Sasol Limited (SOL) Earnings Call Transcript

Ladies and gentlemen, I am pleased to welcome you to this -- the 41st Annual General Meeting of the Shareholders of Sasol. My name is Sipho Nkosi, Chairman of the Board of Sasol. Please allow me a moment to introduce my colleagues to the benefit of those shareholders who joined us now. We have Mr. Fleetwood Grobler, our Chief Executive. We have Mr. Paul Victor, our Chief Financial Officer. We have Mr. Vuyo Kahla, an executive director. We have Mr. Colin Beggs, Chairman of the Audit Committee. We have Ms. Mpho Nkeli, Chairman of the Remuneration Committee. We have Ms. Muriel Dube, Chairman of the Safety, Social and Ethics Committee. We have Ms. Lucy Mokoka, Group's Company Secretary. And our nonexecutive directors are as follows: Mr. Manuel Cuambe; Ms. Martina Flöel, Ms. Kathy Harper, Ms. Trix Kennealy, Ms. Nomgando Matyumza, Mr. Moses Mkhize, Mr. Peter Robertson, Mr. Stephen Westwell. And Mr. Johan Potgieter, representing our auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers Inc. Mr. Andrej Vladar from Lumi will explain to you how you can post your questions and vote on the resolutions during the meeting. Over to you, Mr. Vladar.

Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon to you, and good afternoon to the Board and as well as all the shareholders and guests that are present in the meeting. Chair, as you said, I will be explaining how the Lumi AGM platform works. And for those shareholders and guests that are present in the meeting, once you have logged into the meeting, you will see on your screen that you have an information panel that will show up. You'll also have various icons that you can see, and I will take you through those various icons in this demonstration. So firstly, the eye that you see is the information icon, where you can see information about the meeting. The second one is the messaging icon. And if you click on that messaging icon, as you can see, we've gotten a few questions already. But what you can do is at the bottom in the bar that says Ask a Question. There's click in there and type out your question as you wish. And once you've completed typing it out, hit the send key to the right of the message bar. Once you do, you will get a received message as well as your message appearing on screen for all to see. The next icon that you will see is the documents icon, and that is to go to the documents vault where you can access the Notice of the AGM directly in the platform for easy reference. So if you just click on it, it opens as a PDF and you can then use that documents vault. The last one is when the voting will open, you'll get a fourth icon that looks like a bar graph. As well as your screen automatically is changing to display all the resolutions. What you will do is while the voting is open, you will select the option that you wish to make, whether that be for, against or abstain. There is no submit button. So it is an open ballot. So you are free to change your mind during the poll while it is open. Our system will always notify you what your last choice is that you've made. If you wish, you can completely cancel your vote on a specific resolution and reenter your vote as well. Later on in the proceedings, the Chair will close the voting and the last vote that you submit will be the vote that is taken. I will now hand back to you, Chair.

Thank you so much, Mr. Vladar. Now thank you, ladies and gentlemen. At this point, I would like to share my reflections on the past year. Following my opening remarks, I will ask the CEO, Mr. Fleetwood Grobler, to share an overview of Sasol's business results, our asset divestment program, sustainability road map and future of Sasol. Then our CFO, Mr. Paul Victor, will then share an overview of Sasol's financial performance, including our pathway to deleveraging the company's balance sheet. We will take questions after Paul's presentation and then go into the formal business of the meeting, including voting on resolutions and a general question-and-answer session before adjourning. Ladies and gentlemen, we are anticipating many questions. So I request that as a courtesy to all shareholders, you ensure your questions are concise and are posted preferably in English. We'll do our best to ensure that everyone's questions are answered. We'll be taking questions in batches of 3 to 4 to expedite the process and the Chairs of the Remuneration; Nominations and Governance; Safety, Social and Ethics; and the Audit Committees of the Board and members of the Group Executive Committee are available to answer your questions. Given the virtual format of this meeting, Elton Fortuin from Sasol's Group Communications team will read out your questions. So I now hand over to Mr. Fleetwood Grobler for the safety moment.

Thank you, Chairman. Good afternoon, and a very warm welcome to all our stakeholders participating today. There can be no doubt that 2020 has been a year of unprecedented disruption. The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has caused a seismic shift in the world as we knew it, leaving no aspect of our lives untouched. To date, over 51 million infections have been confirmed worldwide since the start of the pandemic, resulting in more than 1.2 million people sadly losing their lives. At Sasol, zero harm is our apex ambition and is a goal we pursue with relentless determination. The health, safety and well-being of our people is my top priority as well as that of my executive team. With the onset of the pandemic, we established a group-wide COVID-19 response program that emphasized protecting our people, especially our vulnerable and high-risk employees, supporting fence-line communities, managing business continuity, maintaining compliance to regulations, engaging with organized labor regularly and collaborating with stakeholders. Our response was swift, and it has been effective in curbing the spread of COVID-19 within Sasol. Currently, there are just over 2,000 confirmed cases through predominantly community transmission, and there is a 97% recover rate. However, as the pandemic continued to spread, 14 of our colleagues tragically lost their lives as a result of COVID-19. It is with heavy hearts that we send our deepest sympathies and condolences to the families and friends of our fallen compatriots. The loss of life is extremely painful and notwithstanding the size of our company, it affects us all when our colleagues lose their lives. When it comes to the loss of life related to our operations, it is devastating. In this past financial year, we experienced 6 tragic work-related fatalities. Our condolences go out to the families, friends and colleagues of Mr. Johannes Mlangen, Mr. Tisetso Matlele, Mr. Doctor Ngwenya, Mr. Edward Sikhonde, Mr. Obert Khoza and Mr. Welile Kanku. One fatality is simply too many and is unacceptable. My top priority and that of my executive team is driving our program to prevent high-severity injuries and fatalities. We are firmly committed to making zero harm a reality in all our operations around the world. As CEO, I'm personally involved in the investigations into every fatality. We have improved our time to conclude investigations to quickly establish the root causes. This allows us to address underlying risks and implement measures to prevent a recurrence and share the learnings across all our operations globally. Our safety processes, systems and tools are world-class, and therefore, our focus continues to embed the use of these as second nature in the hearts and minds of our people because we care for the safety and well-being of our own employees and service provider employees that work in our operations. With the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we were able to act swiftly to ensure and protect the well-being of our people and our stakeholders. Through our COVID-19 response team, we were able to provide a coordinated response together with key stakeholders to protect the well-being of our people and communities. We have enabled all office personnel globally to work from home and introduce guidelines for different work arrangements supported by online and field assistance. We reset shifts and work schedules to support social distancing and decrowding at all our operations. Various safety interventions were implemented, such as increased disinfection, screening and contact tracing. In Secunda, we converted accommodation units into quarantine and self-isolation facilities for recovering employees and contractors. We recognized our duty to step-up and show support for those in need across our regions and fence-line communities, particularly those with significant socioeconomic disparities and that are vulnerable. Through these interventions, we have also donated thousands of liters of sanitizer and thousands of sets of personal protective equipment to governments and health workers, leading the frontline fight against the pandemic around the world. In South Africa, to support government's efforts in repatriating South Africans at the height of the national lockdowns around the world, we donated 1 million liters of jet fuel. We know this assisted many South African stranded abroad to be reunited with their loved ones. I'm also very proud of our employees who contributed in their personal capacities to assist communities through volunteer efforts and donating to organizations assisting in curtailing the pandemic. There are indications that the world is largely on a path towards recovery and a new normal. We have all endured the volatility, and we are still grappling with the uncertainty that lies ahead. There have been recent encouraging signs of progress in the research and development of vaccines, but it will take time before the benefits of an immunized population are realized. Through our COVID-19 response structure, we continue to stay abreast of the latest COVID-19 developments to ensure we adjust our response program and associated measures accordingly. Our priority is always ensuring that we protect the health, safety and well-being of our people in a safe working environment. Thank you.

Thank you, Fleetwood. As part of the safety moment for this AGM, Fleetwood shared the tragic workplace fatalities we experienced in the past financial year, including our employees who sadly passed away due to the coronavirus. So on behalf of the Board and all Sasol people, I convey our sincerest condolences to the families, friends and colleagues of those who died. Fleetwood also outlined the approach and interventions underway to eliminate work-related fatalities. As the Board, we support management and are working closely with Fleetwood and his team to realize this aspiration. Let me now turn to the critical issue of sustainability and climate change. As shareholders will know, sustainability is of critical importance to Sasol. We support the Paris Agreement, and we are committed to addressing climate change across our global operations. In that context, it may come as no surprise to some of our shareholders that we did not agree -- it may come as a surprise that we did not agree to the request by Just Share and the RAITH Foundation to table 3 shareholders resolution at the AGM relating to the alignment of Sasol's global strategy and the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets with the Paris Agreement and goals. There are 2 main reasons for this. Firstly, from a practical perspective, the resolutions did not reach us in time. Our Notice of AGM was already in the printing and distribution process by the time we received the proposed resolutions. Secondly, however, it is also important to be clear about what issues shareholders have the authority to decide on and what issues are under the control of management and the Board. In law, the issues raised by Just Share the RAITH Foundation fall within the authority of the management and the Board. However, we recognize the importance of the climate change issues, and we want to play a prominent role in supporting South Africa's climate change transition. Therefore, at our 2021 AGM, shareholders will be able to exercise an advisory vote on our climate change response and its implementation, through which they can register their views about Sasol's approach to climate change. This will be very similar to the nonbinding advisory on a company's remuneration policy and its implementation votes required by King IV Code 4 and the JSE Listings Requirements. Let me say it again though, because I want to make sure there is no misunderstanding, although we did not agree to table these resolutions, Sasol is aligned to the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement does not impose direct obligations on individual countries or individual companies. Instead, it seeks to provide a global framework underpinned by climate science to which countries and companies can align. The agreement provides for developing countries such as South Africa to pursue a different trajectory, given the complexity of the country's socioeconomic context and its implications. Our climate change strategy reflects this reality. Since the publication of our first climate change report in 2019, we have undertaken extensive engagement across the spectrum of our numerous and diverse stakeholders and received constructive feedback. Our 2020 climate change report represents a considerable step forward for Sasol in expanding our disclosure on climate change and expressly addresses our accountabilities. I should, therefore, note that Sasol's 2020 climate change report has just been ranked the best in South Africa by integrated reporting and assurance services out of 14 similar accounts by companies that have high direct environmental and/or social impacts. Our report was commended for, amongst other things, promoting effective management and achievement of climate-related targets and objectives through appropriate performance incentives. We intend continuing our engagement with stakeholders over the coming year to inform our 2050 ambition and road map process. We believe it is an effective mechanism to help us understand shareholder concerns and expectations, so that we can make informed decisions regarding our climate change governance, reporting and disclosures. Fleetwood will provide more information on Sasol's sustainability road map as part of his presentation today. In 2020, the year of Sasol's 70th anniversary, we find ourselves in a rapidly changing world, primarily driven by the COVID-19 pandemic. As governments grapple with containing this highly infectious and often deadly virus, we are witnessing global economic turmoil on a large scale, unlike anything experienced in modern history. COVID-19 has impacted every company and economy in some form, potentially also triggering lasting geopolitical change. The effects on Sasol were particularly profound. As the COVID-19 storm approached, we are already had a disadvantage owing to a highly geared balance sheet. COVID-19 then placed the group's balance sheet under enormous strain with oil prices at very low levels and demand for some products evaporating. This thrust a sudden and unprecedented set of challenges on us. In the face of these, the Board supported the management team in rapidly activating a comprehensive response plan. This plan was aimed at stabilizing the business in the short term, while preparing for a strategic reset, what we call, Future Sasol, to ensure the company is sustainable in an enduring low oil price, environmental and global economy under pressure to decarbonize. To this end, the immediate priority was a cash conservation drive to shore up Sasol's balance sheet, alongside accelerating and broadening the asset disposal program and preparing for a rights issue to shareholders. Future Sasol aims to improve our cash flow generation, while enabling our pursuit of lower carbon alternatives that can benefit all stakeholders. We are repositioning the business to be resilient and sustainably profitable, even if we are in a USD 45 per barrel oil price world. This change is underpinned by a revised strategy and new operating model. Fleetwood will provide more detail on this exciting program. The Board is keenly aware that the past year has also been a challenging one for our shareholders. Since the AGM a year ago, the share price has fallen by around 60%, and we suspended the dividend as part of the ongoing cash preservation measures. We acknowledge that our share price has been highly volatile and underperformed our peers, which is likely to have been driven by concerns about a variety of factors, including the concerns around the COVID-19 second wave and the impact on pricing and product demand; the impact of hurricanes and storm in Louisiana; and the potential rights issue to be launched in February 2021. The Board has been actively engaged in steering the company through these uncertain times. The initiatives referred to [indiscernible] to ensure the sustained profitability of the company to deliver improved shareholder returns in the future. Although we still have a long road to travel, I think we can take encouragement from the decisive manner in which the company is responding to the current volatile macro environment and the reset of the strategy, which will allow the company to operate sustainably in a low oil price environment. From a leadership and governance standpoint, the Board review into the Lake Charles Chemicals Project underscored the need to further strengthen Sasol's internal governance systems, prompting a number of initiatives to improve governance, processes and controls. The Board worked to ensure that Sasol has a culture of accountability. We acknowledge that for trust in the group to be restored, a reset was required, including new leadership. As a result, you will recall, the former Joint-CEOs, Mr. Nqwababa and Mr. Cornell, agreed to an amicable mutual separation, and Fleetwood was appointed CEO effective the 1st of November, 2019. The Board did not arrive likely at the separation arrangements with the former CEOs. My colleagues in the Board and I understand that's an issue, which is the subject of scrutiny. And therefore, it's important to explain the rationale. The first point to make is that the Board undertook an extensive review of what happened in respect of Lake Charles Chemicals Project with the assistance of independent attorneys and other consultants. I will not go back through all the conclusions of that review, but one clear outcome was that no misconduct by the Joint-CEOs was identified. Despite this, it was the view of the Board that the best interest of the company was served by an expedited process of separation. This was to allow new leadership through the process of rebuilding stakeholder confidence as soon as possible. The Board, however, still needed to respect the rights and contractual obligations of the Joint-CEOs, and the separation arrangements were accordingly put in place. These arrangements were, in our view, appropriate and in the best interest of the company. Obviously, we did not have the benefit of hindsight at that time. But with that benefit, it was particularly important that those changes were made. This transition meant that actions were, therefore, already underway to change the business by the time the oil price collapsed and then the COVID-19 hit, the most profound set of challenges faced by Sasol generations -- for generations. In addition to these changes and the retirement of our former Chairman, Dr. Mandla Gantsho, other governance developments in the year included the retirement of our lead independent director, Mr. JJ Njeke, and the appointment of his successor, Mr. Stephen Westwell. In addition, Vuyo Kahla was appointed an executive director. And on the 1st of April, 2020, Katherine Harper was appointed as a nonexecutive director. So allow me to extend a warm welcome to Katherine as our newest Board member. Katherine, a U.S. citizen, is an Independent nonexecutive director and a member of the Audit Committee. She is the CFO of BDP International, a leading privately held global logistics and transportation solutions company. We are delighted to have a director of Kathy's caliber on our Board and are already benefiting from her wide-ranging skills, expertise and experience in mining, chemicals, low-carbon energy and finance. So welcome, Kathy. Diversity remains important to Sasol, and I'm pleased that these appointments further help us to achieve that goal, as 6 of our 15 Board members are now women. Lastly, on matters concerning the Board, our succession plan aim to achieve an optimal balance between independence and continuity on both the Board and our Board committees. It is also important that we have the right mix of skills. The Board will, therefore, continue to change to help address the new challenges facing Sasol and be aligned with the size and shape of the business. Continuity is -- in some areas is also critical, and it is for this reason that the Board extended the tenure of the Chairman of the Audit Committee, Colin Beggs, following the review and confirmation of his independence. Colin is, however, nearing retirement, and this will be his last AGM as a director. To this end, we have initiated a search process to find a successor and will keep shareholders informed of developments on this and any other changes to the Board as we progress. While we will, at the appropriate time, bid farewell to Colin and thank him for his extraordinary and most meticulous contribution to Sasol for many years, it would be remiss of me not to express my appreciation to Colin for the energy, conscientiousness and great skill, care and diligence with which you carry out your responsibility. [ Foreign Language] This morning, we announced that Lucy Mokoka, who has been our group's company secretary for about a year, will resign from the company with effect from 31 December, 2020. On behalf of the Board, I thank Lucy for her contribution in this very important role. Lucy, I wish you well in your future endeavors. So the Board has appointed Michelle du Toit as Group Company Secretary with effect from the 1st of January, 2021. Michelle is an admitted attorney and a highly experienced and accomplished corporate governance and corporate law expert, who has in-depth expertise in securities and exchange regulatory requirements applicable in South Africa and in the U.S. -- United States. I am pleased to welcome you, Michelle, to this new role, and I'm confident that as you have done in your distinguished career, spending 18 years at Sasol, you will continue to add great value to the company. Therefore, to conclude, my opening remarks, let me state that I'm honored to be Chairman of Sasol. This is my first year as Chair. I'm -- and I'm conscious of the great responsibility that comes with this position, particularly at a time of great upheaval. It has, by any standard, been a year of exceptional challenges, and I want to give thanks to our stakeholders for their forbearance. I'm particularly mindful, as I have mentioned, of the challenges shareholders have faced. I would also like to mention the enormous commitment and professionalism shown by Sasol colleagues during this period, which included the unprecedented step of salary sacrifice. I'm proud of their exemplary efforts. The Board is taking a similar action, also taking a 20% fee sacrifice. But as we look to the future, management, with the Board's oversight, is diligently executing our response plan to ensure Sasol's long-term sustainability. I have every confidence that we will be successful and that we have a bright future to look forward to. Thank you, ladies and gentlemen. I shall now ask the Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Fleetwood Grobler, to address the meeting. Thank you.

Thank you, Chairman, and good afternoon, again, to all our stakeholders. Those of you who participated in last year's meeting may recall my message that for Sasol to move forward, we need realism, focus and delivery. I said at the time that we need to be realistic that although we have addressed some key areas of uncertainty by completing the Board review, we still have challenges. Primarily, these were successfully completing the Lake Charles Chemicals Project, LCCP; protecting the balance sheet; and developing our greenhouse gas emission reduction road map. I stated that to do this requires clear focus on the issues we can control and influence. And more than focus, their outcome must be delivery, which is what you, our stakeholders, expect of us. Today, I can say, notwithstanding the calamity brought about by the pandemic and what has been an exceptionally tough year, we have, by and large, delivered what we promised. What I will share today is that our full year results are a story of 2 halves. Despite the challenges we faced in the first half of the financial year, Sasol delivered a sound operational performance. In our second half, the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic caused the seismic shift in our operating context, exacerbated by significant volatility and uncertainty. These external shocks had a dramatic impact on Sasol. To stabilize the business in these extraordinary circumstances, we acted swiftly and decisively. In tandem, we had to chart a path forward to ensure Sasol remains sustainably profitable in a low oil price environment. I am proud of the collected effort of team Sasol, who have pulled together to ensure we could weather this storm. And I would like to recognize the exceptional effort of all our people through this most challenging period. Turning now to our operational performance for the 2020 financial year and the first quarter of our '21 financial year. Our 2020 first half performance was satisfactory. However, in our second half, we faced unprecedented challenges. Despite this, mining improved production by 2%. The impact of COVID-19 on our operations was limited in the second half of the year due to COVID-19 mitigation measures, and we experienced productivity gains. Secunda Synfuels operations experienced an 8% decline in production, while Natref decreased by 34% due to the fall in fuels demand in South Africa. This was precipitated by the national lockdown that commenced in late March. As a result, we suspended operations at Natref for over 2 months, while Synfuels production was reduced to 75% throughput for just short of 2 months. However, our decisive action enabled us to take advantage of some opportunities. We were able to accelerate maintenance work at both Synfuels and Natref to allow continuous operations in financial year '21. Our unique process at Secunda enabled us to swing production, prioritizing chemicals in response to the lower fuels demand. Production volumes at our North American operations were nearly 1/3 higher as the cracker achieved nameplate capacity and is currently producing at maximum run rates. Our HDPE joint venture continues to produce above expectations. At our Eurasian operations, production was marginally down by 2%, but the decline was partially offset by the increase in Surfactants demand. Turning now to the update of financial year '21. Mining productivity was impacted by COVID-19 in the months of July and August. This, however, normalized from September and current productivity rates are in line with our FY '21 targets. Synfuels operations experienced stable production run rates for the first quarter. As previously guided, we have postponed this year's planned September shutdown to FY '22. Natref production rates are about 80% as capacity is constrained by low jet fuel demand. Looking at our North American operations, the LDPE unit at Lake Charles achieved beneficial operation on 15 November. I'm really pleased to say this brings the full Lake Charles Chemical Complex online. Our Eurasian plants are currently operating to plan. And ORYX Train 2 successfully started up operations in October, and the plant is ramping up to full capacity. Turning now to our expanded asset divestment program. This measure forms a key part of streamlining our asset portfolio, which we announced in November 2017 as part of our long-term strategy. Assets disposals that were completed or are well advanced since March this year have yielded USD 2.6 billion in value. Most notably, we reached agreement on terms for our partnering agreement with LyondellBasell for 50% of the Base Chemicals units at the LCCP. This transaction was approved by shareholders earlier today, and I will discuss this in more detail shortly. We are in the process of selling our 16 air separation units located in Secunda to Air Liquide. We have formed a new partnership with Enaex in our explosives business that saw us sell a 51% share in the business, bringing in a global explosives player to Africa. I'm pleased to also confirm that all jobs have been retained. We also concluded an agreement to sell our indirect 10% beneficial interest in the Escravos GTL plant in Nigeria to Chevron and are progressing well with our other asset disposals. Overall, we are pleased with the progress made to date. Despite the challenging economic climate, we have been clear that every transaction must help us deliver on both our strategic and financial objectives, delivering shareholder value in the long term. In considering our approach to seeking a partner in the LCCP Base Chemicals units, we undertook an extensive competitive process where we explored various transaction constructs with different partners. The proposal put forward by LyondellBasell offered us the best mix of upfront and long-term value, while helping us accelerate delivery of our strategy. Lyondellbasell is one of the largest producers of plastics, chemicals and refined products in the world. They are currently the third largest producer of ethylene in North America and are the leading producer in Europe. LyondellBasell has a breadth of operating expertise in commodity chemicals that few can match. Their U.S. headquarters and executive leadership are based in Houston, close to Lake Charles. We have a very strong partner, and the Sasol team is excited to work with LyondellBasell going forward. In this transaction, LyondellBasell will pay us USD 2 billion for its 50% of the JV at completion, subject to any closing adjustments. The new JV is to be called Louisiana Integrated PolyEthylene, and LyondellBasell will be the operator on behalf of the JV. It is important to clarify that Sasol will retain the U.S. Performance Chemicals business in its entirety. This includes ownership of the new LCCP Ziegler alcohol plant, the new ethylene oxide and derivative plants and the new Guerbet alcohols plant. The transaction will, therefore, shift our portfolio towards specialty chemicals rapidly, which is in line with our strategy shared with the market in '17 and reaffirmed in June of this year. Furthermore, Sasol will retain ownership of the remainder of the Lake Charles property and will be able to utilize vacant land to develop further facilities on this site. This provides us with future potential growth opportunities for our U.S. Performance Chemicals business. We will also protect our integrated value chain by retaining access to our share of the low-cost, on-site ethylene as well as the ethylene from the existing cracker. This will help us protect the profitability of our U.S. Performance Chemicals business through the cycle. Sasol's remaining 50% base chemicals exposure in the LCCP positions us well for participation in the commodity chemicals recovery over the next few years. Before I touch on some of the key components of our emission reduction road map, let me state that we take the commitments we have made on climate change seriously, including our support for the Paris Agreement in its efforts to curb global climate change. We wholeheartedly agree with all our stakeholders that climate change is a significant issue. The question will, however, always be, are we doing enough? Are we moving fast enough? We know some of stakeholders feel we should move faster. So let me briefly explain how we think about this topic. Removing carbon from our activities is not a simple task. It is a process that takes investment and time. What does this mean in practice? At its heart, it involves judgments about the pace of transition, which reflect a number of variables, principally around availability of alternative feedstock, availability of infrastructure, technology and cost. Our road map will enable us to deliver on our commitment of reducing emissions by at least 10% by 2030. However, as we further develop and execute the road map, if there are opportunities to either accelerate delivery, reduce cost or deliver greater reductions, then we will certainly incorporate these. Our 2030 road map can be broken up in 2 phases. Firstly, what we call the REDUCE pillar, which is applicable until 2024, focuses on improving the efficiency of the current operations, using low capital interventions of approximately ZAR 0.5 billion spend and the introduction of renewable energy. Project implementation in this pillar began in 2017 already. And to date, we have achieved just over 3% towards our target. Further efficiency optimization will underpin both the REDUCE and TRANSFORM pillars. Renewables feature strongly in the first phase of the road map. Based on the overwhelming response to our recent request for information, where the market indicated that there were over 7 gigawatts of shovel-ready projects, we are now trying to fast track this implementation for 600 megawatt of renewable energy in the form of electricity to our operations. Our ambition is to be a large player in the renewable energy space to stimulate demand and eventual local value chain beneficiation for job creation and to stimulate economic growth in South Africa. Secondly, the TRANSFORM pillar begins in 2025, with implementation of additional gas conversion capacity in preparation for further natural gas post 2030 and additional energy and process efficiency projects. In the event that gas is either unavailable or unaffordable, an alternative road map path can be pursued for further introduction of process and energy efficiency improvements. Our plans also demonstrate our holistic approach to harmonizing the needs and expectations of all our stakeholders, our employees, fence-line communities, customers, suppliers and shareholders. The reality is that there is a balancing act that the company must live with. I understand the impatience. We at Sasol would also like to move faster, but we have to move in a judicious and responsible manner. Too fast or too slow, both these approaches involve risks we must avoid. We are certain, however, that our resolve to continue our focus on innovating for a better world will not be diminished by the depth of the challenges we face. We are currently defining our long-term 2050 ambitions and emission reduction road map, which will be shared with you at our Capital Markets Day next year. Here, we will share further details on how our plans align to the Paris Climate Change Agreement. Our climate change strategy will see our business fundamentally transform in the coming decade or 2. We plan to fully diversify our energy mix in terms of our energy sources and our energy feedstocks for our processes. We are vigorously progressing our plans in seeking additional gas and large-scale renewables, which are both essential to our strategy. We recognize that as a key role player in South Africa's energy landscape, the impact goes beyond our fence-line. Partnerships will be increasingly important not just for the sake of improving our emissions profile, but to enable South Africa's energy transition. There is promising opportunity to develop enabling industries to the Just Transition. We have the ability to leverage our scale to enable infrastructure development that will benefit the whole of South Africa. It is vital that the Just Transition is carefully managed to minimize socioeconomic impacts. By working more closely with government, business and other stakeholder groups, we will help the country make Just Transition to a lower carbon future. The climate challenge is enormous and requires collective effort. We are considering LNG as a nearer-term solution to accessing gas and a gas pipeline from Rovuma together with other stakeholders as a long-term option. This collaborative approach has already led to exploring approaches to funding an additional infrastructure requirements to support green energy. Another area that presents great potential certainly after 2030 is hydrogen. Sasol is a significant producer of hydrogen or what is referred to today as green -- rather gray hydrogen as it is derived from our coal-based feedstocks. Hydrogen, however, has the potential to be a sustainable energy carrier, and we are evaluating both gas-based and green hydrogen production pathways. While green hydrogen is currently prohibitively expensive, we are pursuing further demonstration opportunities and partnerships with the intent of enabling and taking advantage of technology developments and breakthroughs. In this regard, we have already landed key partnerships that will play an important role in our transition and that of South Africa. We are a member of the government's South African Hydrogen Society, which is tasked with developing a hydrogen road map for the country. As a first step in this area, we participated in the hydrogen fuel cell demonstration project, led by the Department of Science and Innovation to provide power to 1 military hospital in Pretoria. In theory, the realization of large-scale green hydrogen technology could enable us to achieve deep decarbonization in the future, should technology breakthroughs deliver economically affordable green hydrogen solutions. Let me emphasize that a potential journey to our 2050 ambition starts with the current feedstocks and renewable energy and progresses with further integration of lower and thereafter, low-carbon feedstocks. As we contemplate the changing energy landscape in South Africa, we must achieve beneficial outcomes that enable inclusive growth, enable job creation and retention interventions. And here, Sasol can play a leading role. As we mark our 70th anniversary, this is also a period of renewal for Sasol. On the 1st of November, we implemented our new operating model, and all senior management roles and accountabilities are now active. To deal with the difficult short-term challenges this year, we took decisive action to stabilize the business and create a clear pathway to a deleveraged balance sheet. We will implement a sensible capital structure to support our strategy and ensuring resilience against further market volatility. Also, a robust capital allocation framework to balance portfolio returns is key for Sasol to remain resilient. Future Sasol will be streamlined, focused and positioned to succeed. Sasol will be an attractive investment by delivering good returns, which are underpinned by low cost, high margins, strong capital discipline and business sustainability. We will provide more details on our Sasol 2.0 initiative, including the targets and delivery pathway at our investor update to be held on the 2nd of December this year. Our business portfolios are distinct and customer-centric. They participate in select global markets to drive value-based growth. They are responsible for their own profit and loss, supported by a strong but leaner and more fit-for-purpose center that provides strategic boundaries, allocates capital and enables the business units. It is a simple, more agile organization, where people are energized and enabled to realize their full potential. Simplicity means that businesses are empowered to make their own decisions, which are market and profit focused. Our strong technical, engineering and marketing capabilities together with efficiencies realized through digitalization will enable Sasol to deliver better solution to our customers through our unique chemistry and technologies. Lastly, the triple bottom line delivery of people, planet and profit will enhance our employee value proposition. It will foster strong relationships with our stakeholders and return value to our shareholders. Advancing our sustainability journey remains key for our long-term aspirations. Sasol has a proud history of 70 years, strongly rooted in South Africa and here to stay. I am confident we have the people, the strategy and above all, the will to succeed in a lower carbon world. On behalf of the executive management team, I would like to extend our sincere appreciation to our people around the world for their significant efforts and to our stakeholders for their support in these trying times. I will now hand over to Paul Victor to take us through our financial results. Thank you.

Thank you, Fleetwood, and good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. Today, we outlined a set of results that were delivered during a volatile and challenging macroeconomic environment. Our results were severely impacted by a decrease in Brent crude oil and product prices as well as the impact of COVID-19. Since March 2020, we have been taking immediate steps to implement a comprehensive response plan to stabilize the business in the short term, a targeting to raise up to $6 billion by the end of financial year 2021 to repay our debt. This is being achieved through a combination of first lien, realizing $2 billion of savings as a result of the self-help measures, which we identified. Secondly, a debt reduction for an expanded and accelerated asset divestment program, as Fleetwood highlighted. And also sustainably, we're repositioning our balance sheet through delivery of contributions of these items above as well as a planned rights issue of up to $2 billion during the second half of financial year '21. It's very important to emphasize that the size of the rights issue will be subject to the process and the progress that we've made on the self-help measures and the quantum of asset disposals as well as the balance sheet exposure to future market shocks and continued volatility. I'm pleased to report that by honoring our mantra of realism, focus and delivery, we exceeded our $1 billion 2020 response plan target for self-help measures, conserving cash well in excess of $1 billion and have a liquidity buffer of more than $2 billion to enable us to absorb any future market volatility. We are also well on track to deliver on our $1 billion savings target for financial year '21. This was delivered through focused management actions and the establishment of a cash war room to continuously review and improve our liquidity position. We have been able to successfully manage the impact of [indiscernible] black swan event in the form of significantly lower oil prices as well as the impact of COVID-19. I will now focus and highlight on the key messages from our financial year '20 set of results. The fallout in all markets led to a 37% drop in Brent crude oil prices during the second half of the year. The past months have seen a considerable volatility in oil price. However, it has now stabilized around the $40 per barrel mark. Equally, significant to our business is the rand-dollar exchange rate as most of our revenue in dollar -- of our revenues is in dollar-denominated forms. In the second half of the financial year, the rand weakened against the dollar by 13%. Polyethylene prices also declined by 15%. And very important to note that it established at around about the level of USD 760 per ton from nearly $900 per ton in the first half, with a similar downward trend seen across the other base chemical basket prices. However, we do believe that there will be some recovery in chemical prices in financial year '21 period as the market normalizes. The Sasol business of today has shown significant resilience and is currently cash free -- free cash flow positive in these volatile markets. I will briefly summarize our financial performance. Through focus and delivery of our key business metrics, we are pleased to report the following: firstly, our cash fixed costs remained flat, which is remarkable in a year where costs were still ramping up in support of new assets. We also significantly improved our working capital levels and reduced our capital spend through focused management actions. On the downside, with the revised outlook in terms of longer-term price assumptions, we have booked ZAR 112 billion in impairments. This reflects the current depressed macroeconomic environment with a softer outlook on price recovery, including the impact of the fair value adjustment at the LCCP, given the announcement of the partnering decision. This was hugely disappointed -- disappointing, but we need to look forward and ensure that our assets yield competitive returns going forward. We maintained a healthy liquidity buffer of $2.5 billion. Our capital -- our actual capital expenditure for the year amounted to ZAR 35 billion, of which ZAR 14 billion or $0.9 billion related to the LCCP. To create flexibility on our balance sheet, we successfully engaged our lenders to waive our covenant at year-end as well as lift the December 2020 covenant from 3x to 4x net debt to EBITDA. Protecting the balance sheet and meeting our debt covenants remains paramount during this time. Furthermore, we still delivered on our commitments towards a sustainable transformation and broad-based black economic empowerment with an expenditure with black-owned suppliers at ZAR 26 billion for the financial year 2020. The pathway to a deleveraged balance sheet is on track and is underpinned by the progress made on our self-help initiatives and our asset divestment program. The proceeds from our recently announced asset disposals, the U.S base chemicals partnering transaction, in particular, represents a meaningful step towards reduction of our debt. For financial year '21, we will continue to execute against our response plan objectives to keep liquidity strong and to bring our leverage down. The final major step on our deleveraging pathway is a rights issue. We want to implement this when the amount required is very well defined and when we can do so on the basis of a clearer and stronger financial position. Sasol will make that final decision on the rights issue in February 2021, and we are committed to optimize the size of the offer should we proceed. The decision is highly dependent on the successful delivery of management initiatives and needs to contribute to a prevailing need for a sustainable Future Sasol. The deleveraging of the balance sheet will be a gradual process, and it's particularly important that we focus on the controllable factors at our disposal. We will provide more details on our Sasol 2.0 initiatives and the pathway to delivering Future Sasol at our investor update on the 2nd of December 2020. As we execute disposals, we will continue to safeguard long-term shareholder value, while aligning the portfolio with the company's long-term strategy. Financial year '21 remains a critical period for Sasol. The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and the macroeconomic swings are expected to continue and may have even further impact on our market guidance. It's within this context that we expect the following outlook for financial year '21's delivery from our assets. In some areas, it will be different to what we've guided at year-end. Mining to ramp up to targeted production levels as we focus on safety and efficiency. We expect a normalized unit cost of between ZAR 340 to ZAR 360 per ton. South African liquid fuel sales volumes are expected to range between 54 million and 55 million barrels. An average utilization rate at ORYX GTL are also expected to be between 75% and 80% as Train 2 resumes operations in the second quarter of financial year 2021. Performance Chemicals sales volumes are also expected to be roughly in line with our financial year '20 volumes due to the impact of the recent hurricanes, which made landfall on the U.S. Gulf Coast and resulted in a loss of production. Base chemicals sales volumes are also expected to increase by between 1% and 2%, also due to the impact of the hurricanes that made landfall in the U.S. Normalized cashless costs are expected to track our inflation guidance. In conclusion, we continue to face significant challenges as a business. But with our focus on the key actions required at this time, I'm confident that we can steer the ship through this very difficult time. And on that note, I will hand back to the Chairman. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much, Paul, for such a presentation. Ladies and gentlemen, as indicated earlier, we will take questions in batches of 3 to 4, and Elton will read them out for us. Elton, over to you. But -- no, no. Before I move over to you and you read them for us, let me just go through the constitution of the meeting. I'm comfortable that the notice of meeting has been delivered to shareholders in accordance with the requirements of the company's act that the electronic attendance register has been duly completed and verified, the required quorum of shareholders is present and that the proxies that have been handed in are in order. This meeting has, therefore, been properly constituted. Now going to the minutes. The minutes of the previous AGM were approved by the Board of Directors and signed by me as a correct record of the proceedings. These minutes will upon request be available for inspection, either electronically or physically at the offices of our transfer secretary Link Market Services. The register of shareholders of the company is open for inspection either electronically or physically at the office of our transfer secretary Link Market Services. Now on the voting side. As allowed for in Sasol's Memorandum of Incorporation, I here declare that all resolutions will be voted on by way of a poll. Now going back to Elton, if you could assist us with the questions that are there, sir.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll deal with the first 3 sets of questions that relate to the settlement payout to the former Joint-CEOs. The first question is from [indiscernible]. At last year's AGM, we challenged the REMCO to be prudent regarding the exit/golden handshakes to the 2 exiting CEOs. We note that our comments and concerns were disregarded. Why were the exiting ex-CEOs given excessive and exorbitant payouts given the poor performance of Sasol during their tenure and the circumstances surrounding their exit? Similarly, [indiscernible] says explain the decision for paying ZAR 98 million to 2 former executive directors who had failed to complete the Lake Charles project on time and resulting into excessive overrun costs. How do they benefit from adding no value? [indiscernible] asks another question. Your explanation for giving ZAR 98 million is empty and not acceptable. People are remunerated for performance. And in this case, the company's balance sheet as well as the income statement were very bad. Explain why do we have to pay for nonperformance?

Thanks, Elton. We take onboard the criticism of our shareholders and other stakeholders on the separation arrangements. We profoundly regret the impact our actions have had on the goodwill and trust extended to us by our stakeholders despite the utmost good faith that informed our approach to this matter. We are reflecting on measures to take to assure our stakeholders of our commitment to restore confidence in the way we implement the company's remuneration policy.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll move on to the next question. Has Sasol disclosed its gender pay gap at all occupational levels for all geographic segments and pay ratio for all geographic segments in its reporting suite? If no, when does Sasol intend on disclosing these metrics? And that is from Tinyiko Mabunda. The next question is from [indiscernible]. Former Sasol CEO, David Constable, states that they pay the most taxes whilst at the same time, destroying our future. Sasol, a fossil fuel company and their product is poisoned, and it is a killer and is a destroyer. This can be verified by the residents living in Mpumalanga, which is said to have the dirtiest air in the world. People suffer from bronchitis and asthma. What is Sasol's carbon emission reduction targets for the Vaal area noting the air quality -- noting the poor air quality in the Vaal? And then the third question for this round is from [indiscernible]. Mr. Chair, please indicate the percentage of ethics line calls related to leadership and what number of these calls are still open?

Thank you, Elton. Could I probably ask [indiscernible] to weigh in on the gender pay gap and then the rest, I'll divert to Fleetwood who'll give us guidance in terms of how we are. The second one will go to Mpho and Mpho can handle those. Thank you. Sorry. There you go. All right.

Thank you very much, Tinyiko, for your question, which is do we disclose the gender gap in all our geographies and the pay ratio in our reporting suite? We currently do not because it's not necessarily regulated in South Africa for us to do so. But it's a very important metric that we keep track of as REMCO and we firmly support fair and responsible remuneration. We do, however, on a regular basis, track the pay gap between the highest paid and the lowest paid in the business, and the trend has been positive, particularly with us complying and actually exceeding minimum wage in South Africa. We also have a view of what's happening in all markets. I do have to just mention to you that pay gap in gender calculation is very different in different geographies. And therefore, there is no standard calculation for that in South Africa as yet. And we do comply to the Employment Equity Act. And on an annual basis, we do submit to the Department of Labor, the pay gap between that 10% highest paid employees and 10% lowest paid employees. And this is -- the entire employment equity report is available for the public, unfortunately, except this part on remuneration. So as soon as a standard methodology is defined and approved in South Africa by all stakeholders, it will be a requirement of all companies to improve the pay gap basically in their annual reports. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Fleetwood, I don't know why don't you take the Mpumalanga ones.

The one on the Vaal, yes. So [indiscernible], thanks for that question. I think you need to see the context in terms of our carbon reduction road map is a holistic approach that we will execute in our operating facilities. And so the Sasolburg operations is also under the same focus where we would first reduce. So that means all the areas where we can be more energy efficient, we will continue to do that. And we will also bring in other measures that can optimize our operations and therefore, operate at a more optimal spot and therefore, not having any waste or emissions that is not the best way curbed in our operations in during normal operations. So the point that you raised is really to do with air quality. I can state that at the moment, we are complying with air quality standards that is applicable to us at this point in time. We are preparing ourselves to be compliant for all the regulated air compliance requirements with respect to NOx. Specifically, Sasolburg would be fully compliant with the time lines as agreed with the Department of fisheries and environment. And therefore, this is part and parcel of our focus to comply in the first instance, and that will be the context in which, I would think, the Vaal specific question you posed is answered.

Thank you.

Thank you. The third question, Chair, was related to the percentage of ethics line calls related to leadership and what number of these are still open.

We have 7 calls relating to leadership that are still open within our system. They constitute 6.8% of their calls of the total calls within our system. And of course, we have a process to -- aimed at focusing on expediting closing out calls that relate to leadership or what we refer to as sensitive and priority calls with sensitive calls, in general, taking -- allowed for a total period of being investigated of 180 days except that the calls that relate to issues impacting on matters of racism and sexism, those are required to be closed within 60 days. So just to give you a bit of the context, and of course, all of these matters, we approach them on the basis of no predetermined calls on them. And then we go through them thoroughly. And as indicated, the total number of calls in relation to percentage is 6.8% being 7 calls.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll move on to the next 3 questions. The first one is from [indiscernible]. Sasol has a bad reputation of noncompliance in many parts of the world. State of Secunda and Sasolburg is evidence to that. Why should South Africa trust Sasol with their ocean for the offshore oil and gas exploration when they currently cannot clean up their act? The next question is from [indiscernible]. Why are executive and nonexecutive directors paid more and yet Sasol is performing badly? And the third question for this round is from [indiscernible]. I represent Justica Ambiental/ Friends of the Earth Mozambique. I'll refer to the report by Centro de Integridade Pública, or CIP, entitled, Sasol is Smoking Mozambique, which details how Sasol Mozambique is selling gas from its Pande and Temane projects in Sasol, South Africa, at far below market price. And for a tiny percentage of what Sasol SA then sells it at market value. You responded to the report to the media and to our organization's AGM questions with details of the contract between yourselves and the Mozambican government, which allows for this and use that as a defense for your actions. However, my question is, regardless of the contents of a contract and its renegotiation, do you think it is ethical and a responsible business practice to be pricing gas in this way. And when will you amend the pricing so that you sell the gas from Sasol Mozambique to South Africa at market value, so that it actually benefits the people.

Thank you very much. I will ask Fleetwood to answer the first and the third one, and I'll ask then Mpho. Maybe we start with Mpho to talk about the executive and nonexecutive pay, and then we'll move to Fleetwood.

Thanks for your question, [indiscernible]. I do disagree with you that executives and nonexecutives are being paid more. They are not. You will remember that in the communication that we shared with the market and shareholders over the past year that the executives actually took a pay cut, not only just executives but over 6,000 employees globally to take into account the challenging business conditions. And over and above that, executives have not had a bonus over the past 2 years, which has dramatically impacted on the overall remuneration. Also, I must just raise the fact that the shares that have been allocated to executives and other employees within Sasol have been performing very poorly over the past years, a reflection of alignment between executive pays alignment with shareholders. So they have been feeling the pain as you have been feeling. And we are -- I mean, obviously, management is working particularly hard to make sure that business performance improves. And talking about nonexecutives, you will agree that -- you will remember that in 2018, we brought a resolution to shareholders like yourself to close the gap between foreign and local NEDs, and that was overwhelmingly approved in 2018. But what we did, taking into account business performance, we actually put forward to shareholders a 3-year glide path to align those fees. And that's what has been happening here, closing the gap between local and foreign NED fees. I can say with confidence here that even our American shareholder -- American NEDs are still paid below market, so they're not being excessively paid. And when management took a 20% cut in their salary earlier this year, the Board did exactly the same. And you will have seen recently that the Board has further undertaken to take a 20% cut for the rest of the year, while they relook the fees in general. But the NED fees are still in line with market and some of them slightly below market, indeed.

So [indiscernible], thanks. I will move on to [indiscernible] question with respect to compliance. First of all, [indiscernible], we are a prudent operator and where we operate, we comply with the regulatory standards that's applicable in that jurisdiction. So that is one of the minimum operating requirements that we do is to comply to all regulations under which we can operate our facilities safely and judiciously. With respect to the point that you make with respect to offshore oil and gas exploration, in the areas where we deem the offshore exploration in the sea is applicable or we should look at that, we follow international strict guidelines of how to go about on those exploration activities. So let me give you an example. When there's any -- we're offshore in South Africa or Mozambique, any activity with respect to exploration, you have to do a comprehension -- comprehensive environmental impact study, which include public participation. And all of those protocols are well followed. And if deemed not appropriate, you will not be granted to be able to continue with exploration activities in that particular instance. So Sasol follow those procedures and regulations in the countries where we do consider offshore exploration with very prudent and well-established partners that are well versed with the drilling and exploration activities globally. So Sasol is not doing it as a party on its own. It's always in collaboration with strong partners that's also got experience in these areas. So I hope that, that can give you quite a clear indication that we are doing it with circumspection and with the necessary regulatory frameworks that we have to follow. With respect to the Mozambique gas pricing, I'm going to ask Jon Harris to weigh in also on this question. Suffice to say, that I believe in the areas where we have commercial agreements, we honor those agreements. The benefits of those agreements is due in the countries where we operate. And it is then also utilized by the areas -- by the governments in those countries to the benefit of the country. And so I think in your particular specific instance that you referred to, I'm going to ask Jon to provide further perspective. Jon?

Yes. I would -- I refer to -- this asset was discovered since 1965. It spent the next 35 years in the ground not being exploited and not being developed. We invested a huge sum, some [ MZN 220 billion ] or $3 billion to enable the development and utilization of that gas. And we ended up pricing it against the competing fuel, which is coal at the time and is indexed to a number of other fuels that are possibly used as an alternative to gas such as fuel oils and a few other indices, which are commercially sensitive. So to your question around -- so I think we've enabled the development. And the question is, is it ethical and responsible business practice to price it in this way? I believe that it absolutely is as to the competing fuels that you have to pitch it against. I mean, at the moment in South Africa and also Mozambique currently, there are no other sources of gas yet that you can commercially go out and buy. And therefore, there's not an alternative. So in terms of trying to price this fairly, I would say that we have absolutely priced this fairly. And also we've pitched the price such that we could make a -- as a responsible business, make a practical return on that huge investment that we made to enable it in the first place. And that investment and that pricing allows us to be a significant contributor to taxes in a fiscal year in Mozambique. In fact, Sasol upstream business is the largest or the second largest taxpayer and the transportation business is the second or third largest tax payer. So is that responsible? I think it is. is it ethical? Absolutely. We are -- I think we're very responsible and ethical developer of that gas in Mozambique. Thanks.

Thank you. I'll move on to the next round of 3 questions. The first one is from [indiscernible]. There is a genuine "liability for ecological debt." Since Sasol ignored the mandate "polluter pays," so part of its impending further financial collapse will be the liability for pollution across Africa and the world. How is Sasol going to pay its climate debt to the people of Africa, considering that they are one of the biggest contributors of greenhouse gases in Africa? The next question is from [indiscernible]. What is the level of engagement between Sasol and the communities they operate in, namely Mpumalanga and Sasolburg? Do you hold regular meetings to update them on developments and reporting on your emissions and ERP. Are you conducting these consultations in a transparent manner and make available all necessary information to allow for informed participation and decision-making? Accessing to health statistics when assessing their solution and how they support the fence line communities to get adequate health care? And the third question for this round is from Salim [indiscernible] they relate to safety questions, year-in and year-out, AGM in and AGM out. We have challenge ex chair, Dr. Gancho on work fatalities. Year-in and year-out, we received the same response in song on 0 harm and safety priorities yet lives continue being lost. And the new Chair and new CEO take this seriously. Surely current systems and policies are not working. What new technologies or interventions have been introduced since our last engagement?

Thanks, Elton. I will ask Paul to handle the first one. And then the second -- second and third one, I'll ask Fleetwood to deal with the 1 on stakeholder engagement and the safety one. I'll ask you to do that.

Thank you very much for the question. I think what it's quite important to remember, and I want to refer you to our balance sheet. There, we have made a provision of around about ZAR 22 billion for our interpretation of what our exposure is in terms of our environmental liabilities. I think where I do differ with your stance is that in every jurisdiction that you operate, there are very strict rules, laws and governance and practice that requires a company to assess its liability in terms of those regulations. We, as a prudent operator, assess our exposure in terms of those rules and make the necessary provisions in terms of our exposure. We're also where we need to remediate the environmental impact, we do so immediately and spend the cash immediately. And currently, there are no illegal actions where we are not conforming to those legal requirements. Obviously, as we continue going forward, the rules are getting more stricter, especially on CO2, and hence our efforts to also make sure that our footprint is optimized as we go along. There will be carbon taxes and exposure as we navigate through the future. But also on a positive side, you need to notice that in our tax calculation, we were also eligible for considerable amounts on energy efficiency, where we have improved our energy efficiency through ZAR 1 billion of investments to ensure not only are we efficient, but that we also do care in terms of our impact of the environment. So where we stand today, we are very sufficiently covered in terms of what we believe our exposure is, and it also undergo a significant scrutiny by the auditors. And hence, I need to differ from you that we are not conforming to those requirements. In fact, we are.

Sure. Then moving on to the question of Thomas, with respect to the level of engagement between Sasol and the communities we operate in. I'm going to ask [indiscernible] and Bernard to weigh in on that after I've answered the question from [indiscernible] on the safety. And suffice to say that we've got extensive ongoing stakeholder and fence line community engagement, but I'll leave that for [indiscernible] to elaborate on. So with respect to the question on safety, I would like to just give the context that we have really benchmarked and looked at our safety approach, systems, tools and standards. And that has been assessed as world-class processes standards, operating procedures and systems. Importantly, we also actively drive adherence to our life-saving rules because we care about our people. We conducted an in-depth analysis of all the fatal incidents and identify the common themes emerging, including risk identification, operational discipline and supervision, training and competence learning effectiveness and service provider management, and these were themes that we communicated for inclusion into our operating model entity learnings and safety improvement plans. We conducted critical review to better understand the effectiveness of our high severity incident program. While we acknowledge that our operations were interrupted during lockdown regulations, we experienced 6 fatalities in this reporting period. Our HSI review demonstrated the need to refocus on certain performance areas, including, but not limited to, behavior as it relates to operational discipline, adhering to our life-saving rules and our efforts to humanize safety because we care, adequate risk management with respect to quality of our pre-task risk assessment and critical control identification and implementation, review of procedures for task execution and aligning training and competency of individuals with requirements. And also, but last, but not least, institutionalizing lessons learned from previous incidents. So I think we've taken the occurrence of these fatalities very serious. I personally led that the safety effort in the company since I got into the seat. And I must say that it is a task that we will not refrain from because we believe that zero harm is possible, but we need -- as I've said in my address, we need to also get into the hearts and minds of our people that it's almost second nature to follow rules to assess risks and to make sure that the tools, systems and procedures that are in place are diligently followed and adhered to because that will protect lives. Schoeman, I'm going to hand over to you on the community engagements, please?

Thank you, Fleetwood, and thank you, Thomas, for the question. So in regards to the different engagement platforms that we have with communities, quite fast, and we've been engaging for many years now on our AE emissions, specifically. We've had quarterly meetings with our communities, the information is transparently shared presentations are given on the steps, and we also undertake extensive monitoring on these issues as well. All of this information is shared. However, this year, given the COVID pandemic and what we are facing with, those engagements have come sort of down in terms of what we are doing. However, we do continue to engage via various other platforms. We've engaged in terms of the COVID pandemic directly in supplying sanitizers to various areas where we operate. We've also had a number of workshops that they use. We've had public participation. We've had engagements with environmental NGOs as well as traditional leaderships. The engagement still continues, however, it will pick up more once we come out of the pandemic and we move into a lower level of quarantine. So that's where we are right now in terms of our engagement. Bernard, I'm going to hand over to you in terms of the health issues, please. Thank you.

Thanks very much, Schoeman. In terms of how we monitor the health situation at the issue. We monitor the issue in the areas where we operate and consider a number of factors in understanding any impact out and otherwise multiple factors sources beyond just [indiscernible] also having the impact on the issue. And it's in this space that we we've done many things to try and impact on the air quality and have community programs that do this whether that's insulation of homes or other opted programs. In terms of supporting health work, as [indiscernible] local authorities to group our facilities in our communities. So over the last 2 or 3 years, we've seen either the upgrade or the opening of new clinics to support this [indiscernible].

Thank you very much. Just to the shareholders, we had planned for this meeting in consultation with shareholders to finish at 4 o'clock. However, in view of the number of questions we have we will extend that period. So please reach us out on that.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'll move on to the next question, who is from demands. Sasol has been a serial climate enlist or this Board and shareholders pass a resolution to ensure their emissions are drastically reduced, especially those that impact and other major causes of the climate crisis. The next question is from Diane Halin, an evaluation of the strategy disclosed in the climate change report reveal that the 2030 roadmap at best results in an emission reduction of 10%. And in brackets, despite use of the word, at least, please explain to shareholders our strategies in the 2030 road map, in fact, and empirically, aligns with the Paris agreement and a net 0 reduction target by 2050 or even in 2070 aligned for an overshoot. And the second part to that question, as climate legislation and global commitments are expected to been stricter over the next decade. Posing material business and operational risks are the in actions of directors not negligent today? And then the third question for this round, also from Desmond to Sasol is a company with a bad history during the [indiscernible] era. And now during the democratic era where the company has refused to reduce its toxic pollution and has consistently applied to defer their compliance to air quality laws and health regulations as they do not want to be held responsible for their actions. I will stop there for now.

Okay. Okay. I will ask for you to handle one, but may I ask [indiscernible] to probably answer some, and then we'll ask Fleetwood to finish off. [indiscernible]?

[indiscernible] I think it's good if you can [indiscernible] and also ask [indiscernible] to assist with the technical part of the road map to 2030, that will be great.

Okay. Thank you, Fleetwood. We'll do so. Thank you, Diane. So in terms of the Paris alignment and our 2030 road map, we did take into account the Paris agreement. We took into account the temperature goal. We also took into account climate fines, both the 2-degree as well as the 1.5 degree. We then overlaid that in terms of South Africa's peak plateau and decline trajectory. And we also then had to include mitigation potential socioeconomic implications as well as cost. And all of these went into formulating our at least 10% reduction target. Now of course, in terms of how we do this, one would say the South African target, the peak plateau decline, the top part of the target is not in alignment with the Paris agreement and its coming out highly insufficient. That is correct. However, the bottom part of the PPP because it is a range is, in fact, in alignment with the Paris agreement. So in terms of what we've done is we've taken that range, we've looked at all of the different variables that go into how we would set a target at corporate level. And that is how we came out with the target that we have of at least 10%. Now the reason why we've said at least is because we recognize that we need to do more. However, the mitigation available in-country does not exist yet. I mean key step change for Sasol is gas. And, of course, large-scale renewable energy. And so we've started with our progression of renewable energy. However, gas in the form and the amount that we need does not currently exist in for [indiscernible]. So we need to factor all of that in for our at least target, what we are aiming for is to hopefully accelerate all of these activities in order to then see if we can achieve that sooner. So the up lease part is to ensure that we can achieve something that we are in the event that we get gas with renewable energy sooner. On the 10%, what we assessed ourselves is a minimum ambition that we will achieve through the technologies as we've detailed in our 2030 road map. So solution ask perhaps you want to come in now and what's the road map actually says?

Thanks, John, and thank you, Dan, for the opportunity to talk a little bit more about the road map. So when designing the road map, we looked at over 100 different mitigation opportunities, and it really spoke to the sequencing of the projects and how we could implement the projects as quickly as possible. And this is why we're progressing quite quickly with the implementation of renewables as the first step. Now as Fleetwood mentioned, the road map looks at 2 phases. Phase I, where we aim to achieve a 4% to 5% reduction; and Phase II, which is a 5% to 7% reduction. So as a minimum, we will achieve between 10% and 12%. But as [indiscernible] explained, we are definitely trying to achieve more than that. We've already achieved 3% reductions in Phase I, added to that will be the renewables. And then we start progressing with some of our energy efficiency projects, which look at improving the process and energy efficiency of our facilities in Secunda, which seek to recover more heat converted to electricity and utilize less steam in our processes. So with all of these projects, we are confident that even in the absence of gas, we will be in a position to achieve an at least 10% reduction.

Thank you. In regard to the question that's been raised by Desmond concerning in which you made the allegation that the Sasol has been a serial climate denial list. That allegation is pretty unfortunate and certainly not borne by the fact, particularly when one is regard to the points that have been made, firstly by the Chairman, by Fleetwood and shortly and sort of just now by [indiscernible] and [indiscernible]. But when you've raised a question around, we need to be introducing a shareholder resolution. As we've indicated, with auto mechanism for ensuring that there's participation of our shareholders in our climate chain journey. That process is going to be through -- is going to be through a nonbinding advisory vote. Focused on informing and reacting to our climate change strategy and the implementation thereof. We believe that this accords with the expectations in relation to transparency. And of course, as already been indicated, the disclosures we've been making on the space of climate change have been well received, including us getting an assessment of our climate change report of being the best amongst the reports that have been released. Thank you.

With respect to the last part of the question, Desmon asked with regard to that, our history, I must indicate Desmon. I disagree. We have been very prudent and operator in this field complying with the regulated rules of how to go about producing our products. I believe that this is also true as we look at today, where there are new requirements in the apps being promulgated. We are working with government, with the regulator of how to accomplish that. You have to keep in mind that a plant that is produced in the late 70 s or built in the late 70s or 80s, and you look at it 20, 30 years, hence, technology has moved on. Newer later technologies can provide a less environmental impact, and we acknowledge that. It is about how to convert in a cost and a logical implementation of the new options that you need to implement and built vis-a-vis the old plant that you've already got in operations since the 80s. And what is that step? How do you how do you change the technology without it being cost prohibitive? And how do you work with government like in many other countries of the world where we operate, that there is a the engagement of how to, over time, phase out older technologies and implement the latest more state-of-the-art technologies within the confines of a road map of how to achieve that over a period of time. So we are in no different pathway to do that in South Africa. So I do believe we are a prudent operator working with the regulator to get to that point of latest technology and acceptable practices, which remember, at this point in time, we are compliant with the regulatory environment in South Africa for those emissions.

Yes, sir. I'll continue with the next round of questions. The next question is from [indiscernible] the question concerns the salary of nonexecutive Directors, which has increased by over 300% in the last decade or so, is paying them not productive in this era of huge financial constraints. The next question is from Grant McGillan. The 2017 annual integrated report has thrown up some interesting and revealing information and triggers poor decisions made by Sasol in the past, in 2016. I wrote an e-mail to the CEO and copied the CFO. I was immediately forcibly removed from Secunda operations by management and security. The CTFE project, I think that Coal Tar Filtration East project budget was predicted by me correctly when Fastec, project controls and management wanted to decease Synfuel's management and board. After 4 years, delayed tactics, et cetera, ethics department kept saying all is well. But today, the plant is still not working after 13 years of gold and commissioning. ZAR 4 billion has stood still for at least 5 to 8 years. BO, beneficial operations is 5 years overdue and baseline budget, ZAR 2.5 billion of the baseline. Now the annual integrated report based line report and findings of 2017 released earlier this year shows that the need for this ZAR 4 billion investment is not required, and the plant is redesigned to extract VOC, benzene, et cetera, which the annual integrated report states are not at the levels which harm people, but which underpin the business case to invest in the CTFE plant. Please conduct a full investigation into this ZAR 4 billion investment and my 16 reported noncompliance infringement, which have all been treated wrongly. The third question for this round is from El [indiscernible] Does Sasol have any plans regarding LNG in cabotage, including plans to construct a pipeline from Cabo Delgado to Richards Bay to import LNG to South Africa. Please detail dates and activities.

Thank you very much, Elton. I think the first 1 is on the fees that the NADs are getting, and Paul will handle that one. And last 2 ones, 1 from Grant, both on Grand and the LNG one will be handled by Fleetwood.

Thank you very much for your question, Celisia. I just need to remind you that the increase that you saw in the past that you referred to in the past decade was actually approved by shareholders in a measure to close the gap between foreign and local directors where there was a big differential in the pay and all directors have the same responsibilities over the dealings within Sasol. I do have to remind you that Sasol is a large company with operations over 30 countries and very complex, indeed. And we do benchmark the NED fees against our counterparts and peers. And if we look at the benchmark currently, the U.S. directors actually are still below market, while the South African NED are within market. I will repeat what I mentioned earlier that the Board took a 20% cut in their board fees last year and have also undertaken to take a 20% cut in 2021. I also have to remind you that the glide part -- 3a glide part to normalize the NEDCs has been postponed for 1 more year, meaning that there is no any de fees at all to be taken by any NEDs in 2021 has been postponed to 2022. So all efforts that have been undertaken by management to reduce their own salaries accordingly through to lack of bonuses as well as no increases. The same has applied to NEDs.

Thank you. Fleetwood?

See, thank you. With respect to Grant McGillan question on the Secunda project, I'm going to ask Bernard to deal with that 1 for us. And I will, in the meantime, cover the question that was put forward by [indiscernible] on the question regarding the gas in Mozambique. So [indiscernible] our options that we are evaluating to bring further gas into South Africa are looking at a temporary bridging measure that will speak to liquefied natural gas. Now to bring that into the operations of our Mpumalanga plants, we have to consider either via Richard's Bay or via Maputo. And both areas are under investigation to look at the possibility to establish and construct LNG facilities. At this point in time, we have been interacting with the BGC company, Matola Gas company in Maputo regarding their aspiration to build an LNG facility in Maputo that may link to our pipeline in Mozambique to South Africa. Now that is in partnership with Total. And the LNG sourcing would be from a global system. I would not know if that would come necessarily from the GABA Delgado province in Northern Mozambique. But it is a route to bring in LNG to South Africa. Our long-term aspiration is to work with the Mozambican government and with the Rovuma industrial players to consider bringing in gas from Rovuma into South Africa through infrastructure of a north-south pipeline that can then extend into South Africa and the benefit of that would be, if we can garner more gas usage in South Africa of which Sasol will be a key baseload offtaker that will bring gas also cheaper because of the economy of scale to the southern part of Mozambique, and then also for a consistent development of the region in Southern Africa and these discussions we've had with also the President of Mozambique, President Nyusi, who is keen to consider under his tenure to see the fruition or the North-south pipeline come to fruition under his leadership. So I'll stop there, and I'll refer then the second question from Grand to Bernard. Bernard?

Thanks, Steve, to that. I'd like to start off by saying that there's no lack of transparency between group technology and synfuels in terms of the execution of this project or reception between those parties. We have experienced project cost and schedule challenges with this project, and we've been very transparent about this and have reported on those. This project was fraught with technology challenges, and also contracted performance as we had to deal with over a fairly long period of time. And the project is and once delayed, as we have reported, we are at the process of commissioning that plant as we speak. And to the question on reviews, we have a standard practice that after projects of this nature with a successful or not. There's a review at [indiscernible], where we understand what we can learn from the project to improve our performance in following projects. So I think been a tough project. It is also a project that we do believe is required and needed in terms of our journey to reducing VOCs on this site, which by 2032, we believe we'll achieve 80% of our reduction target, albeit, a little bit later as we've reported. Thank you.

Thanks, Bernard.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. The next question again from [indiscernible]. Sasol presentation and false commitments to the Paris Accord has not being seen in their programs, plans and development, rather they are involved in undermining our children's future by pushing to explore for oil and gas on our beautiful coast line, that is the statement as it's put forward. Another question from -- 2 more questions from Grant McGillan. The first one, also in relation to the CTFE. Why were bonuses paid to the former joint CEOs when still ending investigation for misappropriation of shareholders' capital to the CTFT, circa ZAR 400 million. And the next question from Grant McGillan. Why is Sasol maintaining a hard position with Mpumalanga Secunda Community groups and not holding public air emission meetings, which has been ongoing for 2 years?

Thank you very much. Questions from Grant. One is on bonuses, and the other 1 is understand that the company has taken over there. Fleetwood, do you want to take the last one, that one, as well as the first 1 from Desmond? If you don't mind, Vuyo, maybe we ask for you to do that. You'll do Grant? Okay.

The Grant, as I understand, the point made in relation to the Grant question around the joint CEOs, maladin that they repaid bonuses when they were still under investigation for misappropriation of shareholders capital on the free TFG that totally without merit, the joint CEO's would never in any investigation concerning the CTFG. And so there would have been no restrictions in relation to them concerning that. Okay. Elton, can you repeat the first question from Desmond, please, which 1 is that?

I'll do that. It's more of a statement Fleetwood. Sasol presentation and false commitments to the Paris agreement has not been seen in their programs, plans and development. Rather, they are involved in undermining our children's future by pushing to explore for oil and gas on our beautiful cost line.

Okay. Thank you, Desmond. And again, I think you've heard the climate change report is comprehensively covering what is our strategy. In terms of improving and decarbonize the South African economy in terms of the approach, the timelines and what are we to do -- what we are implementing in that regard. So I think your statement is not correct. We are fully aligned with the trajectory that we followed to be within the Paris agreement at South Africa. We signed up to the Paris agreement as 1 of the corporates in South Africa. We are following the trajectory that the South African government is committed to the Paris agreement at the time. And I do not agree with your statement that we are not following that. I think we've explained in detail how we go about to achieve that. And as we are preparing the work now for our 2050 ambition, we would, as I've indicated in my address as well, further demonstrate that we are linking our 2030 to 2050 roadmap. And how we will then achieve the decarbonization in accordance with the trajectory that is required to fulfill the obligations of the Paris agreement. So with respect to the -- how do we interact with our communities in Secunda, I would like that Bernard again or if I can ask Charlotte to weigh in on that matter. Bernard, if you're comfortable, please go ahead.

Thanks. I think the comment is in reference to public participation meeting that we shared to be route sometime adding about 12, 18 months ago, which were then disrupted by very aggressive groups and the security and safety of the people conducting the participation forums was really a threat. And those people had to be evacuated. And the session had to be canceled, in fact, and subsequent systems within arranged in different venues with different security arrangements, and we would prefer to actually have open forums, and we will move back to that, if we haven't already as we do in every other area where we have public participation for him. But this was a specific response to a situation where our people and, in fact, government officials, the safety was at risk.

Thank you very much, Mr. Cha. I'll move on to the next set of three questions. Next question is from Greer Blizzard. We note that the minutes of Sasol's 2019 AGM do not make any mention at all of the lengthy question-and-answer session that took place at that AGM, please can you advise why this is the case? And also commit to including details of today's AGM question and answers in the minutes of the AGM? Thank you. The next question is from Zaha Omar. What is Sasol's strategy to reduce sulfur dioxide emissions at Secunda and to meet the legally required minimum emission standards by April 1, 2025. What factors have been considered in developing that strategy, which includes answers to the following: what are the targets for reducing pollutant emissions, what is the estimated capital expenditure required? And what steps will Sasol take to ensure that it meets these targets and raises the capital expenditure required? The third question for this round. What forecast value has been set aside to shuttle claims made in the U.S.A. in terms of the class action case filed there by Mr. Chad Lindsey Marcel?

Okay. The first one will ask Lucy on the AGM minutes to address that one. And on sulfur dioxide, in Secunda, we will request Bernard to weigh on it. And then the last 1 on the activities in the U.S., we'll ask [indiscernible] you to answer that.

The question asked by [indiscernible] relating to the minutes of the AGM. The minute deals specifically with the business of the AGM in accordance with the notice of the AGM. We did make the transcript available through link market services, our transfer secretaries. There were a number of requests for the transcript during the year, and we did make it available. This year, there will be no transcript because the recording will be made available on the website, on the company website. Thank you.

Bernard. [indiscernible] Bernard, please.

With respect to the south and oxide in Secunda, for many years, has been very clear and transparent about the fact that the previous minimum we should standard of 500-milligrams per normal cubic meter was simply not attainable in terms of the technology solutions that we were considering at the time, and in fact, to continue with those projects would have been nonsensical. So when the engagement over the last few years with the authorities by industry, not a recess, as it resulted in a restatement of that minimum emission limit to 1,000 normal cubic meters, per 1,000 milligrams per normal cubic. This enables now to launch a project and to develop the technology that will meet this standard. And we're busy developing that. We hope to buy in May next year, have a clear understanding of the capital, the technology solution itself and also the timeline and we intend to be able to comply then before 2030, but the timeline themselves will be defined during the next 6 months. Fleetwood?

Okay. Thank you in relation to the question raised by Grant concerning the class action matter raised by chaired Lindsey Mochel, then whether we're forecasting settlements in relation to that matter. You'll recall that if you have been following the matter that we had brought up a motion to dismiss the action put against us, which was partially successful. Pursuant to that, we received half of the confidential witnesses that have been relied on by the plaintiff, indicating that the issues that were placed in relation to them. were without merit. And as a result of that, we've applied for a motion to reconsider the matter and because of that reconsideration, the judge has staged the processes in relation to the actions against us, with a particular focus on the court investigating the circumstances that had given rise to the issues now regarded to have misinformation in relation to the confidential witness information. So we take this matter as it goes we are comfortable around the assets that we've been taking on it. And we're not at a stage to be forecasting any settlements in relation to it. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Also, maybe if I may ask how many questions do we still have? I'm conscious of time and those that will start leaving the meeting.

I would estimate, we probably have around 20 questions. And some of them are very lengthy as well.

Yes. I don't know. Can I just suggest that in the interest of having everyone here so that they vote that we commit to answering these questions individually and interacting with various people who ask the questions, that will assist us in managing time that will assist us in managing the vote before people disappear. With your indulgence, I really would love to request you to accept that. Will that be fine? Sorry?

Provided.

Okay. As Vuyo said, the written responses will be provided. So thank you very much for questions. If I may now move to the vote, which is one of the businesses of today. I did mention that as allowed for in Sasol's memorandum and corporation, I hereby declare that all resolutions will be voted on by way of a poll. So we will then start with the annual financial statements audit committee report and safety and then social and ethics committee reports. So if we start with the financial, the audited annual finance segments. The audited annual financial statements of the company and of the Sasol group for the financial year ended June 30, 2020, together with the reports of the directors, the Audit committee and the external auditors were published on the 24th of August 2020 and are available on Sasol's website. So if you have any questions relating to the financial statements and the audit thereof, you may now ask these questions. I don't think you see -- there are no questions letter there.

Not specifically to the audited financial statements.

Okay. So the Chairman of the Audit Committee, Mr. Colin Bags, the CFO, Mr. Paul Victor; and the orders of the company pricewaterscoopers as represented by Johan Bogie are also available to respond to these questions. As I said, some of them we will communicate and give them the responses as we go along. Then the report by the Safety social ethics committee setting how the committee discharged its duties in terms of the company's act and the regulations is included in the integrated report. The Chairman of the Committee, Ms. Muriel Dube, is also available to respond to your questions. If you have any questions relating to the report, you may ask the question now. Thank you very much. Then that takes us to the ordinary resolutions. Ladies and gentlemen, we will now proceed to vote on the resolutions as set out in the notice. Sufficient information has been provided in the secular and notice. I will, therefore, not repeat the resolutions. The ordinary resolutions in front of you today must be supported by more than 50% of the voting rights exercised on the resolution in order to be adopted. Please use the voting functionality on the online GM platform to cast your votes. You'll be able to vote for or against the resolutions or abstain from voting. If you lose connectivity, you will be able to vote any time during the general meeting. You can also up to the time the votes are closed, change your votes. You must vote on all resolutions in order to be able to submit your vote. Now ordinary resolution number five -- number one, resolution number one, which pertains to the reelection of directors. We start with the reelection of directors we will vote on each director separately. The following directors who are eligible and have offered themselves for reelection in terms of the company's memorandum of incorporation, retire by rotation. The Board supports their reelection, and they are: Mr. Colin Beggs; Mr. Nomgando Matyumza; Mr. Moses Mkhize; Ms. [indiscernible], Mr. Stephen Westwell. Are there any questions on the election of the directors retiring by rotation?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, they are. The first question from [indiscernible] on ordinary Resolution 1 and 4. What is Sasol's policy on board tenure? How do you measure a nonexecutive directors independent? If they have been on the Board for more than, for example, 9 years, has Sasol published the nonexecutive directors independent assessments reports in its reports? If no, why? And just give me an opportunity to find the others in relation to this resolution?

In relation to the reelection of directors, C. Beggs, N.M. Matyumza, Z.M. Mkhize, M.B. Kennealy and S. Westwell. These directors were on the Board at the time of gross poor corporate governance and corporate culture challenges of last year. During their tenure, the Board has made strategic mistakes as evidenced by last year's volatile period. Why does the Nomination committee still express confidence in these directors? And not appointed a fresh crop of directors that can ensure that the company crawls out of its current challenges. These current challenges require new [indiscernible] from Board to executives.

Thank you very much. Were those be the only ones referring to or do you have another one?

So those are the only ones we can pick up in relation to the reelection today.

Thank you very much. Vuyo, do you want to deal with that?

Thanks a lot, Chair. So first -- firstly, just to indicate, yes, the company has a policy in relation to board tenure, and it provides for 9 years in relation to every director, but may allow an extension for a year, each time, up to a maximum of 3 years, enabling a director to reach 12 years. That is assessed on an ongoing basis and the director is subject to any election every year by -- within to an assessment in the election every year after the 9 years. When the Director has reached the 9 years at each of those years thereafter, there's an assessment around independence. And that assessment includes looking into the commitments of the director consents since the way appointed. And also, an assessment around whether or not they have sufficient time to discharge their duties and they are free of any conflicts that cannot be [indiscernible]. And the Board then makes an assessment around the satisfaction in relation to that. If you go into our integrated report, I think on Page 65, you will find the assessment that has been made in respect of the directors who has reached the 9 year.

Thank you very much.

I take this following one?

Yes.

We take the point that's been raised around, the question that's been raised around why the directors are submitted for reelection in light of the issues that have impacted on the company. Essentially, many of those -- the critical fact in all of these issues has been LCCP. As you recall, the LCCP was subject to a review by independent players led by legal advisers and independent legal firm. It established no wrong doing in relation to the Board. It, of course, had identified a number of material weaknesses, some of which resulted in the Board not being favored with the information that it should have got in access to in order for it to be able to address the issues that have been -- that it had to look into. The Board, of course, took measures to look into ensuring that all of the material issues that have been attended -- have been raised -- have been attended to. And 5 of that 6 material weaknesses have been fully resolved. And 1 is in the process of being finalized in related to remediation. So in light of that, as well as the assessment of each of the directors, it was considered that they remain feet and proper competent and qualified to be submitted for reelection. Thank you.

Thanks, Vuyo. If there are no more questions, I will proceed with the vote. You will now vote on the reelection of Mr. Colin Bags. Please record your vote now. Thank you. [Voting]

You will now vote on the election of Mr. Nomgando Matyumza. Please record your vote now. [Voting]

Thank you. You will now vote on the reelection of the Mr. Moses Mkhize. Please record your vote now. [Voting]

Thank you. You will now vote on the reelection of Ms. Mpho Nkeli. Please record your vote. Thank you. [Voting]

You will now vote on the election of Mr. Stephen Westwell. Please record your vote. [Voting]

Thank you. And that concludes a resolution the first resolution. So we're moving now to the second resolution, ordinary resolution number 2, which is the election of a Director appointed by the Board of the previous Annual General Meeting. The Board appointed Ms. Katherine Harper after the previous Annual General Meeting. In terms of the company's memorandum of incorporation, a director appointed into a vacancy retires at the AGM and is eligible for election. The Board supports Ms. Harper's election. Are there any questions on the appointment of Ms. Harper? There being no question, we shall proceed with the vote. You will now vote on the election of Ms. Harper. Please record your vote now. [Voting]

Thank you. We now move to resolution number 3, which is about the appointment of Pricewaterhousecoopers incorporated as independent auditor. The Audit committee has nominated Pricewaterhousecoopers incorporate for appointment as the independent auditor of the company and the group for the financial year ending June 30, 2021, to hold office until the end of the next annual General meeting. The Audit committee is satisfied that the appointment of PWC complies with the requirements of the applicable regulatory requirements. Are there any questions on the appointment of PWC.

No questions, Jo?

No questions. Okay. There being no questions, we will proceed with the vote. You will now vote on the appointment of pricewaterhousecoopers. Please record your vote. [Voting]

Thank you. We now proceed to vote on resolution number four, which is about the election of Audit committee members. The Board has reviewed the proposed composition of the Audit committee against the applicable regulatory requirements and confirms that the composition of the Audit committee complies with the requirements. The Board recommends the election of these directors as members of the Audit committee, and they are: Mr. Colin Beggs; Ms. Katherine Harper; Ms. Beatrix Kennealy; Mr. Nomgando Matyumza; and Mr. Stephen Westwell. Are there any questions on the election of the Audit committee members, other than the ones that have been raised already?

The question has been asked. And yes, it was answers. That's correct.

All right. Okay. Now you will now vote on the election of Mr. Colin Beggs. Please record your votes. [Voting]

Thank you. You will now vote on the election of MS Katherine Harper, please record your vote. [Voting]

Thank you. You will now vote on the election of Ms. Beatrix Kennealy. Please record your vote. [Voting]

Thank you. You will now vote on the election of Ms. Nomgando Matyumza. Please record your vote. [Voting]

Thank you. You will now vote on the election of Mr. Stephen Westwell, please record your vote. [Voting]

Thank you. Now with -- we now move on to the nonbinding advisory votes. An endorsement of remuneration policy and implementation of the report on the remuneration policy. The purpose of the 2 advisory votes is to endorse the company's remuneration policy and the implementation report of the company's remuneration policy. In terms of King for and the JSE listings requirements, and an advisory vote should be obtained from shareholders on this policy and the implementation thereof. These votes allow shareholders to express their views on the policy and the implementation thereof, but are not binding on the company. You may recall that we did not meet the requisite 75% level of support for the remuneration implementation report at last year's AGM. Which led to consultation with shareholders who voted against the resolution to better understand their reasons, allowing the Remunerations committee to consider these concerns. The actions taken by us in response to these engagements are set out in our 2020 remuneration report. Are there any questions on this advisory vote?

Thank you, Chair. I'll read out a few questions in relation to remuneration. The first one is from Gram Bruce Stratton. Please explain why you have chosen not to allow the shareholders the opportunity to vote on directors fees as single resolutions for each type of directors remuneration? And is it very likely that holders may support some of the fees, but not others? Holders have taken serious pain the deterioration of the share price passing of the dividend and the prospect of dilution of our right as a result of a possible range issue. Why are the directors so well remunerated as they are not suffering the same pain and still the same shareholder Surely, all these non-independent directors should share a pay freeze that will only be relooked at after the dividend payments resume? And then fourth, what guarantee do we have the governance flats will not occur again in the future?

Thank you. You have to cover them all.

I think that covers everything related to remuneration at this time, Chair.

Thank you very much. May I just, before Mpho answer questions, probably say that, at the end of the voting process, if there are still questions around that, I've been advised that we will try and answer all of them that are there. So fear not, we are here to serve. Mpho?

Thank you very much for your question, Graham. It is standard practice indeed to put forward directors remuneration as a single figure, as you see it in the annual report. And that's why you see it in that format. But in the fuller report, you can actually see how the figures made up in terms of committee fees as well as board fees. And your second question in terms of why aren't NEDs taking and suffering the same pain as shareholders. I think I've covered this question a number of times earlier. The 20% sacrifice last year, the 20% sacrifice for the next year, that's been committed, and the salary increase that has been frozen indeed for the next year. And the fact that, I mean, we do have international NEDs from the U.S. as well as Europe, and those fees are still below benchmark if you compare with what is being offered in those different countries. So quite a challenge to attract as well as retain international, highly qualified NEDs. And then this pay freeze, I've just responded to that. A no guarantee do we have that governance lapses were not okay in the future. I think the Board is fully committed to ensuring governance is adhered to in all its dealings and continues to do so, and have been rated fairly high in terms of our overall compliance to governance. Thank you.

Thank you. I think there's still another one.

More questions relates to remuneration. I'll deal with the first one from [indiscernible]. One of the ESG performance measures incorporated in the STI plan is a 1% improvement in energy efficiency. Sasol Scope 1 and 2 emissions over the past 4 years has remained constant. Evidence in the sustainability report has shown no decrease. What methodology is used to calculate energy efficiency? And what are the actual figures used to determine this metric. And then the second question, also from [indiscernible]. We understand that disclosure of current incentive targets, actual figures might be commercially sensitive information. However, we request that you disclose that 5-year historical targets in your integrated and financial report to assess whether the target figures for all thresholds that have been set over the past years are indeed in line with fair remuneration practices.