Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. May we all be seated. Thank you. I am pleased to welcome you to the 43rd annual general meeting of Sasol Limited. My name is Sipho Nkosi, Chair of Sasol's Board of Directors. I am chairing the meeting today from our headquarters here in Johannesburg. Before we commence with the day's proceedings, we will watch a short safety video. This video deals with the procedure to be followed in the unlikely event of an emergency during our meeting. Welcome to Sasol Place, the global headquarters of South Africa's leading integrated chemical and energy company. At Sasol, we are committed to zero harm and ensuring the health and safety of our employees, service providers, contractors, and visitors. Please pay close attention to this short safety video, as it will highlight specific information on key and safety procedures applicable to our event facilities. You will be required to comply with the following in case of an emergency. If possible, gather your personal belongings if it is safe to do so. Remain calm, do not rush or panic, and only respond to instructions issued through the building's public address system. Sasol emergency marshals will assist in evacuating you to the nearest emergency assembly point. Do not use the elevator in case of an emergency. To ensure your safety and to avoid injury, please follow our three-point contact principle at all times when ascending or descending in escalators or stairs. First contact, keep one foot grounded. Second contact, keep one hand on the handrail, and finally, third contact, keep your eyes on the direction of travel. In other words, keep your eyes on the path. At the assembly point, the area emergency controller will record attendance. Return to the event only once the all clear has been given by the area emergency controller. Please take note, bathrooms are indicated by these symbols. In order to avoid disruption during the event, please switch your mobile device to silent. Thank you for taking the time to watch the safety induction video. Enjoy the event at Sasol Place and remember to stay alert and stay safe. Thank you very much. I am very pleased to say that all our directors are here for this occasion, for this AGM. They come from all parts of the world. Others are from the Middle East, others are from Europe, others are from this continent, and others are from South Africa. Ladies and gentlemen, please allow me a moment to introduce my fellow directors who are all here. I would wish for them just to either wave so that we know them or to stand up if they feel energized to do that. I have on my left, Mr. Fleetwood Grobler, who is President and Chief Executive Officer of Sasol. Thanks, Fleetwood. We have Hanré Rossouw, too. Oh, there is the guy. I would like to extend a warm word of welcome. Hanré took over as Chief Financial Officer from Paul Victor on 1 July this year. He hit the ground running and was responsible for the annual financial statements that are being presented to you today. Thanks, Hanré. Of course, we've got my boss on the right, Michelle de Jager, who is the Group Company Secretary. All right. Then, thank you, Michelle. We've got Mr. Vuyo Kahla, our Executive Director. On the far left, we have Ms. Muriel Dube, who chairs the Safety, Social, and Ethics Committee. Of course, we've got the Chair of the Audit Committee, Trix, next to her, who's sitting next to Muriel, Trix Kennealy. Did you wave, Trix? Oh, okay. I'm just checking. We do have Mpho Nkeli, who is chairing our REM committee. She is on my far right. Thank you very much, fellow directors, but this doesn't complete the directorship that we have at Sasol. If you look at the front row, they are sitting there, some of the directors. Because they are sitting in front, I will request them just to stand up and face the audience so that they are seen. Manuel Cuambe. Thank you, sir. Then we've got Cathy Kapa, Ngcamzu Mzimba, and Stanley Subramoney. Oh, there he's hiding. Thank you, guys. Of course, last but not least, our Lead Independent Director, Mr. Stephen Westwell. Thank you, directors. It doesn't end there. I'm pleased to announce, as probably you saw on SENS, that we have appointed a new director, Mr. Andreas Schierenbeck, as a director of Sasol with effect from 1 January 2023. Andreas is the founder and a director of HH2E, a green hydrogen company dedicated to producing green hydrogen to the German market. He was the CEO of international energy company Uniper between 2019 and 2021, where he shaped and started the execution of the company's decarbonization strategy. We move now to safety moment. As it is customary at all meetings at Sasol, we'll start with a safety moment. I therefore would like to ask our CEO, Mr. Fleetwood Grobler, to present the safety moment. Over to you, sir. Thank you, Sipho. Good day, ladies and gentlemen. Safety is our number 1 priority, and together with operational discipline, forms the foundation that underpins Sasol's zero harm aspiration. Being 1 of our core values, safety is fundamental to our culture. It finds expression in our people promise, which commits us to continually provide a safe and caring workplace centered on employee wellbeing. To reinforce and embed the safety culture, Sasol engages repeatedly with a safety moment, as we are doing for this AGM. For today's safety moment, I will reflect on a few salient features of our recent safety performance and actions to progress our journey to zero harm. It is heartwarming to report that we have had no fatalities since October 2021. We are very encouraged by this and are working diligently to maintain this trend. We have seen a declining trend in our high-severity injury rate, which is an indicator that the severity of the injuries we have experienced are decreasing. However, the number of recordable cases in the first quarter of financial year 2023 was higher than we had forecasted. Ensuring a safe working environment is an endeavor that never ceases and is one which all Sasol people are steadfastly committed to. In the same reporting period, we also successfully executed a total shutdown of our Secunda East operations. This mammoth undertaking required more than 10 million man-hours to deliver and was completed with no major safety incidents. Furthermore, when compared to the 2019 total shutdown, the number of incidents reduced by around 38%. Thank you to all the Sasol teams and service providers who participated in the 2022 shutdown and for doing so safely. A dedicated leader champion safety culture also remains a key focus for us, with leaders actively involved in risk management processes and instilling a work environment where high levels of discipline, care, and empathy prevails. To continue on the safety moment, we are progressing sustainable improvements in safety through a range of group-wide initiatives, complemented by customized business-led programs that focus on key risks in specific areas. At the Group SHE meeting, which I chair, we review both the successes and challenges in our various business areas. This ensures that we continuously learn from each other to embed and institutionalize learnings while leveraging the opportunity to collectively brainstorm on critical safety matters. To further increase the operational discipline in the past year, we have also updated our SHE policy to reinforce the importance of caring in line with Sasol's values. We also focused on humanizing safety campaign underpinned by our be safe and be caring values. Safety is our top priority, and the board, together with Sasol's leadership team and our full workforce, are firmly committed to zero harm. Thank you Thank you very much, Fleetwood, for sharing that safety moment with us. We continued our engagement during the course of the year with our stakeholders, including on climate change and remuneration. In July, the chairman of the Remuneration Committee met with top shareholders about proposed changes to our long-term incentive plan. In November, the chairman of our Safety, Social, and Ethics Committee and members of management met with a number of stakeholders to get feedback on our climate change approach. During these engagements, they provided input into our progress with our climate change journey and indicated support for Sasol's climate change management approach for purposes of this year's advisory vote. We also hosted a climate change roundtable on 3 November 2022 with 120 participants, where we engaged with stakeholders on our greenhouse gas roadmap, on our renewable energy program, low-carbon initiatives, and the funding of our decarbonization journey. Ladies and gentlemen, I assure you that we take the contributions of all stakeholders seriously. They leave us to be better shape of future direction. Now I will once again invite our Chief Executive, Fleetwood, to address us on the goings on within the organization. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am delighted now to have the opportunity to provide the business and strategic overview for our financial year 2022, as well as a brief summary of our business performance for the first few months of financial year 2023. I will then hand over to Hanré Rossouw, our Chief Financial Officer, to provide a brief recap of our financial progress and focus areas for the year ahead. Looking back at our journey from 2020, we were faced at different times with significant challenges, which included the outbreak of the global pandemic, the collapse on the oil price, and major supply chain disruptions. Notwithstanding these challenges, we remained focused on the factors we could control in order to keep our team safe, stabilize the business, and execute on a response plan to improve profitability and liquidity. During this period, we also significantly stepped up Sasol's climate mitigation strategies, which are essential to future-proofing the business. At the same time, we must also acknowledge that in recent months, the company has faced a sequence of operating challenges that have compromised performance. I will talk about these in more detail a bit later, but it is enough to say that they are present grounds for humility. We are working hard. We have achieved successes, but we have also fallen short in some areas where we need to do better over the coming months. Turning to our business overview for the financial year 2022, we continued with the same momentum and delivered a strong financial performance, benefiting from favorable macro environment and robust cost and capital discipline. We significantly increased our profitability, achieving ZAR 72 billion in the adjusted EBITDA, which represents a 48% increase compared to the prior year. Our accelerated asset is now complete, delivering over ZAR 50 billion of proceeds and focusing the business now on our key areas of strength. This has significantly contributed to the deleveraging of our balance sheet and reducing net debt. As a result, we announced the reinstatement of dividends, demonstrating our continued commitment to shareholder returns. We continue to execute our Sasol 2.0 transformation program, which is aimed at ensuring our business remains profitable and competitive into the future, even at much lower oil prices than we currently face. I am pleased to report that we have achieved and even exceeded some of our targets for the financial year 2022. We continue to progress our plans to meet our 2030 climate change target. I will talk also more about this a bit later. Lastly, our South African value chain experienced feedstock and operational challenges in the first half of the financial year, particularly in our mining operations, where adverse weather impacts and safety stoppages resulted in lower production. Through focused interventions, we improved operational stability in the second half of the financial year and continued with the ramp-up of our operations in the U.S., benefiting from the stronger chemical prices. We continue to create shared value across a wide range of stakeholders through the employment of social and human capital. Our stakeholders includes employees, customers, shareholders, governments where we operate, communities, and NGOs among others. Some of the highlights are shown on this slide. As part of our commitment to be a force for social good, we continue to invest in impactful socioeconomic projects benefiting communities in and around our operating regions. Delivery of key energy and chemicals products to our customers, creating value for our shareholders, and partnering with governments and regulatory authorities are important for our livelihood. Our total measured procurement spend was ZAR 55.8 billion, of which ZAR 33.6 billion was spent on a majority black-owned businesses in South Africa. This is up 40% from last year, demonstrating our ongoing commitment to sustainable transformation and broad-based black economic empowerment. Turning now to our business performance for the first few months of this financial year. Our business continued to benefit from a largely favorable macroeconomic environment with the Russian problem in Ukraine still supporting a stronger price environment. We have, however, started to see the impacts of weaker economic growth globally on demand, which is leading to a downturn in chemicals pricing together with inflationary pressures and ongoing disruption of supply chains which are impacting feedstocks costs in Europe and in the U.S. The weakening of the macro environment was aggravated by a variety of challenge in our South African operations. This included sporadic Eskom power outages and the strike action by Transnet's unions in October, which disrupted the South African rail and port services and our ability to supply and export certain chemical products. Yesterday, we issued an updated outlook for our 2023 key financial metrics and operational guidance. There were a few key events in recent weeks that have led to this revision and is not something we are taking lightly at a management level. I will provide more color on each segment, starting now with our energy business. In mining, production was impacted by operational challenge at two of our collieries as well as proactively safety stoppages and ongoing coal quality issues. As I mentioned earlier, we continue to embed our safety remediation plans as a priority. Coal purchases continue to supplement our own production as part of the business stabilization plan, which is aimed at maintaining a healthy coal stockpile level for our operations. In our gas segment, the drilling campaign in Mozambique is continuing with better than expected yields and together with a good safety performance. Turning to segments, we have seen a notable improvement in demand from our direct marketing channels supported by our customer loyalty initiatives. In our chemicals business, our Chemicals Africa segment faced several challenges, with sales volumes being impacted by Sasolburg plant outages as well as the recent Transnet strike action, which forced us to cut back some of our utilization rates to manage inventories also in line with market demand. In our U.S. operations, we decreased production rates at both ethylene crackers and polymers units to manage inventory and in response to the poor market conditions. In October, a fire occurred at our Ziegler alcohol unit at Lake Charles Chemicals Complex, and we have been able to restart alcohol production at 50% utilization during November while isolating the damaged section for repairs. The timeline to resuming full production rates is dependent on completion of the repair work, which is expected by the end of quarter three in this financial year. Our Chemicals Eurasia segment continues to be impacted by the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, the resultant higher energy prices, and the general weakening in economic outlook. We continue to implement initiatives to mitigate these impacts. The significant operating challenges together with the uncertain macro environment leaves less room for maneuver and even greater focus on those activities within our control. This includes ensure safe and reliable operations, enhanced customer focus, and ensuring our production is aligned with market demand. In mining, our first priority remains the embedding of our safety remediation program. This is consistent with previous messaging that we need to ensure that these initiatives are properly embedded before we shift our focus to reaching full potential productivity rates in our mine sites. We are focusing all our efforts for the remainder of this year and beyond to restore optimal coal quality to maximize profitability in our South African value chain. We continue to engage with Transnet to ensure reliable rail infrastructure and services to improve product movement and ensure continuous supply to our customers. In the U.S., as stated previously, we are progressing with the restoration of the Lake Charles Ziegler unit, and in our European operations, we are switching to cheaper fuel alternatives where possible to mitigate the high energy prices. In Italy, we are receiving grants by the government in the form of tax credit. In Germany, the government is planning to cap natural gas prices for the industry with effect from 1 January 2023. Depending on the details of this program, which are not fully known yet, Sasol Germany may also apply. In summary, I'm confident that the stabilization measures we have put in place will have a positive impact. COP 27 recently concluded, where climate action and the need for implementation were at the forefront of all discussions. Being the first COP to be held on the African continent, the concept of the Just Transition was mainstreamed while still maintaining a driving towards the highest level of ambition, even amidst the global energy crisis. The Just Transition is important as we transition, but it is not an excuse for inaction. Turning now to Sasol's decarbonization journey to reduce 30% of our greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 and achieve our ambition of net zero by 2050. Over the past year, Sasol has been engaging organizations that assess Paris alignment, such as the Science Based Targets initiative, to develop a methodology or assist with independent assurance of Paris alignment. However, to date, this has yet to be developed by these independent bodies. In fact, the SBTi recently revoked oil and gas assessments previously undertaken and has paused other assessments in this sector. While Sasol is neither predominantly an oil and gas nor chemicals company, and in the absence of being able to independently assess, we utilized widely accepted methodologies to provide some level of assurance, while we work towards an independent assessment. Our 2050 ambition is a 1.5-degree aligned, while our 2030 target is well below 2-degree aligned, which is in accordance with the Paris Agreement. Here, we applied the International Energy Agency's absolute contraction approach and complemented this with other well-established methodologies. We must bear in mind that being a 1.5-degree aligned is not an absolute target for every country and company, but rather an aggregate goal where each of us must play our part based on available resources, socioeconomic issues, availability of technology, and costs. Some can do more, some can do less, but it is the critical fact that we all act with a common goal to reach net zero. We are making good progress with our 2030 reduction target, which includes a mix of reducing coal volumes, integration of large-scale renewables, energy and process efficiencies, and increased natural gas feedstock intake. We note some key reservations publicized by stakeholders. However, it is important to understand that Sasol, like all others undergoing a transformation, is learning by doing. We have set ourselves goals that are non-negotiable. We are also communicating transparently and openly with stakeholders as we progress our journey. Sasol has clearly articulated a roadmap to 2030 we have published and to reducing by approximately 20 million tons of greenhouse gas through using proven technologies. We are confident that we will achieve our targets with our returns optimized through careful planning alongside cost and capital discipline. We are in parallel refining our views on the path to net zero activity. We intentionally constructed more than one viable pathway to deal with an uncertain future, because technology choices will inevitably change in the future. This offers different options to transform our value chains, progressively shifting our feedstock away from coal towards more transition gas and then green hydrogen and sustainable carbon over the longer term. As economics improve, we will integrate these feedstocks in our facilities sooner to reduce emissions. In no way should this approach be misconstructed or misconstrued as Sasol changing its goalposts. For us, achieving our 2030 target and the net zero ambition by 2050 is an absolute imperative. We are fully cognizant of the implications of not achieving these targets. In line with this, we are bolstering our research and technology capabilities to support and assess the development of emerging and new technologies. These technologies will not only contribute to Sasol's net zero plans, but also play a critical role in the broader societal move to net zero through the application of our technologies, including Fischer-Tropsch and sustainable aviation fuel. To affirm our serious commitment to the future Sasol strategy, I am delighted to announce the constitution of the first of its kind independent Sasol Climate Change Advisory Panel to the group executive committee. The aim of this advisory panel is to guide the group executive on Sasol's climate change response, testing the robustness thereof, and providing independent knowledge. Potential gaps in our climate management approach are envisaged to be identified earlier in this process. This panel, due to begin its work early next year, will be made up of 4 recognized thought leaders in the fields of mitigation, technology, transformation, scenario planning, adaption, and the Just Transition. I have the pleasure in welcoming Ms. Geralda Welch-Chute, Mr. Gunnar Groebler, Dr. Harald Tawu, and Mr. Jason Schenker onto the panel. We look forward to robust and fruitful debates on our transition. In South Africa, we have agreed the key terms with independent power producers to secure over 600 megawatts of solar and wind power to start coming online before 2025. We have signed 1 agreement this week as part of the 1st tranche, and target to sign the remainder of these agreements in the next 2 weeks. Our ultimate aim of 1,200 megawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2030 represents one of the largest renewable energy procurement programs from the private sector in South Africa and will be a strong contributor towards South Africa's renewable energy ambition. In Europe, we have entered into several power purchase agreements for our German and Italian operations. We have made significant progress in our gas supply strategy. The PSA project in Mozambique is progressing well, and we are partnering to pursue adjacent exploration acreage to access more gas. We have extended the gas supply plateau by 2 years, which is a huge step forward and ensures that we have flexibility in our gas supply profile and LNG optionality as we progress our 30% reduction pathway. Together with our partner, TotalEnergies, we have also developed and are implementing a low-cost, innovative solution at Natref that will produce diesel which meets the newly regulated Clean Fuels 2 specifications towards the end of 2023. A pre-feasibility study has been completed on a green hybrid refinery concept, which includes the introduction of bio-based feedstock. This is a very promising prospect towards energy security for South Africa. Sasol Chemicals has achieved ISCC+ sustainable certification at 3 of our largest European sites, namely Marl, Brunsbüttel, and Augusta, for best use of bio-based and circular feedstocks. Sasol is progressing steadily to roll out our mitigation levers and reduce emissions. We are implementing our 2030 roadmap systematically because our plants are complex, and shutdowns need to take place safely for modifications to be implemented. Therefore, we are not able to commit to annual reductions, but in no way does this mean we are changing the goalposts. We are simply indicating that projects will be executed over a few years, but still within our target period. Capital projects in the industry typically take 3-5 years to implement once the concept is properly scoped. It is also important to stress that all of our decarbonization efforts are informed by our Just Transition approach. We will not, and we cannot move towards the greener Sasol at the expense of colleagues in the higher polluting parts of the business. Our activities, including leveraging existing initiatives and a collaborative approach with partners in tandem with our decarbonization roadmap. In closing, let me make some final remarks. I recognize there is impatience that we are not moving faster. Critics go so far as to accuse us of greenwashing as if we are not serious about decarbonization. Let me be clear as I can be. Sasol has no doubt that it needs to decarbonize and transform its business model. We see tremendous opportunities for Sasol in this transition, but there are two caveats that need to be understood. First, together with a Just Transition approach, we must also transition in a responsible manner. The board is keenly aware of its responsibilities and has taken important steps authorizing investments to achieve this. The board also recognizes that we must do so in a manner which allows us to self-finance the transition. Yes, we must build future profit pools, but we need the current profit pools to finance this transition. Second, we cannot go faster than the environment around us allows. The projects we are implementing require adequate engineering design Plan and execution time. Additionally, there are some factors which are not in our control, such as regulatory approvals and global geopolitical or macroeconomic impacts. In making these points, I do not want you to underestimate the progress we've made. It is significant, and there is much more to come over the coming years, making Sasol an accelerant in some areas, particularly in South Africa. With that, I will now hand over to Andre to take us through the financial framework. Thank you, Fleetwood, and good morning, ladies and gentlemen. I promised my colleagues I'll be short and sweet with the financial overview, but I think it's important that we start with a discussion of our financial framework that includes the capital allocation priorities. As a reminder, our capital allocation framework, which we shared first to the market in 2021, underpins our capital allocation decision-making and is aimed at balancing the delivery of our long-term strategy, climate change ambitions, and growing our shareholder returns. Our first allocation principle ensure that we prioritize our maintain and transform capital to continue operations well into the future, whilst a strong balance sheet will support us to continue to pay a sustainable dividend. On a second-order allocation level, growth opportunities will have to compete then with additional shareholder returns in a disciplined fashion so that we can maximize risk-weighted returns of our portfolio. We continue to manage our balance sheet to ensure that we have sufficient flexibility and liquidity to continue with this journey. Looking ahead, there are several key areas which remain a challenge and on which we must maintain a relentless focus. We expect to see continued price and demand volatility resulting from the ongoing geopolitical events and potential macroeconomic fallout from high inflation and recessionary pressures. This requires us to remain agile and responsive with a strong focus on cost and capital discipline through our Sasol 2.0 transformation program. Ensuring stability is a key priority, and as Fleetwood mentioned, we are working to address the current operational challenges and continue their operational excellence across our business. We continue to engage with all stakeholders in response to regulatory challenges, which could significantly impact our business. In conclusion, as we continue to navigate the uncertain macroeconomic landscape and ensure safety and stability across our business regions, we remain absolutely committed to deliver our people, planet, and profit objectives. Thank you for listening, and I will now hand back to the chair. Thanks, Fleetwood, and thanks, Andre, for those summaries. Ladies and gentlemen, we now turn to the business of the day, which is our AGM today. I am comfortable that the notice of meeting has been delivered to shareholders in accordance with the requirements of the Companies Act, that the attendance register has been duly completed, that a quorum of shareholders is present, and that the proxies received are in order. This meeting has therefore been properly constituted. The register of shareholders of the company is open for inspection, either electronically or physically at the offices of the transfer secretary, JSE Investor Services. The minutes of the previous AGM were approved by the directors and signed by me as a correct record of the proceedings. A copy of these minutes can be obtained from the group company secretary's office. We're going to invite Mr. Andre Vlada from Lumi, who will explain to us how to ask verbal questions and pose written questions as well as vote on all the resolutions. Andre, thank you very much, sir. Thank you, Chair. Good morning to the board, to those of you in the front, and to all the shareholders and guests that are in the room with us, as well as to the shareholders and guests that are online. As the notice states, this is a hybrid meeting. Please note that there are people that are online. I think we are currently at 150 people online. We are going to try and bridge the gap between online and in-room. Please be patient with us while we do that, especially during the Q&A. To start off with regards to the voting, I'll start with those of you that are in the room. For those of you in the room that are present and entitled to vote and have chosen to vote at this AGM, you would have received a handset as well as a smart card. Please make sure that your smart card is inserted correctly. That's with the gold chip facing you, inserted into the top of the handset, and you should see your name or the company you're representing in the top blue bar. The voting is already open and will remain open for the duration of the meeting up until the Chair closes the voting on all the resolutions. On your keypad, you'll see a list of the resolutions on your screen. For those of you that are familiar with BlackBerrys, this should be quite easy. In the middle is the blue trackball. You can use that blue trackball to scroll up and down the list. Obviously, it would be preferred that you start at advisory resolution number 1 and work your way down to special resolution number 8. Once you find the resolution that you wish to vote on, press the green button to view the resolution. You'll see the resolution text. You'll press the green button again to vote. You'll be given the options for, against, or abstain. Use the blue trackball to scroll through those options, and when the one that you want is highlighted, you press the green button again. It'll show you that your vote is submitted, and you can hit the green button again to go to the next resolution. You'll repeat that process for each of the resolutions in turn. When you're done, at the end, you'll have a long list of all the resolutions and how you voted on each of them. You do have the ability to change your mind. You can scroll back to any of the resolutions, click on it, and resubmit your vote. Our system will take the last vote that was submitted. For those of you online, you will have a voting tab at the top of your screen. If you click on that, you will be presented with an online ballot form or what looks like an online ballot form. You do have the option to vote all resolutions in one direction. That'll be found right at the top. You can make different choices for each of the resolutions individually. For those online, there is no submit button, so as soon as you press the option that you wish to make on a resolution, it will highlight, and your vote will then be submitted. For you to be able to change your vote, just click on the option that you wish to change it to, and the highlight will change to that option. Like the in-room participants, when we close the voting, we will take the last option that was selected. With regards to Q&A, as I said, please be patient with us on this. We do have various forms of and ways for people to be able to ask questions. Starting in-room, yours is quite simple. You'll use the same keypad to join a microphone queue, and you'll use the keypad as a microphone when it's your turn to speak. To join the microphone queue, you'll see on the left-hand side of your keypad screen is the little microphone button. You'll press on that. It'll then ask you, "Do you wish to join the queue?" You'll press the green button to join the queue. It'll then tell you, "You are in the queue." If you wish to leave the queue, so if somebody happens to ask your question before you get a chance to, and you feel, "Okay, I don't need to anymore," and you wanna leave the queue, just press the microphone key again and press the green button to leave the queue. For those of you online, you have two options in which to ask questions. First one is messaging, and what we've done this year is we have given you the option to select topics. Please select the topic that you feel is most appropriate to the question that you wish to ask, so that when we get to the Q&A, we can group them into topics, so that we're not all over the place with answering those questions. Your other choice is on your broadcast screen, you have a button that says "Request to speak." You can press that. It'll then ask you for your name and surname. You will then join to an operator who will then help you get into a queue, and you will then wait for someone to call you up to speak. With regards to the Q&A, please note that while we are receiving resolutions, please only pose questions relevant to the resolutions at that time. The chair will give you all an opportunity after each of the resolutions to ask questions on that specific resolution. If you feel that your question does not fall into one of those resolutions, we will have a general open Q&A session after the announcement of the voting results. If you could then hold your questions to that point. With regards to the general Q&A, if we could ask that you only join the microphone queue or the speaking queue or post your questions to the relevant topic. We will open the microphone queue when the chair announces a topic. For example, environmental, we're now dealing with environmental questions. Join the queue then if you wish to ask a question with regards to that topic. We will then shift between the topics, and if we get more questions into a topic we've already covered, we will then go back into those topics again. The topics at the moment, we have environmental, social, remuneration, resolutions, I'm missing one. I don't have them off the top of my head. Finance. Thank you. There we go. Finance. Thank you. You would know. Yes. When we get to those topics, the chair will announce we are now busy with finance, and then you can ask your questions based on that topic. We would just like to try and keep it structured as far as possible so that everybody can get a chance to ask their questions based on a certain topic. If you're online, there is a support email address that you can contact. We do have support staff online that can assist. For those of you that struggle in the room, I do have colleagues in the room, please. If you do struggle at any point, they will assist you. Okay, please note for those of you in the room that wish to ask a verbal question, you need to use the handsets. You need to join the queue and use the handset. We won't be handing handouts out to those that raise their hands. Okay. Are there any questions on the process at this time? Perfect. Please raise your hand if you have any issues, and we'll come and assist. Thank you, Chair. Thanks, Andre. Ladies and gentlemen, we continue with the business of the day. As chair of this company and the meeting, I am charged with maintaining order to facilitate the business of this meeting. We are here today to conduct the business of the AGM as prescribed by the Companies Act and set out in the notice of AGM sent to you on the 3rd of November 2022. As allowed for in Sasol's Memorandum of Incorporation, I hereby declare that all resolutions will be voted on by way of a poll. Voting, as Andre said, is now open on all resolutions, and you can vote on any resolution at any time until the voting is closed. I will indicate closer to that time when we are about to close the voting. I will give you a few minutes warning, as I said, to ensure that that is done properly. I will ask you to pose your questions on each resolution separately. After the voting has been closed, I will then allow general Q&A. We are anticipating many questions, ladies and gentlemen, I ask that as a courtesy to all shareholders, you ensure your questions are concise and are posed in English. We will do our best to ensure that everybody's questions are answered. To expedite the process, we will be taking your questions in batches of four. Four from the audience, and then the second batch, two written and two verbal from the electronic platform. Given the hybrid format of this meeting, we will be assisted by Mr. Elton Fortuin and Ms. Tiffany Sydow, who will read out your written question. They will also read out the name of the shareholder online who wishes to ask a question, that microphone will then be activated. Shareholders present in the room must use the queuing feature on the handset. Ladies and gentlemen, voting continues. The following matters have been placed before shareholders today. The full text and explanations have been provided in the notice of the AGM, I will therefore provide a brief summary only on annual financial statements. The first item of business on the agenda is to receive the annual financial statements for the financial year ended 30 June 2022. You may now ask questions on the annual financial statements. The report of the directors, the Audit Committee, and the external auditors, as well as the report of the Safety, Social, and Ethics Committee are all in front of you. If there are questions, please, you may ask those questions. There are no questions. Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen. We will now move on to non-binding advisory resolutions. We get to the remuneration policy and how it was implemented in the previous financial year. Please ask your questions and vote on non-binding advisory resolution one, which is to endorse the company's remuneration policy. Number 2, the two remuneration policy implementation report. Please vote. Are there any questions on these resolutions? Chair, there is one question for the RemCo Chair on the remuneration policy, if I may read that out. Thank you. On the remuneration policy from Zolile Kube. "Safety ESG component, we have previously challenged the use of the FERs as a target or metric. Why is the target not fatalities as the company's priority and target is zero harm? If there are any fatality executives should score zero to underline the importance of safety." Second part of that question, "Shareholders have raised concern on the weight of retention awards in LTIs, as there are no solid performance targets to these. Why has retention awards remained high at 35% of LTI despite the concerns raised?" The third part is relating to carbon. Given the ambitious targets Sasol has set in the Sasol of the Future, why has Remco gone for the soft target of energy efficiency and low or no weighting towards low carbon initiatives and the Just Transition? Thank you very much for the question. As we said, we'll do them in batches of four. Do we have other questions? Thank you very much. Could we answer those questions? Who was answering? Chair. Chair of Remco is going to answer that. Am I on? Thank you very much for the questions. Indeed, we did get a challenge or two on the target RCR, but it's a very important target for us for safety, and we do indeed plan to continue using it. It's an important matrix used for safety as well as many companies choose to use that. I do want to give comfort to you, truly, that zero harm is a very important matrix within our scorecards in general for the company as well as individuals. What you may not see is the fact that fatalities actually have the harshest scoring on the group scorecard. For each fatality, we do deduct 3% of the overall performance on the scorecard, and therefore, is a modifier which makes this the hardest or harshest KPI on the scorecard. Therefore, indeed, zero harm is important to us. We do want all our employees to go home after work. That is what we aim for. One fatality is too much for the business, and we aim not to have any fatalities at all at any given time. As for your second question about the weighting of the restricted shares at 35%, which you find too high, I do want to assure you that 35% is not too high. We did a benchmark compared to some companies within South Africa, Europe, and America, where we operate, and some companies have as high as 70% to 80% to 100%. 35% is indeed a reasonable level, and we don't have performance targets attached to these, but these have a longer vesting period of five years compared to others. I must just remind you that Sasol has the longest vesting period of five years in the country, and therefore, in the top end. Do we see ourselves reducing this 35% over time? We review this on a regular basis as Remco, but we believe that retention shares are a very important element for retention for our executives, particularly when we're going through tough trading times. We keep reviewing it, but we're currently happy to retain restrictive shares at 35%. Your last question talks to what you refer to a soft target of energy efficiency. We operate in times where energy supply is not consistent. You know the challenges that we face in South Africa because of Eskom, therefore, energy efficiency becomes key, a very key element in terms of use of energy, for any company, basically, including us as well. We do have indeed other targets, which you may not necessarily have seen maybe on the scorecard on carbon emissions. Those, I think, were increased from 10% to 30% recently, which was very, very high. I also do want to raise or bring your attention to the fact that Sasol has the highest weighting on ESG targets in South Africa at 30%, compared to our counterparts who have the weighting of between 10% and 20%, basically. Also on our LTIP, the weighting of our ESG target is 25%, which was much higher than our counterparts, both locally as well as internationally. We do track all the ESG targets to make sure that they're in line with the company's plans, which are shared with shareholders on a continuous basis. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Mpho. Do we still have another question? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will now take a question in the room from Leanne Gogan-Sammy. Thank you. Thank you, Fleetwood, for your presentation, and to the board. Fleetwood, you refer to a lot of stakeholders being impatient about some of the climate targets and ambitions that Sasol has set. I think it's so important for us to point out that this is not about impatience or personal preference here on behalf of civil society or anyone else. This is about us being in a climate emergency and Sasol having a real role to play in relation to it. I want to refer to the United Nations High-level Expert Panel on Non-State Actors, and the 10 recommendations that have come out of the high-level panel. In particular, I want to refer to two of the recommendations that are made. Firstly, they refer to this being the critical decade of action and the time being now to draw a red line around greenwashing. In relation to businesses, they refer to net zero pledges that must be made and that should refer to interim targets for 2025, 2030, and 2035, and that must be aligned with science-based targets, which Sasol hasn't necessarily done. Right? On oil and gas, it specifically says that businesses should not allow permits for exploration for new oil and gas fields, not allow expansion of oil and gas reserves, and to end oil and gas production. My questions therefore are: Will you be updating your commitments in accordance with the 10 recommendations of the UN High-level Expert Panel on Non-State Actors? Can you justify exploration for new gas given what the expert report has stated? We also know through the Presidential Climate Commission and the Presidential Climate Finance Task Team that finance mobilized through the Just Energy Transition will be channeled towards Sasol for green hydrogen. Clearly, there's financing for a lot of your targets and ambitions, and we'd like to understand how you will remain transparent and accountable in relation to finance that will be channeled to a fossil fuel company essentially, through the Just Energy Transition process. Thank you. Thank you, Lianne. Can I probably propose something here? We are specifically voting on this resolution right now, which talks to the Remco policy as well as remuneration policy implementation report. We have noted, Lianne, your question, and when we get to the general questions, we will then attend to that. If you don't mind, if you could allow us to go through the process of these resolutions and asking questions which are specific to the resolutions, and we will then attend to your question. We have noted it, and when we're done with this one, we will go through that one for issues of climate change. Thank you so much. With your indulgence, I would like to handle the meeting that way, because otherwise we're going to keep on jumping from resolution to other questions. Can we follow that flow, if you don't mind? Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have one more question in the room, and this is from Ms. Thandile Chinyavanhu. It's an environmental-related question. I'm guessing it would be related to resolution three. Okay. Sorry. Good morning. I understand that you're dealing with questions related to resolution one right now, but if you can please take note of my question, which will be maybe discussed around resolution three. Sasol has disclosed in its recent climate change report for 2022 that the Pande site in Mozambique is responsible for approximately 819 kilotons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions from their fugitive flaring and fuel emissions. Using satellite imagery, Greenpeace Africa was able to observe that methane emissions in this area have been increasing year-on-year since 2019. How do you have confidence in these emissions, firstly, and how are you able to justify further exploration when you're struggling to ascertain the exact emissions from this site? Thank you. Thanks, Thandie. As you've already pointed out, we will when we get to resolution number three, that talks to climate change and all other areas, we will then answer your question, as we continue focusing now on remuneration policy and the implementation report. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have another question in the room. This time it is from Sibongile Khumalo. Hello. Morning. Okay. Morning, everyone. I'm Sibongile Khumalo from South Africa. In the organization, we have now I do understand about the financial report. Actually, I just want to ask another question. Since I came in September, it's been six months ago, the company Yes, this month I called the community of Sekhukhune in Embalenhle asked for the emissions of the emissions here in Kanene. As the community is often kept in the dark over Sasol's Kanene. Since this has not happened yet, when Sasol established this panel. Question number two. We know that for Sasol's chemical businesses, the company states that the baseline for the Scope 3 emissions is being developed. This was also said back in the year 2021. Reporting point. When does Sasol intend to set these baselines? Thank you. I said, we will keep your question, and when we get to that point where we need to answer all the other questions, we will deal with that one. Thank you very much for your question, for now, can we focus on two resolutions? That is resolution number one, which is about company's remuneration policy, and the second one is the remuneration policy implementation report. That's my request. Mr. Chair, there's one more question on the remuneration policy. Good morning, Mr. Chair. I am Greer Blizzard from Just Share. My question is for the Remuneration Committee. Sasol states that for purposes of determining relative total shareholder return, it adjusted its peer group to include larger comparative companies. These companies are not disclosed by name. Please could Sasol disclose which companies it considers its peers in its benchmarking process? Such information is critical in determining whether executive remuneration aligns with long-term value creation and best practice around remuneration. Thank you very much. Am I heard? The chair of Remco will answer the question. Thank you very much for asking this question. Indeed it is fully disclosed. If you look at our detailed Remco report on page 37, you will see all these companies listed for the benefit of our shareholders and any readers of our integrated report. It is there and fully disclosed. Thank you very much. Thank you. Have we completed the questions? Mr. Chair, we have another question from the room. Yes, please. From Emma Schuster. Hi. Sorry, my colleague Melody Koza's mic isn't working, so I'm just going to pass it over to her. Thank you very much, Chair. With regards to the first question that was asked online by Greer Blizzard from Just Share, we did not actually get the actual information. We managed to do a detailed analysis, and I would like to have a follow-up as to whether we can be given at least some of the specific names regarding the peers. I hope you will now allow me to proceed to ask the questions that I have that are applicable to this resolution. We note that in 2020, Sasol's Remuneration Committee approved a methodology to track internal pay equity on a group level, race, and gender basis by country, with employing more than 250 employees on a permanent basis, and where the data is available. Sasol reports that its findings were that the detailed level pay gap ratios showed a downward trend in South Africa and in Italy. However, no numerical figures are provided to reflect the actual pay gap ratio or the previous year's figures to allow for comparison and assessment. I have two sets of questions relating to pay equity. Firstly, is Sasol willing to disclose further information on the pay equity? Secondly, given that it is important to include temporary employees in such assessments in order to provide an accurate reflection of pay ratios, will Sasol commit to including temporary employees in its methodology? My other question on pay equity relates to the gender pay equity analysis, which was once again commissioned by the Remuneration Committee in 2020. Sasol reports that this analysis found that no systemic gaps exist. Is Sasol willing to provide further information in relation to this assessment and to disclose the gender pay gap for the South African operations? Thank you. Thank you very much. Chair. Thank you very much for that question. Just to make sure that you do find that list of peer groups, please go to the annual financial statements, because you will find that it's also available on our website, and go to page 37. The information is fully available for you. You can literally go through your cell phone right now to our financial statements, and you will find the information. I'm glad you read the REM report to the detail that you have. At Sasol, we are super proud, and as a REMco, that we do track the pay equity between race as well as gender, even if we are not requested to do so by the law. We believe in fair and equitable remuneration, and therefore, we do it because it's morally just to do so. Unlike other markets in the U.S. and Europe, where it is required for companies to report on these pay gaps, South Africa is not requested to report on disclose on these pay gaps currently. For the time being, REMco is being responsible by tracking these gaps in the business and making sure that we close them where we find them. Yes, indeed, there is a downward trend in a number of countries. In some countries there is equitable pay, and therefore, we are happy with that. Yes, when the law does require us to disclose, we will do so. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Paul. Mr. Chair, we'll take another question from the room, this time from Mr. Madimetja Elias Papo. From the room. That is from Robyn Hugo. You can ask your question. That's an old question, Chair. The mic is working now. Chair. Mr. Chair, it doesn't seem as if we have any more questions either online or in the room related to this resolution. Thank you very much for that. To colleagues that have asked questions, I just want to assure you that we've got your questions loaded. We will attend to them as soon as we have finished resolutions one and two. Thank you very much for your questions. If you haven't voted, please continue voting, and we will now proceed and move away from this resolution, because that concludes the questions on the remuneration policy and the implementation report. As I said, we encourage you to vote on advisory resolution number one and two. This brings us to Sasol's climate change report, and some of the questions that were asked would be answered now because this has to do with climate change. In our climate change approach, you can pose your questions and vote on non-binding advisory resolution number three now. Could we then receive and answer the questions that colleagues have given to us? I don't know whether the chair of sustainability is ready. Okay, thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. With respect to the question that Leanne has asked earlier, in terms of that king points then the United Nations specific report and elements that they recommended to be contained. Our position is very clear and progressive. All new guidelines and practices that has been published and made available will receive due consideration in terms of how it is applicable, how we can embrace and use that in our own decarbonization journey. At the outright, I'm just saying that we will make sure that we understand fully all of those elements. Suffice to say, we've already made, in that one that gives a certain date or periods that you recommended or that you mentioned there, Leanne, in terms of the five-year tranches, we already align where we have 2030 target and we have the 2030 target. Moreover, our targets are science-based. I think we said in my opening remarks, I mentioned that we are looking into assuring independently, these targets and also the methodology that is available currently. We know that it is not an easy determination, and also I've indicated earlier that even on the areas where they have made some assessment, they have paused on that basis, the methodologies are being refined. I believe that we are then in conformance to that, and we also do not use offsets to get to this target. This 30% target is an absolute target. There are no offsets involved to reach our 2030 target. With respect to the question you've asked on financing on green hydrogen, I believe that the Just Transition Partnership in terms of financing has been very clear. There is continued participation and engagement with the entities that will be having access to that finance. If there are worthy projects to be considered from a national point of view, yes, there are projects that are devoted to green hydrogen, those projects that will be falling in that category will be assessed, and we will collaborate then with the presidency and Mr. Daniel Mminele's department to really make sure that we have coverage with ability and that we can seek eligibility for those funding. If we can do it earlier, we'll definitely consider that. I hope that gives you the context how we look at that. Thanks, Leanne. There were other questions. There were other questions, colleague. I don't know which, whether you've attempted them, from Sandile, the other one from Sibongile. Yeah. Yes. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. I believe the next question was with respect to fugitive emissions in Mozambique. I think we are very clearly and transparently I've indicated there we have appointed expert consultant to help us assess how to contain and how to mitigate this emission going forward. It is not part and parcel of our current drilling campaign or the wells that we operate currently in Mozambique. Thus, we are really focusing on to understand and how to mitigate that and to deal with that fugitive emission that you are referring to. Attention and focus is there, and we hope to give you by the end of our financial year as we go into the next reporting period, we will update our progress on that matter. There was a question with respect to Scope 3, chemical emissions. First of all, we have set a target for our category 11, Scope 3 emissions, that is of our 2019 base, which is a 20% reduction. We understand mostly the impact of the use of our Energy Business, impact from a Scope 3, and that is the use of fuel and what does that then bring as a Scope 3 emission. When we get to our chemicals, we have got hundreds of product formulations that goes into a couple of thousand customers that use our products globally. To determine end use of how the product is used, how is it applied, how would it be stored or how would it be used and, I would almost think, discard of, takes time because you need to engage with these customers. We don't have always the understanding how exactly they are using, disposing of those products, and that's why the road to get to the bottom of all of that Scope 3 from our Chemicals Business is taking more time because it's a complex problem to solve. Therefore, we have commenced that process. We are making progress on that base. Again, we will update you on a quarterly basis on how we are making headway to define those category Scope 3 emissions. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will now go to questions in the room. The first question is from Emma Schuster. If we could just ask that our shareholders who are in the room, if they could please stand just to make it easier for us to identify them in the room. Thank you very much. Thanks. Good morning. My name is Emma Schuster. I'm from Just Share. Before I start my question, I just wanted to make a point about Ian's question on the science-based targets. I think the point is that if there's no methodologies available, you can't say that therefore the targets you assign are science-based. At best, I think you can say that there are no methodologies available at the moment to establish whether they're science-based or not. My question is on Sasol's position on the carbon tax, which is reported in the climate change reporting and through Sasol's industry bodies. I'd just like to Hello? Thank you. I'll just read out some short sections from the climate change report. "Sasol's high GHG emissions make us sensitive to increasing carbon prices, especially if out of sync with our ability to mitigate. Further information has been requested on the viability of our business under increasing carbon tax scenarios. In a conservative scenario, assuming all allowances fall away and the increase in price is applied, Sasol would need to consider trade-offs to balance the people, planet, and profit agenda. To be clear, the purpose of the carbon tax, firstly, is to ensure that the polluter pays for the cost of their emissions to society and that this cost is not borne by society in general, particularly the most vulnerable. Secondly, it's to incentivize behavior change that would not happen otherwise. In order for this to happen, it has to be expensive. It's supposed to be expensive. In light of this, please can you explain what is meant when you talk about the carbon tax being out of sync with Sasol's ability to mitigate, particularly bearing in mind that South Africa's carbon tax already falls far short of what experts, including the National Business Initiative, say is required to align with the goals of the Paris Agreement. Secondly, Sasol reports that it's engaging with National Treasury for further clarity on the rate, trajectory, and allowance phase of the carbon tax. Are these engagements with government strictly about obtaining clarity, or are they to lobby for lower rates and greater allowances? To that point, what is Sasol's response to Acting DG Mamonyane's comment at the parliamentary subcommittee meeting last month on the surprising lack of vision and leadership from business in response to the amendments to the carbon tax? Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Emma. I will just start off by saying that Sasol has made a very clear commitment to reduce our carbon greenhouse gas emissions by 30%. There's no walking away from that. If you interpret that within South Africa Pledge National Determined Contribution, and you are very well-versed with what that number is, Sasol's target snugly falls into that range. As a matter of fact, we are helping to increase the probability of that range to be achieved. I think that is, first of all, where we position in terms of the commitment from a National Determined Contribution. I would also like that Andre weighs in terms of where we are. Suffice to say is that, it is important to understand that you have to have means to reach this implementation of the 30% target we committed to. That means that you have to have capital available, you need to have funds available, and that you need to spend that to reach it. Now, I always say analogy of the athlete that runs the 100 meters, and as he gets out of the starting block and he reaches the 80% mark, that someone throw a stone from the side and he stumbles and he fall, and he can't make that goal post because of, in our case, that would be that we won't have money to really use to implement those targets. We've committed, we've already started the process. You need to have a cash flow to be able to complete the process. I think that notion also lies into the context of realism of how to go through a period where we are fully in support of carbon taxes. We also are clear that you need to have realism in how you look at how to achieve that eventual outcome. I think Andre can weigh in on the actual other part of your question. Thanks, Flip, for that. I think just to note that the report that you quote from predated a lot of activity that subsequently happened in terms of the TLAB process, along with other stakeholders, Sasol made contributions to the process where it was open for public comment. I think to that point, we are absolutely supportive of a carbon tax that's realistic and that represents an underpin to drive transition in South Africa more broadly. I think that word advocacy, you asked, are we advocating? I think we're advocating for a balanced position that takes into account people, planet, and profit. There's got to be a just view of what is possible for Sasol and the country's transition path. To that extent, I think government also recognized that the engagement was positive of that process, where there were sort of a number of compromises made to clarify aspects such as, for example, exchange rate determination, clarity on the process of allowances, which have not been concluded yet. I think that process has got to continue. I think the public debate that we've seen, we will continue to participate in that, and I think we will note our position and make sure that there's a balanced discussion around such aspects. Thanks. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We go to the next question in the room, and that is from Ms. Ilham Rawoot. Thank you, Chair. I represent Justiça Ambiental, Friends of the Earth, Mozambique. One second. My question is referred to the Pande-Temane project in Inhambane Province. Mozambique is one of the most climate-vulnerable countries in the world. You've just said you'll be planning adjacent plants to extract more gas, which is directly contradictory to the climate commitments you've just discussed. Please can you explain this? Which of the company you're referring to that you'll be using as consultants with the assessment and mitigation? Then my next question is, how many methane leaks has the project had in 22 years, and how many has it had this year? Thank you. I'm going to ask that my colleague, Priscillah Mabelane, also weighs in on this particular question. We have appointed that consultant. I can't remember who the consultant was, and I will come back to you in terms of that specific question if you can indulge us. The question about we are looking at bringing in and restoring the decline of our current gas reserve in Mozambique. That gas is being used in South Africa in our operations and by many of our industrial gas customers. Now, I think it's also important in the context that the world needs more energy as we speak. That energy needs to be transitioned to a sustainable energy mix that will enable the global society to reach net zero by 2050. In that context, when energy sources are declining or diminishing, you just cannot stop using that and say the energy will be coming from other sources to be able to supply the demand for that energy. Therefore, from that principle, it is incumbent upon us to ensure that we've got a sustainable operation that is transitioning. That we have interim gas available to afford this transition. Therefore, our gas fields are declining in Mozambique. Our focus is to extend that decline so that we can enable sustainable operations to transition and transform in South Africa. That is the reason why we're doing. We are not doing it to be in the game of big gas and export from Africa in gas. That's not our focus. Our focus is to enable South Africa in energy security and to maintain that, and then to transition when sustainable scale energy of other alternatives, like green hydrogen, like sustainable sources of carbon, becomes more prevalent and cost-affordable to implement. I think just at the outset, I want to put that in context, because that is actually energy security we've seen in the last year or two. It becomes an important transition. It is not now to say that you are now locked in for all and for decades to come. It is about enabling a transition, and that's how we see it. Priscillah, if you can weigh in, please. Morning, everyone. Just to add, if you look on page 12 of our report, we have actually outlined, sorry, page 13, the best practices that we've actually deployed in measuring and the baseline assessment that we've done. In that report, we're highlighting that to date, in terms of our total emission for Mozambique, is 1% of Sasol's total emissions, and in terms of CO2 equivalent. The second part that we're also outlining is that we've also developed methane measurement platforms that we intend to use going forward for all of our drilling as well as The flow lines that we're building, and we're already implementing that in terms of the PSA flow line that we're doing. I just also want to reiterate that as far as the historical Pande 4, which blew up in 1965, when technology was not yet developed, as Philip has also indicated, over the years, we have adopted best practices in terms of how we execute our drilling campaigns, we continue to measure and manage this well. At the same time, we've seen that the operations have normalized. The appointment of a consultant, is Velocys, is actually a renowned upstream company. Also to add that they're not working alone. We have solicited a number of experts, particularly global universities, to complement both the subsurface as well as the surface solutions that we're looking into. The data that we are acquiring through satellites, as well as through the water monitoring processes, will be evaluated and tested and signed off by a number of advisory as we move forward so that we are robust in the implementations that we'll be putting forward to resolve this issue. Thank you, Priscillah. Chairperson, if I can just come in to deal with a question that was asked by our shareholder from Secunda area, she is particularly against the public participation processes that were unfolding in the area. I want to just emphasize that we are regularly having public participation programs, in the last month, in June, we had a process that was held in Secunda, we are having another one in December this year. It is all in line with these sessions, it will also be held in Emalahleni, in Secunda, in the Lebohang townships where we engage with the local community. Just to close out that one. Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We're going to take one more question from the room at this time, that is from Robyn Hugo. Morning, Chair. It's actually Ayabulela Kuzo, I'm representing Just Transition. I have two questions. The first one relates to the Energy Council, the second one relates to Sasol's Just Transition Office. Sasol plays a key role in the Energy Council. For example, Mr. Freedom Utloba is the chairman, the council has its headquarters at Sasol's premises. We are aware that the council has recently appointed a CEO. Has the Energy Council now adopted its constitution settled its terms of work? We asked last year and still want to know. Will you make public the minutes of meetings between government and the council? If not, why? If so, when, where, how regularly? That's the Energy Council question. The one on the Just Transition Office. Sasol reports that it has recently established a Just Transition Office. Where can we find the activities of this reported on? We would like to know, for example, how many engagements with affected communities were held, over which time period, the outcome of these engagements. Sasol's recent report don't provide this information. Thank you very much. Thank you, Ayabulela. Thank you for your question. First of all, the Energy Council is a council that's got the vision to help South Africa to decarbonize and to reach net zero by 2050. The members of the Energy Council comprise a wide constituent of business and government in South Africa. The idea is that we not only using the base members from an energy backdrop, but you would see the members of the Energy Council that has grown since its founding end of last year is now up to 20 members. These members comprise users of energy. It comprise associations in the energy landscape like the renewables. It also include OEMs in the automotive industry. The naamsa is one other area, many other mining and users of energy as well. The collective wisdom is that that will enable us to get more efficiency and traction towards reaching and transitioning the energy landscape to sustainable energy to reach South Africa's aspiration of net zero by 2050. I just want to make sure that that is the reason why it exists, is to transition aligned with the sustainability goals of the country. The engagement has been developing over the last months. We have appointed now a CEO that is running with that, once that internal processes now and staff will get going, we will have a much better engagement with the public at large in terms of our communications, et cetera. Your reference to the minutes between the council and government, there has been no official engagement in terms of the work of the council To engage with government in terms of the regulatory or policy framework, that is work in progress. I think there's nothing to hide when we do engage with that. That's in the interest of the public to understand what is the work of the Energy Council, what is the output, and how does it impact in terms of rules and regulatory environment in policy making. I think that is a work in progress. Thank you for your question. Thank you very much, Mr. Edwards. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll now go to the online voice questions. Our first question is from Zara Omar. Hi. Can you hear me? We can. Thank you. My question is, in its reporting on the carbon tax, Sasol refers to the clear need to consider trade-offs to balance the people, planet, and profit agenda. At National Treasury's parliamentary report back, the Acting DG also said that businesses' fears that the carbon tax is prohibitively extensive are based on a business as usual calculation instead of one aligned to a decreasing emissions trajectory. Firstly, what are the trade-offs that Sasol is referring to? Ability for future carbon taxes, what assumptions do you make about Sasol's emissions trajectory, bearing in mind that Sasol has reported that its emissions will rise in the coming year? Thank you. Thank you. Thanks. Let me discuss that, seeing that I was also involved in the TLAB process and got a grilling in Parliament. Important point that you do make is that it is not only about the business as usual in your assessment of carbon tax, but it is our ability to reduce our carbon footprint and assessing the carbon tax liability as we move forward through the years. Effectively, take the example of 2050, what would be our carbon tax liability or annual liability then if we do then reduce our carbon tax by 30%? What we then do is we would calculate to go through the way that we go into the scenarios and the assumptions. We would calculate on the basis of whether it is ZAR 30 at whatever exchange rate, what would the tax liability be. Assumptions then include aspects such as allowances. We would then have to assess in terms of the projected profitability of our business, given the CapEx expenditure needed to transition and the operating costs, whether the business would still be viable. In that way, we test all our various pathways to check the viability of all the various solutions. All the content of carbon tax. It's a multifactorial aspect, but I've highlighted there to you the key assumptions that flow through the carbon tax. Just to note, sorry, I think we've missed the aspect on the transition office. We've got to just deal with that as well, Chair. Thank you very much. Gugu, I don't know whether you want to add on this question by Just Transition. Thank you, Chair. It is correct. We have pages 38 to 40 of the climate change report on the Just Transition Office. It's an office that we've recently set up. Part of its focus will be around the development of our Just Transition roadmap. It is a development that will work together with our stakeholders. Indeed, as you intimate, there will be engagements with different stakeholders, including communities, employees, suppliers, and a whole host of other players who may be impacted by our energy transition. At the moment, we're leveraging existing engagements and consultations to kick off the process, but there will be further work coming through around this as we move into calendar year 2023. Thanks. Thank you, sir. Mr. Chair, there are a few questions coming through online, if I may proceed with those. Yes, please. The first question, I'll read three out at a time. The first question comes from Ian Erasmus. How can Sasol decarbonize their operations while the Secunda facility is CO2 emissions intensive by ways that the four Benfield units emit millions of tons of CO2 daily? How is Sasol going to change the Synfuels operations and physical plant to eliminate or reduce the CO2 emitted by the Secunda Benfield? The second question comes from Mr. Charles Chinyavanhu. Considering that Sasol operates in the Highveld priority area declared by government with the aim of improving air quality due to dangerously high levels of air pollution, what are your plans to invest on environmental programs aimed at improving the air quality and livelihood of locals? The last question also from Ian Erasmus. With respect to fugitive emissions at the Secunda facility, the coal separation unit has maximum acidity strain in the plant and has a lot of fugitive emissions to atmosphere via the plant's valves and pressure safety valves leaking into atmosphere. What actions are Sasol taking to measure these emissions and rectify them? Thank you so much for those three questions. I will deal with the first question with respect to Benfield concentrated CO2, and I am going to ask Simon Baloyi, our EVP for operations and technology, to weigh in on the other two questions that was asked. The output of the total greenhouse gas in Secunda is measured and is part and parcel of this 63 million tons that we have as the baseline in our South African operations. The Benfield CO2 that you referred to, Mr. Rasoo, is part and parcel of that calculation. The opportunity how to deal with that as the concentrated source for capture is, of course, one of our areas that we look at how to use that. We all know that CO2 is also a source of carbon, with the advent of affordable green hydrogen in future, that may be a viable route to react that CO2 with green hydrogen in our Fischer-Tropsch reaction to products. At this point in time, we are setting the target based on that total amount, including the Benfield, which will be reduced by 30%. I think that gives the context to that, it is fully accounted for. If I can ask Simon to weigh in now. Thank you, Fleetwood. Morning, Ian. On the question dealing with the emissions of gases at liquid methane at coal separation, our plants are equipped with advanced gas detection systems, the focus of that is to ensure zero harm to our people. Therefore, if there were to be any leak on any valve, that will be picked up, we will shut down that unit and fix it. The pressure safety valves, for instance, those are designed for overpressure situations unforeseen. Those ones, if any event were to occur, which is seldom, that will then release safely to the flare systems, which the plant is also designed for. Thank you, sir. Thank you. If I may ask Simon just to weigh in to the question that was asked in addition, and that was: What are we doing in the area, and communities in Secunda to alleviate further emissions from that area, not only in our plants? What are we doing in the community at large? Yeah, thank you, Fleetwood. As you all know, we are actively doing and spending huge amounts on our projects. These are focused at particulate emissions, focused on the NOx, and we are well on track to meet the MES 2025, except SO2, that we have dealt with via various forums. In the communities, we don't just stop in our plants. What we do in the communities, we have went through various phases, and the first phase was to focus in the local communities, where firstly, we have dealt with installations in the houses to make sure that the communities use less heat. We have dealt in projects where we address particulates by having grass-cutting programs because we could recognize in those environments that the grass cutting was contributing to PM and SOx. We also moved in to make sure that we can help the communities move away from the open flames which were using coal. We've done all of those projects. We're also rolling out phase 2, and phase 2 will continue to focus on similar ideas and information on air quality. We're also doing projects on waste management as well, where we place various skips to make sure waste is collected. We've turned former waste sites into vegetable gardens. Sasol will continue not to only do our projects, but fully be involved in the communities to reduce the impact of the air pollution. Thank you. I think that's Yeah. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will take more questions in the room now, and the first question we have is from Bianca. Great. Thank you. Fleetwood, Andre, thank you so much for your presentation and for answering our questions, and we completely appreciate what Sasol is doing in regard to dealing with what are very difficult issues, right? At the end of the day, what we're doing really as civil society is to present our perspectives and our views and ensure that this is aired quite openly. I want to make a few points, right, in relation to some of the answers being given. The first is that the science requires that emissions be halved by 2030. That is much more than what you're currently committed to. That is what the science requires. The second is in relation to the fair share. Our NDCs do not represent a proper fair share allocation, linking your targets to our NDCs misrepresents the actual allocation of a fair share, which the UN high-level expert report requires. The second is or the third is around gas. It's more expensive. You've allocated huge amounts to new I think it's back on. You've allocated huge amounts of money to new gas reserves and exploration. In light of all of these, you can see why we have said your decarbonization targets are insufficient, and why we don't regard them as being science-based. What we're trying to understand is that given that gas is more expensive, and is likely to cause a lot of issues in relation to compliance with the high-level expert report or broader emissions, for example, what alternative plans are you working on to ensure that, let's say, massive ramping up of RE, for example, is on? Are you able to share with us what financial arrangements are being made? Who are you speaking to? The whole world is looking at South Africa right now in terms of decarbonization, and there are financiers that are out there able to support this. For you to respond to say, this is about cash flow, unfortunately, we can't accept that. There are options, and we want to be able to see Sasol illustrate to us how you're exercising those options. I think I will end my question there. Just say that we want to see you be more ambitious for all of us. Thank you. Thank you, Lianne. As I have said, we see all stakeholders are part and parcel of shaping the outcome for our beloved country as well as this company, Sasol. We welcome your inputs, and we welcome your thoughts in that regard. In terms of the science-based requirements, et cetera, I am going to ask Shamini Harrington to weigh in on that, because that is coming in a very technical detail, which I think she can help me to position that better. With respect to the options on mega renewable energy, I would like to just give the following context. We at Sasol, we use about 1.5 gigawatts worth of electricity in our operations. Out of that, we are also generating own electricity that is coming from our boiler plants that is driven by steam, as well as our gas turbines in Sasolburg, as well as a gas turbine system in Secunda. In terms of our needs for renewable energy to help us to decarbonize our Scope 2 emissions that we buy currently from the utility, we have embarked on a program to buy 1.2 gigawatts of renewable electricity that will supplement our operations requirement of electricity in South Africa, and you have also noticed, globally outside South Africa. The moment that you go with a very ambitious, bigger part, the electricity per se will not help us much further. That becomes a point where the ratable renewables will help us to decarbonize the last part of our requirement. I think there is still cost reductions required for energy storage in that sense to provide fully 24/7 renewable energy to all our operations in South Africa. I think it is an opportunity, and we watch closely what will transpire and to harness that. When we look at a big scale hydrogen export project or a hydrogen utilization project in South Africa, which we are in study phases, we are doing a pre-feasibility study in Gqeberha. We have announced a partnership with ArcelorMittal to look at Saldanha Bay. Those type of projects also take time. Yes, to your point, it takes funding, and funding for renewables could be available. The thing that you always need to remind yourself of is that notwithstanding those funding available, you have to take the funding that you get. In our case, we cannot finance mega projects off our balance sheet. We cannot do that. It's impossible. What we can do is to follow a realistic implementation of bite-sized chunks on renewable that our balance sheet can handle, and that comes back to the cash flow that we generate that helps us to keep our balance sheet in a healthy way. Those are interlinked, and you cannot ignore that. Suffice to say, to your point, we are having ambition to play a leading role. Sasol cannot do that on our own because these are tens of billion ZAR of type of projects. We will have to partner and collaborate with others in South Africa and globally to enable that. That is our intent. As we get clarity on the scale, cost, and details, we will then also go to others in these two projects that I've mentioned to participate with us to enable that. The other part that I also want to emphasize, and Lianne, I think it's important that we understand that the cost of, for example, electrolyzers are still coming down. It is also about the smart way how to harness investment in renewables, specifically hydrogen, as the cost curve come down. Because if you invest all your needs at the high point in the cost curve, let's take example. If the cost of hydrogen is now ZAR 2 a kilogram, we would like to invest in that. But if we do it at ZAR 5 a kilogram, which it is now, we will have regret capital spend because forever and a day going forward, that asset will carry that cost. If we waited five years, perhaps the cost would have come down to ZAR 3 or ZAR 2 a kilogram. If you invest big at that time, you have done a better long-term business decision in terms of your investment. That is our intent, is to be leading in some of these catalyst lighthouse projects, but that we also have a long-term in mind that we will have a programmatic implementation at scale as the costs come down in these type of technologies that we know will do over time. Thank you. I don't know whether there's some questions. Mr. Chair, just checking if any of our subject matter experts will be elaborating on the responses. Could we have you as Chairman to conclude? Thank you, Chair. Leon, in regards to the science part, I think it's important that we must bear in mind what we are referring to when we say that Sasol's targets are science-based. Whilst there might not be a methodology for coal to liquids, specifically within the Science Based Targets initiative, we have in fact applied the International Energy Agency's absolute contraction methodology. This is a methodology that's used by the SBTi itself. Using that, we then applied the absolute contraction of 2.5% per year, and you will get to a 30% reduction by 2030. That aligns with well below two degrees. I do hear you on the point regarding science globally. We must bear in mind that science globally says halving emissions, and Sasol is certainly on the page of being able to contribute our part and where we can, and if the methodologies are there, we will get this assured to demonstrate mitigation, what we are doing to assess and make sure we contribute to the Paris Agreement more effectively over time as the methodologies become available. Thanks. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will take another question in the room, and this time it's from Emma Schuster. Thank you very much. Peter, I want to follow up on something that you said in response to my colleague, Aya Kuzo, about there being no official engagements between the Energy Council and government as yet. It's quite difficult to understand that given what we know of the role that the Minister of Mineral Resources and Energy played in setting up the council, and his admission about my phone calls to industry bodies on policy positions. I'm not accusing the council of anything, but I think it's important to understand the potential view of conflict and uncertainty around these engagements. It depends, I suppose, on the definition of official engagement. We also know that the historical role that industry bodies have played in lobbying to delay and prevent climate action. So maybe a little bit more transparency from the council going forward would be appreciated by wider society. Thank you. I'm not sure whether, Peter, you got the gist of the question. Yeah. I think the plea is please continue with the work, but do it in a transparent manner to just have visibility of that. When I refer to official engagement, that means what is the output of the Energy Council and how do we then officially get that output in terms of the discussion with government? That's what I refer to as official engagement because we haven't done enough work to propose positive, constructive proposals in terms of certain of the areas to transition. Your point well made and taken. Thank you, Emma. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will take another question in the room, this time from Beauty Matyu. Thanks, Chair. My question is, in June 2022, the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment established a task team to investigate the source of sulfur dioxide and H2S, hydrogen sulfide, smells in the north and in- Just read the order, please. To investigate the source of sulfur dioxide and the H2S, hydrogen sulfide, smells in the northwest in Gauteng. Sasol denies the H2S incident. In the most recent response to allegations that the operations are caused of high level of H2S in the Gauteng region between eighth and 10th June 2022, says Sasol. We wish to reiterate, as we have stated publicly in response to the media reports, that our operations have been stable during the period in question, eighth to 10th June 2022, with no operations incidents that could have resulted in the increased ambient concentration of H2S and SO2. For the sake of transparency, will Sasol commit in this forum to publicly release its H2S emissions data? The last question that I have is a question on the offset that Sasol is conducting in Sasolburg, especially on the waste sector. Can you please, this forum, look into it and investigate what happened? We don't even have the reasons what happened as the community of Zamdela. We want to know what happened with those projects. Thank you. Thank you so much. I'm going to just weigh in on the first one and then ask Simon again to help us with your specific questions that you have raised. I just want to open up by saying our monitoring system, in terms of on-site measurement and also in the 40 km radius around Secunda, is publicly available. It's linked to the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment, and it is publicly available. I think there is no question that we will, or you will be able to have access to that. Having regard to that, the other questions I'm going to ask Simon to weigh in. Yeah. Thank you, Freduit. I'll start on the operations. Just to reiterate what you said, we do have monitoring stations around Secunda and Sasolburg, and we do confirm that during that time, our operations were running stably. We are also fully participating in the forums with the NACA and all the established task teams and sharing our data with them. On the waste matter, the waste keeps does continue from our side. We still continue to support that, and we are working with the government on that one as well with the communities. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will now go to another online voice question, this time from Ian Erasmus. Okay. What is Sasol's action plan when carbon tax is enforced in South Africa? Is Sasol capable of paying the full carbon tax amount and still make a profit in South Africa for its shareholders? What are the future possibilities that Sasol Secunda will become a stranded asset if the carbon tax is enforced? Please explain what Sasol has been doing on ground level to achieve this. For example, installing pipes on the Benfield region columns to divert all the CO2 to a new process to convert the CO2 with a yet unproven green hydrogen process. For instance, how are you going to realistically reduce the CO2 emissions at the four Benfield units? If you cannot make these goalposts because of a lack of cash flow, are you going to say that Sasol as a company is making zero profit at this very moment? If Sasol is not going to use its massive amounts of yearly profit to rectify your CO2 emissions now within the next year, are you just not kicking the can down the road with the shareholder on the scene end a decade from now when you and the rest of the current board members has already left Sasol's employ? If your calculations include the CO2 of the four Benfields, the global emissions calculations that you said, can you please post your calculations on your website for all shareholders to see? Because according to my calculations, based on the CO2 emissions, there is a massive discrepancy in the amounts. Thank you. Thank you. Ian, perhaps I'll jump in just on the financial aspects. I think it's a technical aspect. Perhaps my colleagues can jump in. I don't want to, as the CFO, venture too much on the Benfield emissions. I think certainly your question on the carbon tax liabilities and our ability to afford that is critical. I think it was referenced in the previous question, one of the previous questions also on the scenario analysis and looking at our ability to afford a carbon tax. Just to note that carbon tax is already enforced in South Africa. We paid last year about ZAR 1 billion of carbon tax, and we expect that to step up in the near future to around ZAR 4 billion, given the profile that government has indicated in terms of the USD 20 per ton of CO2 stepping up to USD 30 a ton CO2. As I've noted previously, the allowance The aspect is still unclear and government has committed to clarifying that also in the near future. We will be able to then assess the capital required, the ability to afford the longer term commitments as well. It really is looking to those scenarios that I've indicated. I think Salman has answered most of the Benfield aspects previously. I don't know, Salman, if there's more to say, rather than I embarrass myself around my chemical engineering abilities. Thanks. No, thank you, Andre. We've already answered it. We've also, in that climate round table previously communicated that almost 50% of our emissions is from process and 50% from the utilities block. We've given that diagram as well and shared with all the investors. We continue to see the Benfield CO2 as a massive opportunity because for others, they first have to capture that CO2. We've already captured it. We also believe that electrolysis prices are going to go down. We're watching the signpost, and when that happens, we will bring hydrogen into our factory. We know that the Fischer-Tropsch is the future technology, and that technology, we already have it in Secunda. For us, all that we see is possibilities, and we have to continue watching the signpost. We also know what has recently happened now in international arena, where the European Union has recognized that CO2 from industries, hard to abate, can be used, and then the Fischer-Tropsch CO2 is also classified in that. All of these gives us all opportunities to use that CO2 without doing anything further with it. I have one point just to conclude on Mr. Rasoo's question. We have assured tabulation of our CO2 emissions in the calculations. That is available in our reports. If you want to have more information, we gladly will meet with you to take you through how the Benfield calculation is incorporated in that part, because it is also third party assured. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chair, one more question, perhaps we'll fit it as well. Good morning, Chair. Greer Blizzard from Just Share. I have the following question. Sasol produces polymer plastic packaging, polypropylene. Polypropylene is one of the most abundant microplastics found in the oceans, causing incalculable damage to oceans, life, and livelihoods. According to its CDP report, Sasol's global initiatives to address the matter of plastic litter, which it finds unacceptable, include initiatives public education, improving household waste management, bolstering recycling, and contributing to marine litter collection, unquote. This passing of responsibility to the end users to clean up instead of focusing on its own role in exacerbating the problem, and from which it is profiting, is an unacceptable transfer of responsibility for a global crisis. Please can Sasol indicate how it is planning to reduce its own role in the production of microplastics rather than expecting this burden to be borne by the end users? Thank you. I will start off with context, I am going to ask Brad Griffith to weigh in from our Chemicals Business in terms of the initiatives that Sasol is busy with on this, in this matter. Now, I do want to emphasize that long-term in our Chemicals Business, we do not see to grow our polymer business that will be in the plastic space. Strategically, we have reviewed our plans to focus more on differentiated and specialty chemicals. As a larger context, that is also the reason why we have divested 50% of our polymer or polyethylene producing units in the U.S. Over the long term, we may totally divest from that production of polyethylene. In South Africa, the ethylene comes out of the Fischer-Tropsch process, and it's integral to the supply in the value chain, where we then convert it in polypropylene and polyethylene in South Africa. Notwithstanding that, we have a number of initiatives that we're focusing on in order to mitigate the plastic pollution that you mentioned. Brad? Hear me? Thank you. Thanks, Greer, for the question. We fully agree with you that it's not just about passing the burden to one party to affect change. All of us have to own that change that we want to make to end plastic pollution. That is what we all are achieving or driving for. What we are committed to do, we work with our industry partners. Sasol is a founding member of the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, which includes not only industry producers, but also brand owners and NGOs around the world to work together on this. In Africa, we are on the regional team for Alliance to End Plastic Waste. We work on a number of initiatives to do exactly what you're saying, is to understand the science behind microplastics, but also to look at how we can make effective programs for cleanup, proper use and recycling of plastic. Thank you. Thanks, Brad. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll go back to questions from the room. This time we'll go to Ms. Ilham Rawoot. Thank you. I actually just want to follow up on my question earlier that wasn't answered, which was how many methane leaks have happened at Pande since the beginning of operations, and how many methane leaks have happened this year? I think Priscilla probably knows the name of the consultancy because of what she mentioned earlier, so if I could just have that answer as well. Thank you. Thank you, Ilham. I'm going to ask Priscilla to weigh in, but suffice to say that we do have a focused assessment on all emissions that is coming through any of our operations, including methane. I don't have a number on top of my head, but maybe Priscilla can weigh in on this question. Hello. We report that we've done an assessment of the total releases. We are estimating about 150 of tons-400 of tons of carbon equivalent emissions. As I've mentioned earlier on, we have appointed Valvestra with a number of academic institutions and individuals that are interrogating this baseline. We are collecting further data, by the end of this financial year, we'll have more firm information that we'll be able to share with our shareholders, including some of the plans to put in place to address this. It's really about our commitment to ensure that the communities around that area are actually protected. Our continuous ongoing monitoring is our highest priority, and we are continuing as well to engage with Mozambique to provide them with regular reports on the emissions. Yeah. And I- It is between 500 and 2,000 tons are translated into emissions equivalent. That is what I was trying to give you the answer on. In addition to that, Ilham, this year's reporting will be concluded in our systems and roll up like our financials. We will report that transparently in the same manner that is referred to in this current report that you have got access to. You will see the numbers that you asked this year is being reported at the end of the year in the reporting cycle. Roger. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will move on to the next question. This time it is from Ms. Thandile Chinyavanhu. Thank you for taking this question. The public calls are getting louder to make polluters pay for the damage that they have caused to persons' property and the public infrastructure as a result of climate change and extreme weather. What is Sasol's stance on this, and what are you doing to remedy some of the contributions you have had to the climate crisis? Thank you. I do not know who will answer that. Thandile, thank you for your question. I think at the recent discussions at COP, this was also a matter that was raised. Sasol, like any other company and industry in South Africa and globally, have to understand what does this mean on a company level versus what the intent is here to look at and how will that be assessed. For me, it is too early to give you any indication how to interpret that at this stage. Thanks, Richard. I just want to say the following. We appreciate all the questions, and we are ready here. We will continue answering them. We have dedicated this whole day to answer all questions, so we are fine with that. I just want to point out that we still have other resolutions to go through. As another matter of housekeeping, we have scheduled lunch for 12:00 P.M. If we have to move that one, please indicate so that we continue doing what we are doing. Thank you very much. Are there any further questions, sir? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll take another question from the room, this time from Sibongile Khumalo. Good day, everyone. I just want to ask a question to Mr. Baloyi. He talked about the development that he did in Sekhukhune, Embalenhle. I just want to disagree with that. Why I am saying that, yes, Sasol did try to develop Embalenhle in a wrong way because they did supply those gas stoves to the wrong organization, which is the business organization. That is why those business organizations, they end up selling those stoves because they do not understand the role of environment. Mr. Baloyi. I am serving in Hesna. Hesna is an umbrella board of environment. We are working with the community. We know the difficulty that we met in Secunda. If Mr. Baloyi, they want to implement anything in Secunda, they must consult the right organizations. The only thing that causes people to fight against Sasol is that Sasol do not consult the right person. Sasol must know where to consult, where to start. We, as the organization that understands about the environment, we know everything that we should do if we control that project or anything. As we are talking about the recycling and all that stuff, all those organizations were given to the wrong organizations. As I speak now, I want to ask the Sasol to know the umbrella board of the organization at Secunda, so that we can do the work accordingly. Thank you. Thank you so much, Sibongile. I'm going to ask Simon to elaborate further to the points he made earlier on this topic, I do appreciate and we welcome your comments for further collaboration. Thank you, Fleetwood. Suffice to say, in the Secunda environment or even in Sasolburg, there is multiple stakeholders and our approach is always to work through a collaborative with everyone involved. I'll take note of what she says, and as we roll out the next phases, we'll review that to make sure everyone is included, just to make sure that you don't have the voice of just one person. I'll just take this as a lessons learned, and we'll incorporate her builds and make sure all bodies in that area are involved. Thank you. Just before we continue with the questions, one of the shareholders has indicated that they would like to vote on some of the resolutions and have to leave. Can I request that the bulk of the questions that we still have, we move them towards the end, after we've completed all the resolutions for voting, in order to allow those shareholders that want to leave, so that they could leave having voted, so that we don't deny them the opportunity to exercise their right in the organization. If that's okay with you, and if you're in agreement with me, I will do that. If you're not, you want to continue now, I will wait. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We still have people in the room who would like to ask questions, we will go on to the next question from a shareholder in the room, and that's from Madimetja Madue. Good day, everyone. My question is in regard to the garages. I just want to ask why Sasol is not a fully participant in the garage field. When you go around, you see here and there, the garages of Sasol, they are not participating like competitors of BP, Total, and others. I just want to get that clarity in regard to that. There is not enough supply of petrol, diesel, so that Sasol could participate fully in the garages. Thank you. Thank you very much. We have noted your question. Can we focus on this resolution? We will answer your question towards the end, if you don't mind. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll go to the next question in the room from Mr. Bhekani Mlambo. I think we'll move on, Mr. Chair. Hello. Yes. For me, I want to support the chairman to move the other questions that are remaining because we have spent a lot of time on the resolution number 3. If we can move it, so that we allow the shareholders to participate, those who want to leave. Thank you very much for that. That's my request. I'm going to make a ruling now. Can I just ask that all the questions that we still have, that we have not dealt with, can we park them and we'll deal with them in the end? What we need to do is to allow We need to be fair to all shareholders not hog one subject, but allow others also who are interested and others to be given an opportunity to ask questions on that. With your indulgence, Elton, this is what I'm going to do. I will request that we vote on this resolution number three, and then we move on to ordinary resolutions. Once we are done, we will come back to all the questions that colleagues would like to ask. I think that's fair. Fair not only to yourselves but to other shareholders who may wish to leave. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the questions for now on Sasol's Climate Change. If you still have them, we'll entertain them in the end. We encourage you to vote on ordinary resolution number one now. Sorry, number three now. Moving again. Okay. From now onwards, we're going to get to ordinary resolutions because we're done with the first ones. You can now pose your questions and vote on the ordinary resolutions dealing with the reelection and election, all by way of separate votes of the retiring directors and Mr. Hanré Rossouw. They will stand up or put up their hands as I call their names. Please, colleagues, do so. Ms. Cathy Harper. Thank you, ma'am. There you are. Mr. Vuyo Kahla. Thank you, sir. Madam Trix Kennealy. Okay. Myself, Sipho Nkosi. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, all CVs were provided in the notice of the AGM. If there are questions on these directors who've put themselves forward for reelection, please ask those questions now. What? Also add that Mr. Hanré Rossouw is also part of that. Have you raised your Okay. Thank you, sir. All right. If there are questions, please ask them now. Mr. Chair, there doesn't seem to be any questions related to this resolution. Thank you so much. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the questions on the election of directors. We encourage you to vote on the reelection and election of all the directors now. We move along. You can now pose your questions and vote on ordinary resolution number 3. That is to appoint PricewaterhouseCoopers as independent auditors. Do we have questions on the reappointment of PwC as independent auditors of Sasol? Not at this time, Mr. Chair. Thank you very much. That concludes the questions on the appointment of the auditor. We encourage you to vote on ordinary resolution number three now. You can now pose your questions and vote on ordinary resolution number four. That is to elect, by way of separate votes, the members of the Audit Committee. They will put up their hands as I call out their names. This is hard work today. Ms. Kathy Harper. Thank you. Trix Kennealy. Yeah. Stanley Subramoney and Stephen Westwell. Are there questions with regards to our Audit Committee? Please pose them now. Chair, there are no questions related to this resolution. Thank you very much. That concludes the questions on the Audit Committee. We encourage you again to vote on ordinary resolution number four. You can now pose your questions and vote on the general issue of shares for cash as set out in ordinary resolution number five, as well as special resolution number eight. Do we have questions for this resolution? There are no questions related to this resolution, Chair. That concludes the questions on the general authority to issue shares for cash. We encourage you to vote on ordinary resolution number five and special resolution number eight. Thank you. Now we're getting into another body of special resolutions. You can now ask your questions and vote on special resolution number one. That is to authorize the board to approve the provision of financial assistance in terms of Section 44 and 45 of the Companies Act. Do we have questions on this resolution? There are no questions related to this resolution, Chair. Thank you, sir. That concludes the questions on financial assistance. I encourage you to vote on special resolution number one. You can now ask questions and vote on special resolution number two and three. That is to authorize the board to approve the general repurchase by the company or by any of its subsidiaries of any of the company's shares, and as part of a general repurchase of its shares from a director, a prescribed officer, or any person related to a director or prescribed officer of the company. Do we have questions on this resolution? There are no questions on this particular resolution, Chair. Thank you very much. We encourage you, ladies and gentlemen, to vote on special resolutions numbers two and three now. Ladies and gentlemen, you can pose your questions on special resolutions number four and five, which seek the approval of the Sasol Long-Term Incentive Plan 2022 and authorizes the directors to issue a maximum of 32 million ordinary shares in connection with that plan. Would we be having questions around this resolution? Chair, we have a question from the floor from Mr. Thabo Thipa. Thank you. Thabo, may you please ask your question? Chair, there are no other questions at this time related to this resolution. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the questions on the 2022 Long-Term Incentive Plan. We encourage you to vote on special resolutions number 4 and 5 now. Moving right along. You can now pose your questions and vote on special resolutions number 6 and 7. That is to amend clause 914 of the company's Memorandum of Incorporation to cater for the issue of shares to employees, not only to the share scheme itself and to remove a number of obsolete references. Do we have questions on the amendment of the MOI? There are no questions related to this resolution, Chair. Thank you, sir. That concludes the questions on the MOI. Once again, we encourage you to vote on special resolutions number 6 and 7 now. Ladies and gentlemen, we will be closing the voting in the next five minutes. In the next five minutes, we'll be closing the vote. You can still change your vote on any of the resolutions. Once the voting closes, you will not be able to change any vote. If you have not yet cast your vote or want to change any vote, please do so now. As I said, there's five minutes for us to finish that one. I know that there are quite a lot of good timekeepers. They're checking on me whether I'm adhering to that. That was my indication that the five minutes is over. Can you see the person? He must have his hand up. If he is ready. I don't think he is. Anyway, let me continue. Ladies and gentlemen, with the votes now cast and voting closed, and the votes are now being tallied and put together. This gives us another opportunity to open to the floor and to everyone who might have additional questions to pose to management and to the board, and to everyone. Are there questions from shareholders, please? Chair, there are quite a few questions online, related to some of the themes that we've asked the shareholders to select. We'll start with the first theme under environmental. There are several questions from Mr. Ian Erasmus. I'll read out three at a time. This is to Mr. Fleetwood Grobler. The first question: Has Sasol issued a SENS announcement regarding the criminal investigation by the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment regarding the alleged pollution of the Vaal River with hazardous waste, or the resulting criminal charges by the NPA against Sasol regarding alleged pollution of the Vaal River with hazardous waste from Sasol Secunda site? Is it not a repeat of just also trying to keep bad news from the shareholders, as was the case with your predecessors and Lake Charles? Has Sasol really changed its culture of fear in that regard, and do the shareholders need to hold their breath again? The second question, also directed to Mr. Fleetwood Grobler: Are you concerned at all that if Sasol is found to be guilty of pollution of the Vaal River in upcoming criminal charges in court, that Sasol's major shareholders, such as may divest completely from Sasol as a result? The next question along a similar theme: What is Sasol's plan to protect shareholders from losses if Sasol is found guilty of environmental crimes regarding the current criminal charges and are ordered to clean up and rehabilitate the river if polluted with hazardous waste? How will this affect profit margins and the shareholders, how will this affect Sasol's reputation as a responsible corporate citizen and its reputation internationally, especially locally? I think I'm going to read one more along the same theme, then perhaps this can be addressed collectively. Sasol has been criminally charged by the NPA for their alleged actions of gross negligence which led to alleged unlawful disposal of hazardous waste at the Sasol Secunda site. Has Sasol suspended any employees involved as per Sasol's code of conduct as well as Sasol's disciplinary code? If not, why not? The Sasol disciplinary code clearly states where the presence of the alleged offender may undermine or hamper proper investigation, tamper with evidence, or intimidate possible witnesses, it is to be decided if the person should be suspended. Does Sasol not apply their policies and procedures to managers? I'll leave it there for now. Thanks, Mr. Chair. Thank you. Yep. Thanks a lot. Thanks a lot, Mr. Erasmus. Starting with the question around whether we announced on SENS, the criminal investigation. Yes, we did announce in our Form 20-F as well as the interim reports. Of course, those are released through our nets, on SENS. We're comfortable that we've made the right disclosures in relation to that matter. We equally are comfortable that we've been taking the right steps in building the right culture within the company, enabling people to speak up. In fact, that's reflected in the level of engagement within the company. Part of that, we also run a heartbeat service within the company to understand that level of engagement. It is not an area of fear for us that we have difficulties in respect to the fear of speaking up. It's one of the things that the CEO will spend a lot of time, together with all the other executives, to emphasize and promote the need for everyone to feel free to engage on anything and understand that they will be protected for anything properly raised, in relation to any matter within the company. The second question as I understand relates to our concerns if we're to be found guilty, and more particularly, what the actions of the PIC would be. I think it is fair to say, Mr. Erasmus, firstly, that it would be inappropriate to speculate on the outcome of the criminal prosecution. We respect the process that's underway there, we do believe further that our shareholders in general are comfortable with our commitment to compliance, and that commitment extends to all our regulatory obligations, including as relate to safety, health, and environment. I would expect that our shareholders would take that into account. There have been questions around measures in place to deal with any possible outcome. I think, as I indicated first, there is no need for me to speculate on what an outcome would be. This is a matter that we have been dealing with and that we are defending, and we will continue to cooperate with the law enforcement authorities around the effective dealing with that matter. Naturally, there are a number of measures around the management of our risks, and that includes risks relating to reputation, to compliance with laws, as well as financial risks that may arise. I think there was the fourth one. The fourth, I think that is a question that had been raised in relation to whether or not we suspended any people in respect to the matter that is under investigation. Again, as I have indicated, it would be a remiss of me to prejudge what the determinations of the courts would be on that matter. We will wait to go through the process and thereafter make an assessment as to what action, if any, needs to be taken. Thanks. Thank you, Vuyo. Can we take other questions? Thanks, Mr. Chair. The next question was also from Mr. Erasmus, but related to the criminal case that is still pending. I am going to assume that was already addressed by Mr. Kahla's response. There is one more question on the environmental theme, also from Mr. Ian Erasmus on a different topic. Your ambient measurement stations are on ground level, while the emissions from your Secunda plant, especially the two smokestacks, are at least 300 meters above ground level. The fact that these emissions from your Secunda plant is clearly seen on photographs and video material blowing directly towards Gauteng. The fact that Sasol has reported no upset conditions at that stage of these complaints, that should be very concerning to shareholders. In the spirit of transparency to shareholders, is Sasol prepared to display a live stream of the emissions at plant level, not ambient monitoring stations, which may not even be in the prevalent wind direction for that day? There are plenty of emissions reading analyzers measuring H2S and SOx, et cetera, on the plant. Why is the actual emission volumes at release point on stacks, et cetera, a secret? Thank you, Mr. Erasmus. I'm going to just say in the context of these measurements are not determined by Sasol and the positioning of where we will measure or would like to measure. This is a regulatory framework where it's determined from an experience-based level, and it is implemented accordingly. I just want to leave that as context and then ask Simon to weigh in terms of that rest of your question. Thank you, Fleetwood. You're 100% correct. The monitoring stations are actually located all around the plant in all directions. On the data from the stack, that data is shared with the department on a regular basis as per the requirement of all our licenses, and it's actually freely available to the public. Anyone has access to that data for that period, so you can go back and look at it. We also, during the public participation that you mentioned earlier, in June and December, we go through all data with the communities, and we go through all the data, and everyone has access to that data. That data is not a secret. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will now take questions in the room. The first in our queue is McGillan. Hello. Almost good afternoon. My question relates to the LCCP project catastrophe and the class action case that resulted in a ZAR 400 million damages capitulation by the company. It's quite evident that it's not reflected or transparent in the financials. We had to find out about this ZAR 24 million payment from the press. The company's code of conduct requires transparency, so I'm rather intrigued why Mr. Rossouw has failed at his first hurdle to satisfy shareholders' expectations that he would be joining Sasol and work to the company rules. The auditors who are here also apparently just decided to omit this ZAR 420 million outpayment and damage to our shareholders. Why do we pay these auditors ZAR 131 million to do a job which they're clearly not doing? That would be my first question. The second question, at the Secunda operations, you invested ZAR 4 billion over a 15-year period of time to build the coal tar filtration plant. It remains unproductive after 15 years, as shown in the last ARR report emissions around Secunda. This is the fourth year that I've been to the AGMs complaining to you, the board, about the ongoings of this project. Could someone assist, please, with the audio? I think it's back. Pardon? Yeah, you're back. It's a bit of a shambles with this system. Right, let me continue. Yeah, this is the fourth year in a row that I've been to this AGM and brought this information to your attention. The ongoing impact to personnel from the emissions within their plant and others is ongoing. Now, what is being done to investigate this ongoing catastrophe? That's my question. My third question relates to Bain. It's well advertised that Bain is a pretty despicable company, but yet Sasol maintains an association with it. It's a disgrace that the company continues to contract this well-publicized entity. Why should shareholders be associated with this arrogant approach to business ethics and conduct against our company's standards? Thank you. Thank you very much. The class action. Bain and class action, we'll take. This Bain. Yeah, we will do Bain. Just to clear. If we perhaps start just on the disclosure of the class action. To the auditors and at least to my defense, that was fully disclosed in the annual financial statements. The reason that was still under process then, the settlement was only announced in September, that's after the event. Also, we disclosed fully that that case was ongoing at the time. I think Vuyo can perhaps elaborate a little bit on the settlement aspects to that. It is correct. As you've already indicated, Hanré, we had made disclosures around the settlement that we're getting involved in. Those settlement, of course, included the amount that you've just indicated of ZAR 24 million, was an amount that had no impact in respect of any outflow of cash from the company, owing to the protesters from our insurers in relation to that settlement. There's nothing that's not been disclosed during that matter. That matter now has been closed, and it was not on account of any capitulation on the part of Sasol, but it was considered the appropriate time, having regard to a management of the risk relating to litigation, to settle. Indeed, that settlement was made, as I've indicated, that money was borne by the insurers. The second point, I think, relates to Bain that I want to deal with. I think it is fair to say that Sasol, in fact, from the very start when the issue of Bain arose, going back to 2018, took measures to ensure that it is appropriately addressed. Part of those measures included the suspension of Bain and a commitment that we would only engage with Bain after certain actions had been taken. In 2020, a due diligence process was undertaken, and it looked into the measures that Bain had put in place to address the areas of concern that the company had set out. Part of those included, of course, changes in relation to the management team. That included the change in respect of the person who was the managing partner, who since had left Bain. Changes in relation to governance risks and compliance by Bain. Part of that, of course, they appointed a board that would oversee the activities of their company here in South Africa. There were a number of actions also taken in relation to them paying back with interest the monies that had been earned on the project with Sasol. When one looks into the string of actions that were required to be done in order to allow them back as a supplier, those were taken, and we found comfort having done the due diligence that I've indicated. In many ways, way before other players probably came to the fray, Sasol was first on the blocks in relation to the suspension and then the due diligence, and pursuant to that due diligence and the actions taken, readmitted Bain as a supplier. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. McGillan. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will go to the next question in the room. Salvi. I think the residual part of Mr. McGillan's question with respect to the coal tar filtration, I am going to ask Simon to address that, please. Thank you, Philip. On the Coal Tar Filtration, yes, this project, we've been busy with it for the last couple of years. I want to also remind you, if you go back into the site, I mean, we step back, the site does have a plant on the Coal Tar Filtration West. When we did the eastern plant, it was primarily to enable us that during shutdowns, we could be able to minimize the transportation of the tar from the plant. That project, we've signed BO now, so we've completed the project. We've signed BO. However, we're busy with optimizing the filtration and the membrane systems. That work is ongoing, and we'll continue to do so. We've proven all the various pieces of that plant and have proven that it does work, and we've concluded that part of the project, and like I've said, signed the BO. On the issue of personnel safety, I just want to reiterate that for us, I've said it before, safety and zero harm to our people comes first. We will continue with all the measures that are required working in that environment, from the mask to the personal monitors. We'll continue with that as we've done before and as we do in our western plants, and we'll continue with that going forward. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll go to the next question in the room, it's from Robyn Hugo. Thank you, Chair. I have two follow-up questions that I asked earlier on remuneration. One is related to the methodology that Sasol has adopted to track internal pay equity. I specifically asked if Sasol would consider including temporary employees in its methodology. This is stemming from the fact that Sasol, as other companies that are already submitting information that includes temporary employees, the subject of labor in the employees' equity form, EEA4 form. My second question relates to the benchmarking question that was asked by a colleague from Jase. Thank you very much for pointing us to the annual financial statement. I would just like clarity as to whether the list of companies that we see in that table are the peers that were included in the benchmarking process, or the list also includes the competitors that were excluded. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Your question with regards to the inclusion of temps, I mean, when the regulation does come out in South Africa, that compels us to disclose, if that includes temps, then we will do. We will definitely do that. Let's wait for the regulation in South Africa. Let's see what it says, and we'll comply just like we comply to all the related labor relations acts. In terms of the benchmarks that you have seen, I'm glad you have gone through them. That benchmark is used basically to compare ourselves with relative performance of those companies that are listed there. I'm not so sure I understand your question. Are you saying that we are including or excluding competitors? Let me just tell you how we come up with a list of our peers. We list companies in the chemical sector as well as energy and South African companies that are listed on the stock exchange. We do look at companies that are almost similar to our size. We also look at companies that have similar geographic footprints as Sasol, on that basis, we come up with a peer group. We do have, for salaries in particular for executives, a benchmark group of 20 companies, fairly large. That way, we get fairly stable benchmarks there. We don't only look at South Africans, as you will see, we look at America as well as Europe, where we have our operations. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll move to the next question in the room. That's from Mr. Frederick Sabia. Good day, everyone. Thank you for the opportunity. My concern here is that I've been sitting here since this morning. I'm asking myself whether I would be seeing a difference between myself as a shareholder and a person who is not a shareholder. Meaning that I'm not hearing anything concerning a meaningful benefit of being a shareholder. I invest. I want to see a meaningful benefit for my investment. Thank you. Is he benefiting from his investments? Continue investing in Sasol. That assurance I can give you, Mntakwethu. You know that the organization has been through quite a lot of challenges. The organization has stabilized. If you look at how we have dealt with matters, we've reinstated the dividend, which is a benefit to the shareholders. We'll continue reviewing the situation and making things better for the shareholder. I would say to you, Mntakwethu, you're going to be fine. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The next set of questions relates to the theme of social. The first question from Ms. Luli Mtube. She's from ESG Insight SA on behalf of various pension funds. Her question on safety. We have been making noise on safety at Sasol since I don't know when. Time and again, Sasol demonstrates poor level of compliance to Health and Safety Act with the continued loss of life. While we hear that this is a priority for the board and executives, there has been continued loss of life. Five lives lost this year. I think she means last year. Instead of lip service, the question is, how much has Sasol invested in FY 2021 and FY 2022 in safety as a whole and in new technologies to improve safety? The next question comes from Mr. Charles Chinyavanhu. Why is Sasol's contribution to its CSI programs less for fence line communities, e.g., Embalenhle, which is predominantly black residents, compared to what it contributes or donates to the town of Secunda, including places where privileged communities reside? What is Sasol planning to do on improving the skewed support for communities? Take one more from Mr. Charles Chinyavanhu. Due to the high pollution in the area, locals are vulnerable and sick. As a result, they always fail Sasol's medical tests for employment. Why can't Sasol create job opportunities that will afford the sidelined and sick communities the opportunity to work in jobs that does not require medical tests? I'll stop there. Thank you so much, Ms. Luli, in terms of your question with respect to safety and what are we doing in that regard. Any fatality is unacceptable for us, and we work relentlessly to implement our programs to arrest high-severity injuries and to make sure that our goal to go to zero harms is met. Let me share with you a number of areas where we've invested and employed technology in the past two years to enable us to up the level of safety, and I also include process safety in this context. In the last year, we have employed drones to help us to inspect boilers and emission on cooling towers and emission stacks. That technology assisted us there. With respect to high-pressure lance water cleaning of equipment, we've employed a technology that is remotely operated without the person being in harm's way while conducting the cleaning process. We have employed advanced gas detecting systems that we've rolled out in our operations in Secunda. If I look at the areas in the mining where we've employed new technologies. For example, in our mines, we've employed fatigue monitoring systems for underground movement in vehicles. We've also included a real-time dust monitoring technology. We've implemented CCV and Wi-Fi systems to enable more coverage of remote areas that is critical underground to connect that also with our control rooms for oversight. If I look at the type of spend that we've done, in the mining area alone, we have invested around half a billion ZAR in the past year to employ these new technologies to enable us to have a better safety outcome. That is not including all the other millions of ZAR we spend every year on PPE, training, as well as other optimization in our equipment and processes in our various operations globally. With respect to the second question that was raised by Mr. Charles, in terms of the contribution of our CSI programs. For the larger Secunda area, which incorporates the communities of Embalenhle, and the others that I can include in this line, about 70% is spent in those fence line communities, of which the remainder is done in the town itself. I do believe we have a very holistic CSI program covering a balanced spend in the total region around Secunda. Thank you. With respect to the last question, I am going to ask Simon, because I am just not sure in terms of the OSH Act not allowing us to employ people with respect to not ensuring they are in a medical fit condition to be employed in an ongoing operational environment. Simon, you want to weigh in on that specifically? Yes, quickly. Actually, the challenge on the employment in all our operations is fitness, is something that we call the RFA, which is a test that checks the general fitness of everyone else that we bring in. What we have done in order to improve and help people to pass that test, we run boot camps. It is just general fitness. That is all it is. As people get fit and they come for a test, then they are able to go through the test. We have not seen any evidence that says it is the general population that are unwell and cannot work there. Having lived in Secunda myself for more than 10 years and my kids being born there, I can attest that the issue is purely fitness, and we are addressing it by making sure that people go into boot camps and then they are ready to do their employment as they come in for that test. Are there any more questions? Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll go back to the room, this time again from Ilham Rawoot. Yes. Thank you. Again, I have questions about Pande Temane. I was in Mozambique last week, three of the community members from Temane wrote a testimony that they asked me to read to you because they can't do it themselves. I'm going to start. Our names are Alberta, Jose Maringe, Salvador Manisse, Armando Chucala. We come from the village of Temane, one of the villages that Sasol ruined when it built the Pande Temane gas projects in 2000. We have a message for Mr. Chair, Mr. Grobler, Mr. Kahla, Ms. Mabelane, all your friends. Sasol used to come to the villages made promises to us. You promised to build a technical college, a school, a hospital. You promised to give us jobs and electricity. Till now, not a single person from Temane has a job. We live in the dark. There is no electricity. The hospital that you built is 75 kilometers away. Our world became a campsite for workers. The law says Sasol's boundary fence has to be 50 meters from the nearest house, but you don't care, and some people's houses are three meters from the fence, and now children cannot walk three meters from their houses. People asked Sasol to please build the displacement houses before you started operating, but you've been operating for 19 years, and we still are exactly where we were. We did not have a chance to say no. Yes, there were Sasol reps coming, and yes, you do what your company calls consultation. We are intimidated. People do not go because they are afraid and think it is a joke. Instead of moving people to new houses, what you do now is come to drill holes in people's backyards. The water from our dams is polluted, but we have no choice but to drink it and watch our children getting sick. We used to farm, and you might think that is not a real job because we don't earn millions like you do, but this was our lives. Now our farms are gone. Not a single person has a job. To all of you rich kings and queens at Sasol, you have given us zero benefits. You tell the world that you do, but we 28 communities are living in the dark. We are starving, we are poor, we get sick, we cannot farm. You lie, and lie, and lie. I have two questions that these people did ask me a specific favor. They asked me to come up and show you their faces just to give you some idea of the humanity that's being affected. My questions are, how many permanent skilled jobs have people from Temane received since operations began, and how many skilled permanent jobs do they have right now? Why has every household not been resettled, received electricity, not received farmland the same size they had for the last 20 years? Thank you. Thank you so much, Ilham. I really commend you for engaging with the communities and bring their voice into the room. Thank you for that. I would also like to share with you, I was in Vilanculos and Inhassoro about 10 days ago, where Sasol opened the Inhassoro Training Centre, where we have spent over ZAR 17 million to train people from these communities in the area to provide them hope, to provide them a job, and to provide them meaning in terms of their workspace and their ambition in the country. This center was opened by the president of Mozambique, President Nyusi, and we have, up till that point in time, already trained 480 artisans to make a livelihood from that center. We will still continue to ensure the operationalization of that center by supporting it in the next 2 to 3 years with another $1 million to $2 million to ensure that it remains a center of hope. As the president of Mozambique has said at that time, this is an opportunity for everyone to better themselves and to train, not that they will necessarily find a job, but that they can be an entrepreneur and skill themselves to make a difference in their own lives. This is just one example of what we are doing in the Mozambican space. As part of our investment of the PSA project, we have committed over $20 million for local development agreements, which has been running from 2023 in the communities. We will be using the majority of the people that will work on this project that we are now busy implementing, the PSA project, that will bring additional gas, and that will go to the monetization of gas into electricity for Mozambican people, not to other areas. The gas is primarily prioritized to go to this funded World Bank new gas power station that will be built to better the lives of Mozambique. We have got endless examples where we are really engaging the communities, where we are assisting, and where we are building infrastructure in that area. I would like to ask Priscillah to also weigh in on this matter, because there are many other examples of what we are specifically doing in those fence line communities and where they were affected, what was our approach to assist them with resettlement. Whilst I hear those three voices and I have seen those faces, I also know that there are many other desperate people also in the larger areas where you have interrogated or where you have discussed with them. My heart goes out for all of those areas that is affected. I also know that Sasol cannot do everything for everybody in Mozambique. Where we can, we are spending large amounts of money. Priscillah, you want to weigh in? Thanks, Freduit. First of all, just to reiterate our meaningful contribution to the communities we work in, and further to our commitment to continuous engagement with our communities. As Freduit has mentioned, he was there with the president as we launched the opening of the ITC, which will really make meaningful contribution beyond our industry. We are looking at other sectors as well. In addition to that, we are, especially myself and my team, every quarter in Mozambique engaging with communities. I would really like to invite you as well to sit with you and the community concerned, because we believe that collaboration and co-development in terms of solutions as we develop the area will be important. To highlight some few things in addition to what Freduit has said, of the ZAR 20 million that we're already investing in, we are prioritizing water, sanitation, as well as electricity, electrification, and particularly creating water and sanitation. We've made good progress over the last year, and we're happy to take you through to some of those community projects that we've prioritized together with the community. In addition, we are also prioritizing schools to make sure that we can work with government to ensure that schools and all the related infrastructure, including health services, are continuing to be supported. I must also add that as part of our commitment in Mozambique, we continue to invest in power generation. We've invested in CTRG in the beginning. We are now investing in CTT, which will upgrade and provide additional security and electricity to Mozambique. In addition to that, the investment we are making now is going to ensure that Mozambique can get LPG, which most of the households will get locally produced LPG, which is more affordable. As I said, we are making meaningful contribution, and it's our commitment to continuously engage. I'm looking forward to meeting the community members in the near future as well. Thanks, Priscillah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll continue taking questions in the room at this time. The next question is from Madimetja Jacob Madue. It's me again. I think the chairman is getting unfair to me because I asked about the garages, why Sasol is not having more garages like their competitors. They have not answered me on that. Another follow-up question. Can I do a follow-up? Another follow-up question. Yeah. Yeah. Another question is in regard to you, the chairman. I think you have been appointed to work in the presidency, if I'm not mistaken. Are you going to be able to do both jobs, be able to do what you've been appointed into the government and also head Sasol as a chairman? Okay, thank you very much. Maybe let me answer that one before they talk about service stations. The thing that I have is not a full-time assignment at the presidency, and it looks to specific issues that you've got to deal with. Just to give you the level, the amount of time that I spend there would probably be, we meet once in a week on a Thursday to do just that. We have a team of people who continue doing the work, because at the end of the day, I'm not there to fix things. I do act as a conscience to various departments for them to do the work. Just to assure you, I am doing no work there other than being a voice and that conscience to do that. That's my mandate, that has honestly, it doesn't impact or affect Sasol or any other organization I'm involved in. Thank you. Thank you, Madimetja. In terms of the garages, or as we call it, the retail service stations in Sasol, we have just updated our mobility strategy. Embedded in that strategy is the growth in terms of organic growth, adding more retail fuel stations, Sasol fuel stations in the country. At the moment, we've got around 400 service stations. Our ambition is to grow that further, to provide more access in many areas where people have got a demand for fuel, and I believe we are well on track to be able to execute on that strategy. Is there anything else, perhaps, Priscillah, you would like to weigh in on in terms of the service stations? Thanks, Leonard. I think you've actually covered it. Just want to highlight that Sasol joined the retail business very late. It's actually impressive that despite all of that, we have actually managed to grow a network of 400 sites, and we are continuing with an average of a minimum of 10 sites a year. If we can do more, we'll be able to do that as well. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll continue in the room at this time. The next question is from McGillan. Hello. All right, I'm back on my feet again. Now, Fleetwood, you heard me just now. This is the fourth time I've been to this AGM. When are you going to get a grip of the company and your management team so that we can come to an AGM like this and get proper answers when we put straightforward questions to your colleagues here? I asked the CFO, where is the ZAR 24 million damages claim cited in the financials? Yes. Yes. That doesn't give me an answer. No. Is there anything else you would like to add? We can deal with that as the end. That was my first question. All right. The second one relates to the CTFE project. I asked, when is the investigation, the detailed investigation of why a 15-year project that asked for ZAR billion from an initial ZAR 1.8 billion, okay, that I was personally involved with for four years. Okay. Hasn't been effected yet. When is the investigation? I want to know. I'm going to put my weight in on that one. Please believe me. Thank you so much. My third question originally related to Bain. Okay. It is, why are we conducting business with an unethical company? All I get told by Vuyo over there, okay, is that he's going to continue doing that business. That doesn't tell me why. That was my question. Can I please have some straightforward, professional, ethical answers, please? Let's start with your CTFE question. Simon has indicated that that plant was commissioned. It reached beneficial operation. The technology has got areas that we need to do improvements on. There is learning in that process. The plant is operational at the moment with areas that is being further addressed. This is not unusual for technology that is employed in a very, very difficult part of the processing of our Secunda tar pitch area, and therefore, that operation will be optimized. We're happy to engage with you and to go and show you what we've done and where we are at in that facility. I'm not sure what are you requiring more from us to say it is operational, and we are busy optimizing it, and we welcome to interact on that basis. That's the answer on the CTFE. The other one, maybe Andre can refer to the other amount. Sure. Just in terms of the financial statements for the period up to 30 June 2022, if you refer to page 127, it's right at the bottom. There's disclosure of the class action currently underway at the time. The settlement only happened in September, it was impossible for us to predict what the settlement could be in the preparation of the financial statements. Thanks. I think we just need to clarify your ongoing residual question around this matter because the books have been closed. That amount was not included as a final amount because it was not available to be included in the closing of the books in this publication of this result. It has been subsequently being fully settled, and it will be disclosed fully now that the amount is known in the next set of financial results. It's a quite simple accounting procedure. For your own plane. Thank you. The question on Bain, I've got nothing further to add that William has said. We've made our assessments. We have not seen any new information coming forward. There is a very clear stance that we've taken on that. Thank you. Thank you very much. Sorry, are the results ready for publishing? Okay, let's look at the questions first and see whether we. Just before you publish the results, let's try and finish the questions that are remaining. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll take another question in the room from Mr. Bhekani Mlambo. Thank you, Chair. My question goes to Mr. Grobler, Tito Hobbler, and Mr. Rasoo. We've been talking about Mozambique, then we forgot to talk about Lake Charles. We need to be putting confidence as shareholders on when are we expecting Lake Charles to be profitable. As we said, currently, the operations are at 50% because it caught fire, and the cost of the repairs, how much it will be. Because I see it as a prodigal son that's been digging deeper in the company and also from shareholders. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you so much. I think it's a very pertinent question and clarification that we need to give on Lake Charles. The Lake Charles investment comprised 7 units, including a textile ethylene, ethane cracker, and downstream derivative units. 2 of the units, 2 polyethylene units, were commissioned and started up and is running since the period after commissioning in 2020, thereabout. I haven't got all the exact dates, but all of the units have been started. The specialty units, there are 3 of those. We have a Ziegler unit, we have a Guerbet alcohols unit, and we've got an ethylene oxide MEG unit. Then we also expanded our ethoxylation capacity to process the alcohol and the ethylene oxide. Those all have been started up. They've proven at nameplate capacity. They are in the ramp-up phase as we have reported in our results and various areas of business coverage. For your context in the question of this 50% is we had an incident which we declared during our BPM that was published in October this year, where we indicated that after a shutdown of our Ziegler unit in Lake Charles and during the startup, we had an incident where a fire occurred. We safely shut down, and there was no harm to anyone, and we've isolated the area that was affected. The position that we have reached now in November is that we could start up 50% of that Ziegler unit is up and running. The area that is affected to take us now to the 100% of that unit is now being repaired, and it is dependent on the equipment that has to arrive on site to install it to go back to full operation of the 100%. We've got also a legacy part of the Ziegler unit, and we have built a new Ziegler unit, and it's integrated into one unit on the Lake Charles complex. Actually, the area that was affected was more in the legacy unit, but it does affect the total integrated area. With respect to the investment, we have reported that our North American complex have posted EBITDA number of more than $500 million in the previous financial year. That clearly indicates to you that we are getting money from that investment, and furthermore, that we are ramping up our production and market presence to monetize that better. Of course, there are market conditions that may help or deter from the actual ramp-up rate in terms of value, but that is well underway in terms of the Lake Charles investment. I hope that gives you context. Thanks, Mr. Chair. We're going to move over to a few financial questions. The first comes from Nelusi Ncube. Given the sustainability targets Sasol has set and the drive towards green Sasol, how much of the company's debt is now linked to sustainability targets? Has Sasol taken advantage of the growth of green finance to raise capital for its sustainability ambitions? The second question comes from Mohammed Bukus. Considering the high level of debt and the interest payments attached to them, will Sasol look for other means of finance to ease their debt burden, non-interest? I personally oppose to interest transactions. What is the entity doing to improve the declining share price over the past six months? The last and this set from Ian Erasmus, should Sasol not invest in mega projects from their balance sheet to protect the Sasol cash cow facility in Secunda instead of bleeding cash from the cash cow to Lake Charles? Thanks, Tiffany, for those questions. I think all three very valid questions. Firstly, on sustainable finance and green finance, it's certainly something that's within our plan. We've recently set out a sustainability-linked framework for future debt issuance, and we certainly look at green bonds as well. Typically, a green bond would be linked directly to a specific use of proceeds. We would look at both those options together with project financing that would be green for a lot of our future projects that Fleetwood shared that we are currently investigating. In terms of perhaps more unconventional other options, which could include Islamic finance, other debt products, we certainly include assessment of all those options. We've got to look at the risk and the conditions attached to any finance instrument, and we would consider those when we look at finance and refinance options. In terms of big capital projects, as Fleetwood also outlined earlier, given the significant risk associated with big projects, the board is certainly not willing to put a lot of money into a single big project. I think we've learned a lot of lessons. To that extent, in terms of capital allocation, we have noted that we will not invest in a large project, but we will look to partner to reduce risk to the balance sheet. I think the question also alluded to whether we are moving cash from Sasol to Lake Charles. Just to note that Lake Charles, the project, has been completed. Only additional capital that goes there is sustenance capital and any optimization growth capital which competes within the normal capital allocation framework. Thanks a lot for those questions. Hello. Thank you. Are there more questions? Thank you, Chair. We're moving back to questions on our social theme. Sorry, before the question is asked and answered, I moved lunch for shareholders from 12 to 1. Is it okay if I moved it to two? I think we should work together on this one. If you want, I'm here the whole day. If it's okay, we can move it to two. Please help me so that I can manage that. Sorry, can we have the question? Chair, we have 12 questions left on queue and three people queuing in the room. Okay. Just to give you an indication. Thank you very much. Colleagues, you can see where we are going. With your permission, I'm going to move lunch to two o'clock. Okay, let's see what we can do. Thanks. Sorry, can I have the questions, please? I'll proceed with the next two questions from Ian Erasmus. In 2021, Sasol uploaded an incomplete fraudulent IRP5 to my SARS eFiling. Sasol's explanation to me via email is that there was a problem with Sasol's own tax program causing multiple issues with multiple employees having incorrect IRP5s uploaded, and that Sasol only picked it up five months later due to my complaint. What is Sasol doing to prevent future fines for incorrect tax payment to SARS? The second question directed to Fleetwood Grobler concerning the safety of Sasol Secunda. You stated in 2021 that Sasol has a very robust whistleblowing process. I have personally made many safety-related disclosures to the Sasol management since 2015 up to 2019, and then victimized for it by my direct management. Why has Sasol actively limited the scope of Guina Attorneys to exclude all my disclosures as made including my safety disclosures at Sasol Secunda Benfield and Refining West being ignored? Does Sasol take seriously disclosures made by the employees regarding safety violations, which can easily result in an explosion which will make the 2004 explosion look like a walk in the park? If so, Sasol takes their people value into account. Thank you. Firstly, on the SARS error, again, this is an error, as you'd appreciate, Mr. Erasmus. We process about 29,000 of IRP5s. We endeavor to do everything to ensure that there are no errors. Indeed, in this instance, an error had occurred. In fact, it reflected overall that there was an error rate of 0.06%. We would want to have no error at all, but with an error rate of 0.06%, it reflects that the controls that we have in respect of dealing with the processing of IRP5s are appropriate. Of course, we'll continue to look into what further improvements can be made in respect of those controls. As you are aware, we have since raised with you the correction, and we believe that the matter is now closed. Thanks. I think coming back to the issue of our robust whistleblowing process, indeed, we uphold the view that we've got robust whistleblowing processes, and indeed, we also investigate every matter that comes through our whistleblowing line. You will recall that some of the issues that you've raised, particularly which may not have been dealt with by the Guina Attorneys process, is because some of them had already been dealt with by another process. For example, the issues raised around victimization had been dealt with in a process by another firm of attorneys. It is clear that we committed to dealing with all of these issues concerning our whistleblowing process. As you of course are aware, the whistleblowing issues form part of the criminal prosecution matters that are before the courts. I think it is best that I not engage further on those, lest it appear that I'm undermining the process before the courts. We'll await the ventilation of the issue in relation to whistleblowing in the courts, but we're comfortable about the whistleblowing process that we have in place. Thanks. Thank you very much. Out of the 12, how many still to go? There are still 10 questions to go, Chair, but the question from Ian Erasmus on the whistleblowing process has not been addressed yet. No, it's done. That's just been handled. Okay. We'll move on to the next question. Also from Ian Erasmus, "What is Sasol doing to engage with the residents of Mossville, Louisiana, to rectify the displacement Sasol caused with building its Lake Charles plant, specifically Chris and Carla Meyer, who had to live inside the Lake Charles factory as Sasol simply built a plant around their property after Sasol failed to take away the property in a quick take action to try and force them from their property. Why is Sasol keeping secret the legal cases between Sasol and the Meyer? Is this how a responsible company and global citizen behaves by trying to quick take people's properties? Do we have another one from Mr. Erasmus? There are several from Mr. Erasmus, Chair, all on different topics. Would you like me to read out a few more? I don't know. Let's attempt this one. Let's deal with the one in Lake Charles. I'm going to ask Brad to weigh in on the actual situation which he refers to. Thank you, Fleetwood, and thanks for the question. Let's clarify that it's Mossville, Louisiana, which is next door to our Lake Charles, Westlake, Louisiana facility. The Mossville property purchase program was a voluntary program that was started in consultation with the community and actually was recognized by the EPA as a great way to engage with the community, for the matters of relocation when it's necessary. It was voluntary, as I said. With respect to the Meyer matter, Fleetwood and Chair, I would refer that to Vuyo. With regards to Just for your assistance, Mr. Erasmus, I wish to appeal to you. You've got quite a number of questions that you have here, and other shareholders are not having an opportunity of asking questions. Would it be okay that if you have additional questions, you send them to us. Otherwise, I'm happy, and management are happy to answer all your questions, but let's be fair to other shareholders as well and give them the opportunity. Thank you very much. Vuyo? Sorry. In relation to the matter raised concerning the Meyer, I think that matter has been dealt with in the sense that it has been dealt with in a private settlement arrangement between the parties. The terms of those settlement arrangements are confidential as between the parties, and it would be a breach on my part to communicate therefore the terms of the settlement arrangements entered into with the Meyer family. Thanks. Thank you. Chair, on your instruction, we have prioritized the other shareholders. There is a question from Robyn Hugo. "Good day, Chairperson. Robyn Hugo from Just Share. Sasol's disclosures on its allocation of capital to its emission reduction roadmap are crucial for stakeholders to assess whether it will be able to achieve its 2030 decarbonization targets. Sasol's climate change report states that it has set a target of ZAR 15 billion-ZAR 25 billion of capital expenditure to be spent by 2030 on decarbonization, and that its capital allocation framework is provided with key guiding principles to progressively grow available capital for transforming the business. After three assessments by Climate Action 100+, in which Sasol was found to have failed to meet expectations on any criteria in relation to capital allocation, it is imperative that Sasol provide a detailed explanation of the alignment of the capital allocation with its own decarbonization targets and with the goals of Paris Agreement. When and how does Sasol plan to address this misalignment, will Sasol be making these disclosures in its FY 2023 interim financial results? Thanks, Tiffany. Thanks, Robyn, for the question. We certainly engage quite actively with Climate Action 100+, as well as other large shareholders, to improve our disclosure on our capital allocation. You'll note that we always reference the capital allocation framework and also the reason why it was included today. We will look to incorporate some of that, not only in our half year but also our full year disclosures. We've got a capital market today coming up again later next year to unpack the detailed plans as we progress on this 2030 journey. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll move to questions back in the room. Next question is from McGillan. Hello. Right, I'm back. Mr. Rasoo, I'm sure you'll agree that estimating forms part of your ambit. Unfortunately, you weren't at last year's AGM. I was. I asked Mr. Vuyo a very straightforward question. What is the estimate of the damages to be expected on the class action case? He told me, "No, we haven't got an estimate." I've got news for you. Sasol agreed to a settlement agreement from as early as February this year. Okay? There it is there, directly from the lawyer who you capitulated to for $24 million. I'm going to ask again, why isn't it in this year's financial results? Let me. Financial results. Right. You mean last year's financial results. Up until the 30th of June. 2022. Yeah. This $24 million was agreed back in February. That was the settlement that, again, as we had already disclosed in February, that there was a settlement that had been entered into with the parties. That settlement, at that time, was still subject to a number of conditions, including that it be endorsed by a court pursuant to a process that would include engagements with any other interested or potential plaintiffs. That process was closed after the reporting period. We could not have disclosed an amount which was still subject to confidential engagement and which was still to be approved. That's where the position lies. That amount had not been approved until the time the court made an approval after the financial year. Well, I'm afraid there was no risk to you making the disclosure. There was no risk. You should have made the disclosure. You've told us numerous times that it's all covered by insurance, where's the risk? It should have just been a one-line item, very clearly stated in the financials. $24 million we cocked up. We were too weak. We packed in. We capitulated. Which you did. If you read this judgment, if anybody wants a copy of it, I'll make it freely available. It is a public record. I want to know from the Chief Financial Officer of Sasol why isn't it in the statement? That's my first question. Sorry. On the CTFE- Sorry. Can we respond to this question of yours? Can we respond to it, please. It's becoming argumentative. Before you move to the other one? I thought I was going to outline my questions and then you would give answers. Yeah. I'm afraid I Is this another change to the terms today of our meeting? No, there's no change. Let him take control. I'm just suggesting that we all have to be fair to all shareholders and give them equal opportunity because all of them are shareholders. We're dealing with your situation. Vuyo, can you just handle that? We're still on the class action. Again, I think it's totally misleading, with respect, Mr. McGillan, to suggest that there's been any capitulation on the part of Sasol. Even the settlement makes it clear that it was on a basis that Sasol itself accepted no liability in relation to that matter. Of course, as you would understand, in any litigation, there are various risk assessments, and in the instance where litigation is also covered by insurers, the insurers too come in and make their own assessment. I've indicated very clearly that there's been no cash outflow from the company in respect of this litigation. I do think that there's no basis of any suggestion that our disclosures were inadequate in any form. At the time, based on the information that we had and subject to the confidentialities that applied, having a bearing on the fact that there were certain decisions that were still conditional on determinations by the court, we're comfortable that the disclosures we've made are appropriate, and we've been only positive around that. Thanks. It's quite interesting that it came out in the press as opposed to from the company. I'll move on to the next question that I brought up. That concerned the CTFE project. Mr. Grobler has given an undertaking that as I understand it, I'm going to be invited to some investigation, and I'll be able to participate? You heard me perhaps wrong. I asked that you can come and have a look to see the plant is operational and that we are busy optimizing it. That was my context. I'll decline that because it's too damn dangerous. You're still harming people there, Fleetwood Grobler. Until you can prove that the ambient air outfall from that plant is satisfying the ZAR 4 billion investment, I'm not going anywhere near it. I wouldn't go near it when I was working in the primary area. I certainly wouldn't be going there now. If you're going to do an investigation, I'll be there. The last issue, the one being about Bain, what I'd like to address is there are standards and rules and regulations plentiful, obviously, within the company. Either Bain is an ethical company, or they're not an ethical company. I think it's fairly clear that two major governments, the South African government now and the U.K. government, have kicked them out. Can I suggest that you review that position you have with Bain and cut them out, please? Thank you. I will just say that we are constantly reviewing our position, in this case, per your request, we will continue to do that. That is part and parcel of our approach. Thank you for that suggestion. Thank you. I got a note here that Mr. Erasmus insists that he wants to ask all his questions in front of all the shareholders. Bear with us. If you must go, please do so. What we will do now, before he continues with his questions, can we get the results published so that all the shareholders that want to be excused can be excused. That then we continue talking to or answering questions that Mr. Erasmus might be having. Can we get all the resolutions listed? Thank you very much. I am just going to go through all of them. It looks like if you look at column one, two, three, is it three? All the ones in front of us, that is advisory resolution number one, advisory resolution number two. Can you put it back again? How about that? Okay. Advisory resolution number three. Ordinary resolution. Thank you. Number 1.1, ordinary resolution number 1.2, ordinary resolution number 1.3, ordinary resolution number 1.4, ordinary resolution number two, ordinary resolution number three, ordinary resolution number 4.1, ordinary resolution number 4.2, ordinary resolution number 4.3, ordinary resolution number 4.4. Ordinary resolution number 4.5. All of those on the screen have been approved by the shareholders. The next batch of resolutions, ordinary resolution number five, special resolution number one, special resolution number two, special resolution number three, special resolution number four, special resolution number five, special resolution number six, special resolution number seven, special resolution number eight. All of them in front of us have also been supported by the shareholders. We truly are grateful for that. Those that have been insisting that they want to move on, they are free to do so. We will then continue with the questions that Mr. Erasmus has got, and any other shareholder who has some more questions. I'm here the whole day. I dedicated the day for this one today. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll resume taking questions in the room again. First in the queue is Ms. Ilham Rawoot. Thank you. I'm just a bit surprised that we're talking about getting energy to Mozambique 20 years later, and talking about creating a skill training center 20 years later. 30% of Mozambique still has access to electricity, and in Inhambane province Okay. Thank you. The percentage of increase of electricity in Inhambane province has increased on average less than the rest of the country, right? Can you explain that, please? Why most people do not have energy. In fact, all the people in the community still do not have electricity, even though you said otherwise. That we're only talking about this now. Can you also answer the question that I asked before, which was, how many people from Temane and the surrounding communities have skilled permanent jobs at the plant right now? I'm not talking about artisans. My last question is about the environmental question that I wasn't able to ask earlier. The people in Temane and the surrounding communities have been complaining about polluted lakes and their water sources. How often does Sasol do water and air quality testing? Do you make this info available to communities, and can you make it available to the public? That request was refused of mine when I sent in written questions. Yeah, I just want to point out that if these were your communities and homes and livelihoods being destroyed, I don't think for energy to go somewhere else, I don't think you'd be that understanding and enthusiastic. I'll tell them your heart goes out to them. Thank you again so much. I also like to just leave you with a thought that in the times when we had the cyclones in the region, Sasol contributed multi to really support the communities affected during those times as well. With respect to your first question, I am going to ask Priscillah to weigh in on your second and third question. With respect to electricity, Sasol is not doing the infrastructure planning and deployment of electrification in Inhambane province or in the country of Mozambique. What we are enabling is the ability for the country to be more self-sufficient with respect to electricity generation through the gas exploration activities that we are busy with. Unfortunately, I cannot help you with the first question specifically. Maybe on the second and the third, Priscillah, please come in. 350. Can we get the roving mic to activate? Hello. Okay. Thank you again for your questions. Just for total permanent employees, our total employees that we have in Mozambique, particularly in CPF, over 99% of our employees are Mozambican, of which more than 95% are from the Inhambane area. The second question was on water and quality testing. In line with our policies, we do regular water and testing. All of the SHEQ assessments are done. We also report on a regular basis to the INP. The reports are publicly available, I am also willing to share that with you. It is also just to note that we haven't really had any significant or major incidents in terms of fires or any incidents in terms of water pollution other than the challenges of Pande 4 that we are aware of, we are happy to share the detailed reports with you, they are also publicly available, and that is in Portuguese as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll move on to the next question from the room, and that's from Moses Mokwala there. Is there a question from Moses? We'll move on, Mr. Chair. We'll go to Ms. Thembi Sisulu in Kosi. I don't know, but I think they form part of those that have just left. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We'll move on to Madimetja Madue. Okay. I didn't get the question regard to Lake Charles project quite well. I heard there were some answers, but I didn't get it very correctly because the last three years we are here, before COVID, we hear that there was cost overruns and the project seems as if it was not going very well. I still want to get clarity on that, but maybe the board can come back to me again and say something regard to that. Thank you. Thank you, Madimetja. We can give you a quick update. That project has been fully completed and fully commissioned and is operating on all units that was built and within the context that I provided earlier, that we discussed Lake Charles. Yes, project was completed. There was a cost overrun. We indicated the project will be completed between $12.6 billion and $12.9 billion. We've completed it at $12.8 billion, and it's fully operational. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have 7 remaining questions from Mr. Ian Erasmus. I'll read through 3 at a time to expedite. There are some questions that have been asked which are related to the ongoing court case, and we've responded to that to say that will not be addressed in this forum. The remaining questions are related to operational and social questions. The 1st one, according to a Sasol internal flash notification this year, in January 2022, Sasol-2 plant smokestack at Secunda's NOx analyzer is not functioning and not reading, and that Sasol is still using a calculation done only at the end of each month to see when and if Sasol went over the NOx emissions from their Sasol-2 smokestacks. Has this analyzer been replaced or repaired? If not, why not? Has Sasol investigated the effects of this unmeasured NOx emissions in the Secunda Highveld area? If not, why not? 2nd question relating to regulations. Why is Sasol trying to hide behind some regulations but flout other regulations concerning emissions? The SAAQIS's readings again are only concerning ground-level monitoring stations. Why, if Sasol really concerned with planet, is Sasol actively dodging the release data of actual real-time emissions at its Secunda site? Sasol seem to be playing lip service to shareholders concerning GHG emissions while hiding the actual volumes at emission level. Is Sasol going to continue to hide behind license conditions instead of doing what's right? The 3rd question in this set to Mr. Simon Baloyi. If the coal tar filtration plant at Secunda has taken 15 years to construct, what guarantees can Sasol offer to shareholders that the current proposed green hydrogen projects, which Sasol wants to do in order to reduce carbon emissions, will actually be built in time and actually used instead of dragging out the process in order to lull shareholders until Sasol can escape to the U.S.? Is Sasol just buying time in order to move house, and is it true that Sasol Africa is split off from Sasol as a global company? I'll stop there. Thank you, Mr. Erasmus. I'm going to ask Simon to weigh in on the 1st 2 questions which you had, as well as then the last one I'll start off with is that any project has got complexity in scale, technology, and time frames. It depends on the magnitude of that in combination that sometimes impact the cost of the project, the time duration of the project to implement, or the performance of the outcome. In many cases that you referred to were the issue of the technology that was implemented, which was mostly the case in this instance. When you look at areas like green hydrogen and renewables, you would know that most of the renewable projects carries less risk because of the technology being much more proven in terms of photovoltaic panels as well as wind turbines to generate electricity. Coupled to that, electrolysis is being developed and being matured, inherently, the technology has been running for many years. It is the cost that while that technology come, that is the biggest focus in the industry. If we consider our future projects that we have in that space, I believe we would have due consideration to status and plan and execute appropriately. Simon, you want to weigh in? Yes. Thank you, Platoon. Just to support you on the project. We have completed many mega projects in Secunda successfully, and I think for the CTF East, like we've said and given the commitment, once we have done with that project, we will do a post-implementation to take all the lessons learned from there and continue in that fashion. On the NOx matter, you mentioned about a stack analyzer that was not working. I must first reiterate that that stack has now been fixed. It's working. Suffice to say, during that time, we used a model that was independently audited to check our emissions. We checked that model against REN data, and we published in our annual reports, you will see that that model was actually ultra-conservative. During that time, there was nothing untoward in terms of our emissions. Actually, what you were reporting was much more conservative than what was happening. Even after we fixed the stack, we back calculated the data, and we can also show that. The question on the GHG, we've answered it. The data on all our emissions is audited by an independent third party, and it's released. That data is not just us talking about it. I think to mention the service provider, I think it's Deloitte. We have that. It's independent, and that data is given. You also mentioned why are we hiding behind license conditions. We're not hiding. Like I've said, the data is regularly released, and that data is public information. We'll also give you that data. We can give you access to that data. It's public information. It's not common standards for plants. There's many variables that you measure in the plants. It's not common standards. We have all plant data on a live stream. It just doesn't work like that, the operational data is freely available. We will comply to all the licenses. We share that data with the communities, and we can share the data with you as well. Thank you. Thank you. The next question. A recent tweet from Mr. Richard Spoor alleges that Sasol Dam F is leaking hazardous waste into the soil and groundwater just east of the Sasol Secunda plant. Is it true that Dam F is leaking due to that dam not being lined? There's no plans for Sasol to explore fracking in the Karoo. We have our focus in terms of the areas that is in southern Mozambique. That is our focus to deal or to obtain more gas going forward. With respect to your question on Dam F, I'm not sure if Vuyo wants to weigh in, and then Hermann can weigh in to give you the context there. Good afternoon. Chair, when Dam F was constructed in the 1980s, lining of dams were not part of the license requirements. Although the neighboring farmer now is claiming that there's specific harm to his farming activities, independent veterinary investigations that was commissioned by Sasol didn't find any proof of that. It is actually, however, important to note that money has been included in our rolling capital plan, so that when that dam is decommissioned as part of the Boesmanspruit plans, that area will be rehabilitated. Questions. Chair, that concludes the questions received both online and in the room. There is, however, Mr. Erasmus still waiting online through the audio call option. I will hand over to you to decide how to proceed with this. Is Mr. Erasmus awaiting? He would like to ask an audio question. Yes, Mr. Chair. Sure. He can. Please go ahead, Mr. Erasmus. Okay. Can you hear me? Yes, sir. I really want this question to be answered. That's why I'm asking this. I'm pertinent to get this answered. Were you aware that the Sasol-appointed Guina Attorneys law firm, appointed in 2021 to independently investigate every one of my concerns, had in their employ an ex-Sasol employee who worked for Sasol as an environmental regulatory specialist from 2015 to 2020, who happened to work for Sasol at the very same time I made all the environmental disclosures internally in Sasol, as well as external disclosures. In fact, it was the very same lawyer who contacted me and asked for all the evidence and photographs regarding Sasol's sanctioned investigation. Sasol, firstly, do you think that your so-called independent law firm is really independent since investigation was led by an ex-Sasol environmental legal expert employee? Mr. Kahla, why did Sasol limit the scope of Guina Attorneys investigation to exclude all my evidence on victimization as a whistleblower? Does Sasol not take their whistleblower policy issued in July 2020 seriously? Thanks a lot, Mr. Erasmus. You've indicated that there was an individual who worked on this matter within Guina Attorneys who had previously worked with Sasol. Indeed, there was someone who had worked before with Sasol. At the time the engagement was made, the person had left Sasol, more importantly, there was oversight of the investigation by the managing partner of Guina, and you yourself have been involved in interactions directly with Guina, who's had oversight around this matter. I've indicated to you about processes that we have had previously that have dealt with the issues, as I've made it very clear, the issues relating to your whistleblower complaints form part of the criminal charges that are before the court. It would be inappropriate of me to then seek to litigate or in any way engage around those issues outside of a process that you are likely to be a witness to and which is before the court. That's the position in respect to the whistleblower complaints. They form part of the criminal prosecution, we will be dealing with them within the confines of the court process as set out. Thank you. Before we conclude, Mr. McGillan, can we take your question, your last question before we close? Hello again. Thank you. Yes. I think it is pertinent to bolt onto Ian Erasmus' concerns, which flow with my concerns. At last year's AGM, I had a question for Vuyo. I felt that he had undermined the whistleblower process that I was involved with. He made a suggestion that I meet with himself. I had a meeting with Vuyo, and we arrived at a good faith, amicable sort of way forward. Unfortunately, Vuyo reneged on the good faith way forward spectacularly in writing. When he had to admit to me that the good faith gesture that he had made, he had no permission to make in the first case. This is the very board member and character at the highest level that we have to deal with as either whistleblowers or potential whistleblowers because I am not a whistleblower. I just happen to be a shareholder who gives a damn about how the oil and gas business should be run properly. How, Fleetwood, do we deal with Sasol with issues when we come to your high offices and people just renege on good faith issues? By the way, I must say, I find Mr. Erasmus' intentions completely believable based on all of my experiences at your plant in Secunda. It is really quite a mess. Thank you. I look forward to a detailed answer. Thank you. Mr. McGillan, I am quite surprised that you would question my good faith in the interactions that we have had together. I am actually happy that I ensured that in those interactions, I was not alone. In fact, I included the chief compliance and ethics officer to go through each of those issues. As you are aware I interrogated those issues in her presence in order to establish whether there is something else that was missing in respect of what had been clearly communicated by Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr that they had been unsubstantiated, and there was nothing. Pursuant to that, I wrote to you a letter indicating that, restating what we had already had discussions on, and indicated to you that as here we are following some in-depth discussions with you regarding the allegations we had made. I advise you that nothing new had emerged that was contrary to the conclusion of Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr to the effect that those allegations had not been substantiated. Of course, at that meeting, you had also sought to provide services to Sasol, and I also addressed you in relation to those. Perhaps those might be the ones that you might think that I had no mandate in relation to them. I have indicated to you the process around how one can become a supplier of services, to Sasol in further wrote, "We note your request to provide services to Sasol. You are welcome to register as a potential Sasol supplier in accordance with our standard supply chain process." I gave you an attached training material guide instructions, which were then provided. I proceeded, maybe that's again the basis of what you think I may have given you the impression I have no mandate. Your application will be considered based on Sasol's current needs. If a need for your services and/or goods exists, you will be contacted by an applications management administrator. Should there be no immediate need, your details will be retained on Ariba for future reference. Kindly take note that the inclusion of your entity in the Sasol supplier database does not create an obligation on Sasol South Africa Limited to issue any request for quotation or to award any contract to your organization. Please note that I have no involvement in the above-mentioned process and would therefore advise you to please address all further correspondence in this regard in the manner detailed above. I'm thankful that you would now, in light of that, and in the fact that having a bearing on the fact that that meeting was not just between you and I, it was the chief compliance and ethics officer. The issues were properly ventilated, and I had the opportunity to ask you what else was there that may have been missed by the Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr. I hold the view that that process by Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr was proper, and we accept its conclusions. Thank you. Thank you very much. Can we go back to our colleagues just to double-check that we've covered all the questions, from Mr. Erasmus and Mr. McGillan. We've done that one. Can you confirm that? I can confirm, Chair. All questions have been addressed. Thank you very much, and thanks for your help. Ladies and gentlemen. Mr. McGillan. Sorry? I can't hear you. He's adding a new question in the Q&A. If we can ask the participant to please join the queue using his handheld device. Right. Yes. I'm back on. Thank you very much for your attempt at deflecting there, Vuyo. The fact that you had to reduce to writing commitment that you had made and then reneged on. It's quite clear that in the previous meeting, you had agreed with me that the best way to sort out the culture problem at Sasol was to go into this proposal that I had made. I'm not going to start discussing here the detailed minutiae of my expertise and what I thought and what I recommended and what you bought into. I'm most certainly not going to go into any further detail of a follow-up meeting that I had with another gentleman on the board there. I must say, he was completely complimentary, completely open, frank, and very decent. I'm not even going to mention his name. I'm not going to be besmirched here that in some way or other, including the ongoings with CDH, who unfortunately had a COVID death of the individual who handled the matter and the record mysteriously disappeared concerning the ongoings of those meetings. Phone them and ask them if you wish, and whether or not you were misled by that company, as I contended. Perhaps we'll have that meeting all over again. That would be fair, wouldn't it? Thank you very much. Mr. McGillan, I think your request has been noted. Thank you very much for your interaction. I don't think Vuyo has further comments to make there. I don't think so, Chair. I think Mr. McGillan knows that I remain open to meeting with him on any matter. Again, the point that I've just indicated around services that he believes he could provide to us that are beneficial to us, there's a process around how you go about doing that. That process has been properly outlined. I can't allow for a different process specific to him, which is inconsistent with the matters that have been outlined. Thank you, Chair. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, this concludes the business of the 43rd annual general meeting of Sasol Limited. I truly thank you very much for your indulgence. I hope that you remain safe and healthy over the holidays. I look forward to seeing you all next year at this AGM. Thank you very much. Have a blessed day. Thank you very much.