto DIminion Bank also allowed church ah ers to make a brief statement, and drew from the Chairman a statemet that until the Canadian Goverment legislated on the issue the bank would not be prepared to act. The Royal Bank heard statements from the leading church representative and the bank chairman, the latter of which drew heavily on Bantustan leaders' supposed support for foreign invesbaext. Then the Chairman immediately ended the meeting, allowing no tim for discussion. The Canadian group notes the intimidating and inhibiting at mphere of such meetings, preventing all but the most courageous from expraeing even the mildest opposition to the policies of the Board. World Council of Churches The question of bank loans, to the South African Goverment has also been taken~up by the World Council of Churches (WOC), both directay with the EABC Lfd indirectly with the participants in the loans.