Bill Yes, I have been there and have read the document. I can�t disagree with you. What comes to mind is something Douglas said somewhere that Democracy does no constitute rule by the people because the Delegates themselves are not experts and are entirely in the hands of the Departmental bureaucrats.
You said in your email: > "Since its establishment, the Bank has always been > privately owned and today has some 650 shareholders." There is something about the shareholding that I do not understand. In private hands, there are (only) 2million issued shares (prescribed by law), with a One Rand face value, and with a maximum annual dividend of ten cents per share. The issued shareholding is therefore only R2million --- a tiny fraction of what would be the full Market Capitalization of the Bank. No individual person may hold more than ten thousnad shares. I don�t know what would be the full Authorised Share Capital, but if the voting at the Annual General Meeting is weighted according to shareholdings, even if all the private shareholders were in agreement, they could not carry an opposed motion in normal circumstances. Now this is where you can perhaps enlighten me. At the last AGM, a shareholder proposed that 10% of net profits be paid as dividend to the shareholders. On this years results, the dividend per One Rand share would jump to R9.39, and the shareprice would immediately jump in sympathy to about R100. The motion was carried by the meeting, but it would have to be ratified by Parliament. As a citizen (I am not a shareholder), I object and wrote to the Minister of Finance as follows:- Dear Mr Manuel, In a report in Finance Week of 13 August 2003, I read of the intention of [a shareholder] to propose to the board of the South African Reserve Bank that 10% of the profits be distributed to shareholders instead of to the Bank�s Statutory Reserves. This would apparently require Parliamentary approval. Mr Manuel, please do not allow this to happen. It is hard to understand why the Reserve Bank should have private shareholders in the first place, except perhaps to provide a body to elect the seven of the directors not appointed by the Government. Apart from this, the participation in the Bank�s affairs of private shareholders and their capital cannot add any value to the Bank. The defined annual dividend of not more than 10 cents a share to the holders of the 2million shares is already suficient to satisfy the need to have that body of private shareholders. That these shareholders should now receive dividends amounting to 10% of profits is completely unreasonable. It is purely opportunistic. The Reserve Bank belongs to all of us in South Africa; not to a priveleged few. Mr Manuel, you have the interests of all South Africans at heart. Please do not allow this travesty of simple justice in our country. Sincerely, H J Sutton * * * * * * * * * * * * My letter has been acknowledged and a reply promised, but I presume it will take a while. If an amending Bill is published for public comment, I will respond. Jessop. ------------------------------- --^---------------------------------------------------------------- This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84IaC.bcVIgP.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html --^----------------------------------------------------------------
