<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5822843931001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
The South African banking group, Absa just concluded its rebranding in line with its new business strategy to build a more African focused approach. Joining CNBC Africa to expand on this is Bobby Malabie, Group Executive: Brand and Corporate, Absa.

The re-branding of Absa

Daniel Buntman, Principal Head | International Banking, Absa RBB
The election of Cyril Ramaphosa to replace former President Jacob Zuma as President of South Africa has resulted in renewed hope and confidence in our future.
<img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class="aligncenter wp-image-129326 size-full" src="http://cnbc.africa/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/Future_Investment_Flickr.jpg" alt="" width="1024" height="683" />
With this positive investor sentiment and exuberant market outlook, the rand has strengthened against major currencies; bidding at R11,82 to the US dollar at market close on Monday, reaching strength not seen since 2015.
This renewed optimism in the country’s prospects presents an exciting opportunity for all South African savers to consider local savings vehicles with exposure to foreign currency markets. Allocating a percentage of one’s savings to foreign currencies is not only a great diversification strategy, but it also helps with saving for future expenses and acts as a hedging strategy against currency depreciation and inflation.
Isn’t this the perfect time to bring your money home? Reduce the hassle of managing banks around the world. Make your life easier and do it all from one place. Pro-South African savings that will make SA grow and capture the opportunity of renewal.
There is a common misconception that you have to be incredibly wealthy in order to have a foreign currency account. In reality, though you do not have to be a Warren Buffet to access these offerings, these have become much more accessible, easily available, and relatively affordable option for locals.
Saving globally from your local account
Absa provides South Africans with <a href="https://www.absa.co.za/personal/bank/international-banking/explore/">a foreign currency account</a> that is domiciled in South Africa, meaning that your money stays in the country, as opposed to offerings that provide you with an offshore-held bank account.
Moreover, it is also much simpler and easier to use as well. Traditionally, consumers have to have separate platforms, requiring them to open off-shore accounts in foreign countries. This is not only more complicated but a lot more expensive way of doing foreign currency investment.
Absa has integrated their offering tightly with your domestic banking account and services. You can still have access to foreign currency savings, with the safety and security (and less the costly offshore banking fees) of having it together with your local banking services and account.
Additionally, you get this along with all the same functionality that you would have with your domestic accounts. This allows for an all-in-one banking solution from which you manage your local savings and investments in the same place as your foreign currency investments.
This account will also enable you to make international payment in any currency of the account to a third party, simply by going into a forex branch.
Absa’s offering democratises savings because it provides many more customers with the personal freedom to quickly, easily and conveniently put some of their hard-earned savings in foreign currency – and do this, while having it all connected to your conventional online banking service and remaining quick as well as simple to use.
*This article does not constitute financial advice, it is only meant for information-sharing purposes and the author will not be held liable, legally or otherwise, for any decisions taken as a result of this article.

Why you should bring your money back home to SA

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5727976191001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
The cautious optimism of local and global investors is one of the themes that dominate this year’s Mining Indaba taking place in Cape Town, South Africa. CNBC Africa’s Rofhiwa Madzena spoke with Shirley Webber, Head: Natural Resources, Absa.

Mining Charter has not derailed mining investment – Absa

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5727230954001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
Companies are increasingly considering merger and acquisition activity which may contribute to possibilities for consolidation and restructuring in an ever changing mining industry. Craig Brewer, Co-Head: Banking, Absa.

The hottest trends in mining now, how SA can be part of investment opportunities

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 730px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5688062227001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
The rand is has retracted after reaching a nine month high after Cyril Ramaphosa was elected President of the African National Congress, joining CNBC Africa for more is Daniel Buntman, Head: International Banking, Retail and Business Banking at Absa

How to take advantage of a stronger rand

Wessel Lemmer, Absa &#8211; Africa will this year continue to be home to some of the fastest-growing cities; thanks to the continent’s large young population seeking jobs and improved livelihoods. However, a key challenge associated with rapidly urbanizing populations is a chronic food insecurity problem that is aggravated by a lack of sufficient property rights, agricultural investment and policy and regulatory uncertainty leading to rising food prices despite access to land and willing producers to cultivate it.
Achieving sustainable food security for both the urban and rural citizens remains an important priority for governments across the continent. Crucially, food security depends not only on a tricky balance between availability and affordability, but also on coordinated partnerships between the various stakeholders in the agricultural sector. Also, it is increasingly becoming important to explore newer and more innovative approaches to successful farming. Urban agriculture is one of the techniques considered to be on the cusp of advancements within the sector, and one that can contribute towards the provision of sustainable access to nutritious food.
The practice involves the growing of farm produce near or around urban cities in the form of gardens provides organic produce to the local community. According a report published by The Sustainable Development Goals Centre for Africa this year, the continent has 65% of the world’s arable land, with food demand in Africa is expected to rise by over 60% by 2050 due to population growth. Simple shifts can result in better efficiencies and environmentally friendly produce that are less prone to climatic changes, and which ultimately has a positive influence on production yields. Community gardens and what is commonly known as co-op’s (co-operatives) can also play a key role in supplementing household budgets, and more importantly, can introduce a wider range of vitamins and minerals into the consumer’s diet.
A healthy and diverse diet, comprising of fresh produce, is imperative for a strong body and mind, and is also essential for enabling Africa’s youthful population to grow into the workforce capable of driving Africa’s economic growth. With half the population being under the age of 25, and 72 percent of these young people seeking employment, agriculture can be a key contributor to economic development[1]. These statistics are only set to grow, with over 330 million young Africans set to enter the job market in the next 20 years[2]. One of the challenges has been attracting young people into the sector and positioning it as an attractive and lucrative career option.
In coping with the food demands of increasing populations, nations such as Nigeria have shifted towards a more intensified and commercialized production system. This shift from the traditional sense of farming has included increased irrigation and modernization of systems, as well as the use of genetically modified seed and fertilizer inputs. In another case study, Zambia, which had a net deficit in maize production a mere decade ago, is now considered a maize exporter with a surplus of grains, all due to an uptake of technology in its farming methods[1].
Another area of opportunity for greater investment in alleviating the vulnerability of crops and livestock, which many nations on the continent need to invest in, is production research. Countries such as Morocco invest heavily in research and development, and new technologies that will assist in increasing yields and quality of production. South Africa, for its part, has the most developed and profitable agricultural sector on the continent. Commercial farms are mainly large-scale, capital intensive and export oriented, accounting for approximately 90 percent of the total agricultural production and covering approximately 86 percent of the country&#8217;s cropland. However, the South Africa’s agricultural sector is also taking strain from insufficient investment into agricultural infrastructure, research and development, as well as education and training programmes particularly for farmers that are starting out.
What is clear is that while Africa has leapfrogged within industries such as financial payments and telecommunications, the continent is yet to flex its muscle in providing grains and proteins that will feed not only its citizens, but also those in other parts of the world. If agriculture is to improve its contribution to economic development and the achievement of sustainable and secure food supply systems on the continent, key stakeholders have to be much more coordinated in their partnerships, not only within countries but also within the various regions of the continent. Ultimately, new approaches and partnerships among the many, but disconnected stakeholders, must be encouraged and strengthened if we are to curb hunger and malnourishment in Africa.
Lemmer is a Senior Agricultural Economist at Absa Bank. These comments were delivered at an Agriculture &amp; Food Security panel discussion recently hosted by Absa, the Oliver &amp; Adelaide Tambo Foundation as well as the University of Fort Hare.

New approaches, sustainable partnerships needed to enhance food security in Africa

Absa today issued its application to the High Court for the review and setting aside of the findings and remedial action of the Public Protector’s report on the financial assistance provided by the South African Reserve Bank to Bankorp, which was later bought by  Absa.
We look forward to this case being brought to court. The years of baseless accusations have been unfair and prejudicial to Absa. Because the business of the courts is conducted in the open, South Africans will get an opportunity to hear the facts and watch them being interrogated, in order for this matter to be put to rest.
Absa is challenging the Public Protector’s report on several grounds, namely:
<ol>
<li>The Report’s findings and remedial action are based on material errors of fact, including that Absa benefited from SARB financial support and that the SARB assistance did not benefit the general public.  There is no debt owed by Absa.</li>
<li>The Public Protector’s process was procedurally flawed and unfair to Absa.</li>
<li>The debt that is alleged to be due had prescribed and is therefore not recoverable.</li>
<li>The Public Protector has no jurisdiction to investigate the matter.</li>
</ol>
Absa paid fair value for Bankorp
In reaching her finding that Absa benefitted from the SARB financial support, the Public Protector appears to have impermissibly ignored facts and disregarded evidence provided to her.
The price paid to purchase Bankorp took into account the assistance from the SARB. The eventual price paid for Bankorp by Absa was R1.23 billion and the net asset value of Bankorp was R1.222 billion (calculated including the total net yield payable under the financial assistance programme to Bankorp).  Absa was therefore not enriched.
The Public Protector’s conclusion, that the SARB assistance to Bankorp was not in the public interest, is not proven. On the contrary both the Davis Panel and Heath investigation, the two statutory investigations on the matter, found that the assistance was warranted to protect the financial system of South Africa. The unlawfulness, the investigations found, was in the manner in which the SARB extended the support.
The facts found by the Davis Panel were corroborated in the evidence Absa and SARB placed before the Public Protector.  There was no evidence to contradict those facts. The Public Protector was selective in which aspects of the various reports put before her she would use. As a result, the report fails to explain why the Davis Panel (as well as Absa, the SARB and the Treasury) was wrong in its analysis of the agreement of sale between Absa and Bankorp.
In stark contrast, the Ciex investigation offered no reasoning whatsoever for its conclusion that Absa was liable for R3.2 billion.  It was merely advice from Ciex that the government should coerce Absa into paying.
The finding that the assistance by the SARB did not benefit the South African public is equally irrational. The Public Protector did not contest, but rather accepted that Bankorp used the “lifeboat” to set-off the bad debts of its customers and that this served to avert a systemic crisis of the banking sector.  It is therefore illogical to then conclude that the South African public received no benefit at all.
Procedural unfairness
The Public Protector violated Absa’s right to procedural fairness in the manner in which she imposed the remedial action. Firstly, she refused to provide Absa with documents upon which she relied to make her findings both in the Provisional and Final Report, thus denying Absa the opportunity to properly appreciate and respond to the case it had to meet. This violates Absa’s basic right to procedural fairness.
Secondly, she relied heavily on the Ciex document which in turn made adverse findings against Absa. During its “investigation”, Ciex never afforded Absa an opportunity to make representations and to provide any relevant evidence, completely disregarding ABSA’s basic right to a fair hearing.
Debt Prescribed
Absa maintains that it has met all obligations relating to the SARB assistance in October 1995.
However, it is worth noting that any claim, valid or not, would be subject to the law of prescription.  The alleged debt would have prescribed 3 years after it was due.  More than 21 years have passed since it was allegedly due.
The Public Protector’s views on prescription appear to rest on a flawed understanding of the role played by the law of prescription.  There is no dispute that the debt has prescribed.
The Public Protector clearly believes that the law should be different, but this view on the law of prescription cannot alter that law.
Jurisdiction
In the final report, the Public Protector correctly states that:
“It should be noted that the Public Protector has no jurisdiction to investigate matters that took place before the coming into effect of the Public Protector Act or the establishment of Public Protector Office in 1995. It would be in contravention of the Public Protector Act for this office to investigate matters that took place before the coming into effect of the Public Protector Act or the establishment of this office in October 1995.”
The Public Protector therefore, misapplied the principle of jurisdiction by embarking upon an investigation and imposing remedial action which fundamentally related to events which occurred before the establishment of her office and the coming into effect of the Public Protector Act. The Ciex document concerns transactions which occurred before the coming into effect of the Public Protector Act and the establishment of the office of the Public Protector. By relying on the Ciex report, the Public Protector is in truth, imposing recovery mechanisms in respect of debts allegedly incurred before the establishment of the Office and the coming into operation of the Public Protector Act.
Remedial Action is substantively unlawful
The remedial action prescribed by the Public Protector, which is designed to ensure recovery of R1.125 billion allegedly owed by Absa to SARB is substantially unlawful. Firstly, no such amount is owing at all. Secondly, to require the Special Investigating Unit (SIU) to approach the President to re-open an investigation which has already been concluded would be unlawful because the very matter has already been investigated and the issue closed. By   prescribing the remedial action in a manner that compels the SIU and the President to act as directed, the Public Protector has exceeded her own powers and usurped the powers of the SIU and the President.
Furthermore, since the debt has prescribed, the remedial action requires the SIU and the President to embark upon a process which is entirely irrational in the circumstances.
Conclusion
As part of our application, we are also requesting the &#8220;Rule 53&#8221; record &#8211; which is the record of all documents that served before the Public Protector in doing her report.  Once we have the record, we will supplement our application as may be necessary.   Given the level of public interest and discussion of this matter, we believe the public has a right to have access to this information so this matter can be dealt with and concluded in a transparent manner.

Absa launches High Court application to review and set aside Public Protector’s Report

The Public Protector released her report on the Bankorp “bail-out” on 21 June 2017. Many among us will have something to say about the remedial action she proposes on this specific issue, in essence that Absa repays the “government” an amount of R1.125 billion.
However, we confine ourselves here to her rather startling recommendation that the mandate of the SARB [South African Reserve Bank] should be changed &#8211; a matter that she was not asked to consider. One of her remedial actions is an instruction to the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Justice and Correctional Services to “initiate a process that will result in the amendment of Section 224 of the Constitution”. She then even more remarkably goes onto suggest what the new mandate should be:
224 (1) The primary object of the South African Reserve Bank is to promote balanced and sustainable economic growth in the Republic, while ensuring that the socio-economic well-being of the citizens are (sic) protected.
While this is an unexpected (and unwarranted) recommendation, it does raise the very interesting question about what mandate is appropriate for the central bank of an emerging economy such as South Africa. Those of us with research expertise and direct experience of monetary policy and central banking matters will acknowledge the complexities of these debates at both a theoretical and practical and policy level. Some academics economists will be pleased with the exclusive price stability mandate of the SARB as per section 224 (1) of the 1996 constitution. Others will argue for a broader mandate including growth and employment, alongside price stability. Some combination of price stability, growth, employment are in the mandates of the US Fed, the Reserve Bank of Australia, and Canada, and even the EU.
[bc_video video_id=&#8221;5493051555001&#8243; account_id=&#8221;1571595826001&#8243; player_id=&#8221;default&#8221;]
The academic debate over central banks’ mandate is an international one and has been going on in one way or another for most of the 20thC. It became especially tense and complicated in the context of the growing dominance of new neo-classical economic thinking associated with Robert Lucas and his research collaborators since the early 1980s. Although there has been some convergence around a narrow price stability mandate in practice since then, there are also many examples of central banks which have a statutory or legal mandate that includes either growth or employment or some combination of these three elements. In NO case that we are aware of is a central bank’s mandate spared the responsibility of price stability (however phrased), whatever other objectives are included. To exclude price stability from a central bank’s objective in favour of some poorly conceived reference to ‘socio-economic well-being” is incomprehensible and plainly irresponsible.
We are not against, and many of us would positively welcome and support, the opening up of a well-informed, properly constituted and transparent debate about the mandate of the SARB at some appropriate time, and through the proper institutions, e.g. through a parliamentary enquiry at which expert testimony and international experience are solicited. Indeed, it is important not to conflate a defence of the proper process by which such debates should be constituted, with a defence of the current mandate of the SARB. It is quite possible to defend the independence of the SARB while questioning how appropriate its current mandate is to the challenges facing the country.
The crisis of low growth and high unemployment coupled with growing inequality suggests that this and other aspects of our economic policy stance should be debated in a responsible manner, designed to bring about a much needed improvement in the quality of life and work among our people, a majority of whom have not yet witnessed the dividends of democracy. There is no reason why the inclusion of growth and employment, together with price stability, cannot be an intrinsic part of such a public engagement. But uninformed and rash statements, especially ones that carry the power and binding nature of the PP, do not assist us at all. Threats to the operational independence and constitutional mandate of the SARB that come about in this manner represent a grave threat to an economy already crippled by a number of serious problems.
The likelihood that the PP’s analysis and remedial actions are designed, not as arguably well-intentioned even if plainly wrong interventions, but rather as part of the assault against the remaining institutions in the state sphere that stand for good governance is very, very high. That is why those who are opposed to such state looting, as we all are, must stand in defence of the SARB, even if we may differ on some aspects of the theoretical and policy debate about the role and mandate of central banks such as SARB in today’s world.
That was also our collective and publicly articulated view on two previous occasions over the past 18 months when two respected Ministers of Finance were unceremoniously dumped by the President.
*Signatories (alphabetical)
Matt Andrews 
Christo Auret 
Haroon Bhorat 
Derick Blaauw 
Anthony Black 
Ilsé Botha 
Danny Bradlow 
Adele Breytenbach 
Philippe Burger 
Rulof Burger 
Le Roux Burrows 
Marianne Camerer 
Daniela Casale 
Ivor Chipkin 
Nico Cloete 
Johan Coetzee 
Kenneth Creamer 
Stan Du Plessis 
David Everatt 
Olivia Ezeobi 
Frederick Fourie 
Pieter Fourie 
Steven Friedman 
Alison Gillwald 
Jannie Rossouw 
Amanda Gouws 
Duncan Hodge 
James Hodge 
Hylton Hollander 
Clare Hofmeyr 
Petronella Horn 
Gilad Isaacs 
Faizel Ismail 
Rachel Jafta 
David Kaplan 
Richard Ketley 
Murray Leibbrandt 
Anthony Leysens 
Elsabe Loots 
Neva Makgetla 
Stephen Malherbe 
Julian May 
Lumkile Mondi 
Jabulile Monnakgotla 
Mike Morris 
Eldridge Moses 
Bokang Mpeta 
Liezl Nieuwoudt 
Morné Oosthuizen 
Vishnu Padayachee 
Brigitte Pegado 
Marinda Pretorius 
Vimal Ranchhod 
Monique Reid 
Gareth Roberts 
Simon Roberts 
Ayesha Sayed 
Maxi Schoeman 
Collette Schulz-Herzenberg 
Krige Siebrits 
Simone Smit 
Mark Swilling 
Christopher Tapscott 
Nicola Theron 
Amy Thornton 
Imraan Valodia 
Theo van der Merwe 
Piet-Hein van Eeghen 
Lize Van Robbroeck 
Corne Van Walbeek 
Cobus Vermeulen 
Dieter von Fintel 
Marissa von Fintel 
Merle Werbeloff 
Martin Wittenberg 
Ingrid Woolard 
Uma Kollamparambil 
Andries du Toit

Open letter from South African academics and economists: Hands off the Reserve Bank

<div style="display: block; position: relative; max-width: 640px;">
<div style="padding-top: 56.25%;"><iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100%; position: absolute; top: 0px; bottom: 0px; right: 0px; left: 0px;" src="//players.brightcove.net/1571595826001/default_default/index.html?videoId=5487292308001" allowfullscreen="" border=0 frameborder=0></iframe></div>
</div>
Franchising month kicked off this Wednesday, joining CNBC Africa for more is Dumisani Bhengu, Head of Franchising at Absa on access to funding in the Franchising industry.

Access to funding in the franchising industry

After consultation with its legal team, Absa has decided to approach the High Court in order to have the report of the Public Protector that was released on Monday 19 June 2017 reviewed and set aside. This is due to the numerous misrepresentations and factual inaccuracies which are used as the basis for its findings, and what we submit are the report&#8217;s clearly irrational and unreasonable legal conclusions.
Absa respects constitutional institutions and has to date done everything possible to cooperate with the Office of the Public Protector during the course of this investigation. However the report leaves Absa with no choice but to seek recourse in the courts as provided for by the Constitution when an affected party disagrees with the findings of the Public Protector.
The office of the Public Protector appears to have either effectively ignored or misunderstood Absa’s detailed submissions, which were made to it on two occasions. A copy of our February 2017 submission has been released to the public.
We also note that the Public Protector’s remedial actions include a directive to Parliament to amend the Constitution in order to change the mandate of the South African Reserve Bank. We are advised that the Public Protector Act does not empower the Public Protector to direct that constitutional amendments be made. Her recommended amendments pose a very serious risk to the financial system and they cannot be allowed to stand.
It is noteworthy that the report’s findings and remedial actions in relation to Absa are mainly premised on the conclusions of the Davis Panel of Experts, which delivered a comprehensive report on the same matter in February 2002. The Public Protector also uses the statement of the Heath Special Investigating Unit as a further basis for her conclusions on Absa.
In the case of the Davis Panel, the Public Protector’s final report misrepresents or misconstrues its findings. While it concluded that the manner in which the assistance was provided to Bankorp was unlawful (ultra vires), the Davis Panel unequivocally found that Absa is not liable to pay because it paid fair value for Bankorp.
The Davis Panel Report reads as follows:
“The Reserve Bank’s assistance conferred benefits on Sanlam’s policy holders, its pension fund beneficiaries and on the minority shareholders of Bankorp. That is contrary to public perception published in the media, and contrary to the conclusions of the Heath Special Investigative Unit. Those perceptions and conclusions have incorrectly asserted that major benefits were received by the shareholders of Absa.”
It goes on to say:
“The Panel is of the view that Absa paid for the continued assistance of Bankorp by the Reserve Bank and could not be regarded as beneficiaries of Reserve Bank assistance package. Absa paid fair value for Bankorp. Due to the complex nature of the impact that the various packages might have had on the value of capital invested in Bankorp, it is difficult for the Panel to assess with accuracy, the extent of the benefits derived by Bankorp shareholders. 
Evidence supports the conclusion that Sanlam, the major Bankorp shareholder was aware that it would have received no value, or less value, for its shareholding absent Reserve Bank assistance.”
While the Public Protector’s final report accepts large parts of the Davis Panel Report as a basis for its findings and remedial actions, the report fails to explain why the rest of the Davis Panel’s findings on Absa are not accepted. In this respect, the Public Protector’s report appears irrational. The Public Protector’s final report not only omits the rest of the Davis Panel’s finding, it also does not explain how it comes to the diametrically opposite conclusion that Absa’s shareholders unduly benefited, rather than Sanlam’s policy holders and pension fund beneficiaries – which is what the Davis Panel found.
It is also noteworthy that in the provisional report that was leaked in January 2017, the office of the Public Protector had relied on the alleged testimony of former SA Reserve Bank Governor Dr Chris Stals. In that report, it was claimed that Dr Stals had testified that the Bankorp/Absa loan was at an interest rate of 16% instead of 1%, and that he had produced a contract to support this. Dr Stals strongly refuted the claim in the media shortly thereafter.
The alleged testimony of Dr Stals and the document he was said to have produced are conspicuously absent from the final report. In the final report this basis is abandoned and instead it selectively relies on a report that in any case found that Absa is not liable.
Ahead of our submissions to the Public Protector, we requested access to documents in her possession that had a material impact on our position. That request was unjustifiably refused. The Public Protector’s report’s assertion that its findings are not in dispute, when Absa was never given insight into, let alone the opportunity to dispute what is supposedly contained in those documents, is therefore contested.
In any event the information upon which the report bases its findings is not new. It was at the disposal of the Public Protector’s office before the findings in the provisional report were made. It appears that this information was not regarded as relevant at the time.
The misconceptions and inaccuracies in the report are profound and damaging to Absa’s reputation. We have instructed our lawyers to immediately prepare an application to the High Court to have the report&#8217;s findings and its remedial actions (including the remedial action concerning the intervention of the Special Investigative Unit and the amendment of the Constitution) reviewed and set aside.
We firmly maintain our position &#8211; supported by uncontroverted evidence – that Absa met all its obligations to the SA Reserve Bank in full by October 1995.

Absa to seek High Court review of Public Protector’s report

PRETORIA (Reuters) &#8211; Barclays Africa Group unduly benefited from apartheid-era bailouts and must repay 1.1 billion rand ($86 million), South Africa&#8217;s anti-graft watchdog said on Monday.
Public Protector Busisiwe Mkhwebane in January reopened a probe of Barclays South Africa following a wider report published last November by her predecessor.
She said on Monday that the probe had found that the apartheid government breached the constitution by supplying Bankorp, which was acquired by Barclays Africa unit Absa in 1992, with a series of bailouts from 1986 to 1995.
Barclays Africa would have to pay 1.1 billion rand ($86 million), Mkhwebane said, adding that her office had referred the matter to the Special Investigating Unit to help recover the money.
&nbsp;
<h2>Barclays Africa response to Public Protector’s Press Conference</h2>
Absa has noted the Public Protector’s statement today regarding her investigation into the SA Reserve Bank’s assistance to Bankorp between 1985 and 1995. Absa acquired Bankorp in April 1992. We have not yet received a copy of the report and we are urgently requesting the Public Protector’s Office to send it to us. Once we have read it we will consider our legal options including seeking a High Court review.
Absa met all its obligations in respect of the loan provided by the SA Reserve Bank by October 1995. It is our firm position that there is no obligation to pay anything to the SA government.
(Reporting by Dinky Mkhize; writing by Ed Stoddard and Tiisetso Motsoeneng; editing by James Macharia and Jason Neely)

Barclays Africa says “no obligation” to pay SA govt

Barclays (<a href="http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=BARC.L">BARC.L</a>) cut its stake in Barclays Africa Group (<a href="http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=BGAJ.J">BGAJ.J</a>) to 15 percent sooner than expected on Thursday, ending more than 90 years as a major presence in the continent.
The British bank, which under Chief Executive Jes Staley is firmly focused on Britain and the United States, said it was selling 2.2 billion pounds ($2.83 billion) worth of shares in Barclays Africa Group due to strong investor demand.
Barclays had said on Wednesday it would sell shares worth 1.5 billion pounds in its second such sale since announcing plans to offload most of its African business.
The bigger share sale initially lifted shares in Barclays, which is partly relying on the funds raised to meet capital requirements identified as a concern by the Bank of England in November. By 0835 GMT, the shares were down 0.1 percent.
The sale is expected to mean an increase of approximately 27 basis points to Barclays&#8217; core capital ratio, a key measure of financial strength, which was 12.5 percent at 31 March 2017 .
&#8220;We still see this deal as utterly transformational for Barclays’ capital position, which in turn offers specific opportunities for earnings enhancement,&#8221; analyst Ian Gordon at Investec wrote in a note following the announcement.
Barclays, whose shares were trading up 0.5 percent at 0740 GMT, said on Wednesday that South African pension fund Public Investment Corporation would buy 7 percent of the shares, raising its holding to 14 pct according to Thomson Reuters data.
The Barclays Africa Group shares, which were up nearly 3 percent at 143 rand at 0835 GMT, will be priced at 132 rand a share, the bank said.
That represents a 5 pct discount to Wednesday&#8217;s closing price of 139 rand and will raise an aggregate 2.2 billion pounds, the bank said, adding it will then place an additional 12.7 million shares in a black economic empowerment scheme.
Barclays said in March 2016 it would sell most of its 62.3 pct stake in Barclays Africa Group, giving itself two to three years to complete the sale. Its first sell down of 12.2 percent was completed in May 2016, but the bank had since been hindered by regulatory delays and political upheaval in South Africa.
Since taking over 18 months ago, Staley has scaled back the bank&#8217;s geographic footprint and emphasized investment banking, although his attempts to revitalize this business have been clouded by investigations in the U.S. and Britain.
Staley has also faced criticism from investors following his attempts to unmask a whistleblower, which Barclays insiders fear could unseat him if the findings of inquiries are damning.
Barclays also faces regulatory obstacles, with an ongoing probe by Britain&#8217;s Serious Fraud Office (SFO) into its 2008 cash call at the height of the financial crisis and allegations by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) over mortgage mis-selling.
Analysts at KBW said the completion of the sale earlier than expected was positive for the bank&#8217;s capital ratio.
&#8220;However this still remains far from market leading (still below Credit Suisse or Deutsche Bank), whilst a number of headwinds remain outstanding,&#8221; they added in a note.
(Editing by Rachel Armstrong and Alexander Smith)

Barclays makes early African exit with $2.8 billion share sale

In a statement, Barclays Africa Group Ltd/ABSA expressed its concern about the crisis at universities across the country during the past few months. With students protesting for free education, the 2016 academic year is in danger of being lost at some universities.
&#8220;We empathize with the plight of students whose parents are not able to fund their university education,&#8221; the statement reads. &#8220;While the government annually allocates billions of rand to provide access to higher education, it is clear that more needs to be done.﻿&#8221;
The Group recognises the importance of education and skills training to socioeconomic development throughout Africa. One of the three piloars of the Group&#8217;s Shared Growth strategy is education and skills development. As part of this strategy, which was launched earlier this year, R1.4 billion has been committed to education and skills training across Africa over the next three years.﻿
As part of this commitment, R49 million has been invested for 2016, mostly in historically black universities in South Africa. R23 million is for tuition fees for what is termed the “missing middle” reaching approximately 550 students, including 114 scholarships awarded to children of Barclays Africa staff. These are students who either have a shortfall on their National Student Financial Aid Scheme (NSFAS) funding or whose parents can only afford a portion of their student fees. R26 million has been invested in university research and capacity building.﻿
In light of the current university protests, the Group has decided to contribute an addtional R57 million towards the settlement of the 2016 student debt for approximately 1450 students in seven universities across South Africa. This is at an average of R40 000 per student. This brings the total contribution to student tuition for this year to R80 million and R106 million in total assistance to universities.﻿
From next year the Group&#8217;s contribution will be increased to an average R70 000 per student, providing assistance to 3000 students across its markets in Africa, amounting to a R210 million investment.﻿
&#8220;We know that our contribution is not enough to resolve the problem for every student but as a large corporate citizen we recognize the special responsibility we have to increase our support,&#8221; the Group statement says.
&#8220;We call upon students and universities to do everything they can to save the current academic year. Should this year be lost, it will be very difficult to accommodate a new intake next, further compounding the problem of access to higher education.
&#8220;Education is the foundation of social and economic development. The inequalities of our society place a responsibility upon all of us to find an equitable funding formula where priority is given to deserving students who do not have the means to pay some or all of their tuition fees.
&#8220;We are also mindful that the challenges in education are broad and not limited to financial barriers to entry into higher education. The basic education system is critical to the success of the post-school education. We recommit ourselves to continuing to work together with governments and other stakeholders to secure quality education to Africa’s young people to support economic development,&#8221; the statement concludes.

Absa

The re-branding of Absa

Why you should bring your money back home to SA

Mining Charter has not derailed mining investment – Absa

The hottest trends in mining now, how SA can be part of investment opportunities

How to take advantage of a stronger rand

New approaches, sustainable partnerships needed to enhance food security in Africa

Absa launches High Court application to review and set aside Public Protector’s Report

Open letter from South African academics and economists: Hands off the Reserve Bank

Access to funding in the franchising industry

Absa to seek High Court review of Public Protector’s report

Barclays Africa says “no obligation” to pay SA govt

Barclays makes early African exit with $2.8 billion share sale

Banking group increases financial support to S.A universities

News Tips

Advertise With Us

Absa

The re-branding of Absa

Why you should bring your money back home to SA

Mining Charter has not derailed mining investment – Absa

The hottest trends in mining now, how SA can be part of investment opportunities

How to take advantage of a stronger rand

New approaches, sustainable partnerships needed to enhance food security in Africa

Absa launches High Court application to review and set aside Public Protector’s Report

Open letter from South African academics and economists: Hands off the Reserve Bank

Access to funding in the franchising industry

Absa to seek High Court review of Public Protector’s report

Barclays Africa says “no obligation” to pay SA govt

Barclays makes early African exit with $2.8 billion share sale

Banking group increases financial support to S.A universities

News Tips

Advertise With Us

Newsletters