Frans Baleni - National Union of Mineworkers, South Africa HARDtalk

compensation. Up to 1,000 people have come forward with allegations

1950s. 1950s.

Those are the latest headlines. Now, it is time for HARDtalk. It has

become known as the Marikana massacre. 34 people were killed as

police in South Africa opened fire on striking miners. For many, it

had echoes of Sharpeville in 1960, one of the defining events that

opened the world's eye is to apartheid. For Franz Fellaini, the

President of the National Union of Mineworkers, Marikana is a

challenge not just to South Africa's mining industry but to the

entire political system that has developed since apartheid. Is this

violence evidence that the system has failed all but a tiny political

Welcome to HARDtalk. What do you think Marikana tells us about post-

apartheid South Africa? Thank you and good afternoon. Marikana tells

us a number of things. In the first instance, it tells us that post

apartheid, there are social details to be dealt with. In the main,

there are three - unemployment, poverty and inequality. At the time

of these demonstrations, you were calling for decisive action from

the police and decisive action is what you got. Decisive action

simply means to ask law-enforcement and prevention of loss of life. Ask

for law enforcement. Any loss of life is regrettable. Our

constitution does not permit anybody to take lives. This is

something that is not allowed. the day, you said at a local radio

station that police were patient but these people were extremely

armed with dangerous weapons. Do you still believe it was their

fault? It is not entirely their fault, how the police have acted.

The bottom line is that by the time the police had acted, 10 lives were

lost. Our call was to prevent any further loss of life, not more

killings. What we had was a situation where there were in

effect two rival unions. Your union, the NUM, the established voice of

the workers in the mining industry for the best part of 30 years,

saying to people, go back to work, this strike is illegal, and a new

rival organisations saying stand your ground, fight for your rights.

Isn't this an illustration of the NUM's declining authority in the

mining industry? This is not about the declining authority of any one

in the mining industry. If you look at the events of Marikana, there

were many players and not all were mining workers. Out of the 34

people who were killed, 12 were employees of Lonmin. Of the 200 or

so people who were arrested, 71 not the employees of Lonmin. It is not

the matter of having workers from Lonmin deciding to were is up --

deciding to rise up. You are not saying that none of those people

were workers and that they were not concerned with the level of wages

they were receiving? Indeed, workers were concerned about the

level of wages they were receiving. But two months before Marikana,

they accepted a wage settlement that had been negotiated and gave

us a mandate. There are of a social economic factors of our time.

Zillah, one of the leaders from the so she'll -- Social Democratic

Alliance, she says that the National Union of Mineworkers was

not even able to go in and speak to the workers there. She says this

represents the extent to which the ANC is coming apart and the

alliance with the unions is also coming apart. That is

misinformation. The reality is that it was a tiny number of people who

were behind the violence which actually prevented us from engaging

with workers. If you look at... Out of 30,000 or so, just about 5,000

were on that hilltop. People were engineering and driving the

findings. This was a smaller number of people than that. The strike was

maintained through violence and intimidation. Without that, the

strike would not have continued. There were testimony is that on

11th August, a few days before the massacre, protesters were

confronted with NUM members who shot at them and killed them.

facts are being presented as we speak in the commission of inquiry.

The police have confirmed that nobody on that day was killed. It

is not factual. And this will be presented at the commission of

inquiry. We talk of this as being a battle potentially between the

supporters of your union and those who are challenging its authority.

The question that arises from that given the dominant role that the

NUM has enjoyed in the industry for so long, is how he is your union

now? What is full membership? 320,000. In the last few periods of

statistic taking, we have lost a few thousand members, some from

London, and some from Impala. Impala would challenge will

percentage. They say among their workers, NUM membership has gone

from 70% to 13% in seven months. The numbers we have it is 38%.

Remember, we're challenging the legitimacy of that equipment. Many

workers have indicated to us they have been cut worst and intimidated

and had agreements signed on their behalf. -- her worst. In essence,

you except that there is a decline. This is a significant decline and

it must tell you something. This is a significant decline but we must

look at how it happens. It happens only where there is violence and

intimidation. In a normal situation, it does not happen. People have

been scared out of membership? just scared, they have been killed.

Many people have been killed. There is another reason people are

killed in mining and that is because of accidents. South Africa

has, even now, the highest mining death-rate in the industrialised

world. What does that say about the long established collaborative

relationship your union has enjoyed with the mining companies?

Over a period of time that we have fought those killings underground,

we have reduced the mine accident rate from 1,000 per annum to less

than 200 per annum. It is still the highest in the industrial world.

still believe that we can still do more. It is because of greed and

the pay structure. The greed of employers, basically. With the pace

up to, the bonus is the incentive. Basic pay is made low. People chase

the bonus. Do you except it is a failing on

your part, on the part of the Union, not to have insured that there are

fewer such deaths? To make sure they are the rare exception rather

than a routine risk for miners? would say it is a failure on our

side. Yes, we can still do more. As I have said, we have done so much,

including strike action to prevent further loss of life. It is for

this reason that we have called for the tightening of legislation,

including having chief-executive is prosecuted and sent to jail. It is

only then will there be the message that any loss of life will carry

consequences. The Bishop of Pretoria was involved in a strike

mediator. He said, as he was working on trying to help resolve

this situation, that the Association of mine workers and

construction union, the new rival union that is trying to set up and

muscle in on your territory, saw the plight of the workers and were

more sympathetic towards them than the NUM. That cannot be factual. We

have been dealing with the issues of mine workers over 30 years.

Isn't that the problem, however? You have become part of the

establishment? We have nothing to lose. It is in our interest as

workers to be united in confronting and poor years. We cannot kill our

own members or kill potential members. It is not in our best

interest. We would rather lose numbers to other unions than lose

members to killing. Argues still a worker?

The general secretary comes through the ranks of the Union and has

worked underground, is elected by a workers. You are the chairman and

deputy chairman of various high- profile financial institutions and

insurance bodies. That's all according to Business Week. Is that

the background workers might expect from their union boss? Some of

those points are not factual. One of those places you mentioned his

working for the benefit of mine workers. We have produced over 800

graduates and have supplied over 3,000 bursaries. What about round

mutual insurance? Mutual investments?

This was about compensation of workers. It is an area of struggle.

There is nothing wrong... And S One Holdings? Again, that was a

deployment by the union as a result of fighting the struggle in that

company, which we are organising. We must have a voice. Once I was

elected as the general secretary, I resigned from the position because

when I was deployed there... Another issue that has recently

been raised is your salary. The Guardian and the Daily Mail

reported that you receive 70,000 rand per months. Total salary is

105 rand per month. That is a lot of money. Those statistics are not

factual. Is it above or below that? Below. How far below? That is a

matter for the union to disclose. Let me point out to you that the

senses of 2012, which was published by the South African statistical

authorities, says that the average Black Sabbath in household makes

60,600 rand per year. -- black South African household. Your

monthly salary is more what they would and per year. Are you saying

you are anywhere close to what the average black South African

household would be making? union determines the salaries of

its employees... That is not an excuse, is it? You are in a

position to say that as general secretary, in the middle of an

economic crisis, when the industry is suffering, when many of your

"fellow workers" are on low wages, maybe you should step forward and

say you don't want to take this money. We should compare apples

with apples. People employed in the Union include lawyers, people with

certain skills, who must be compensated according to the market

in order to render quality services to the ordinary union members.

this is a market, does this mean that if you do not receive that

money, you would go off and work for another union? I do not

determine my salary. My salary is actually below the market rate.

general secretary of Cosatu, the organisation of which the NUM is a

member, it represents all the trades unions in South Africa, is

part of this alliance that has essentially governed South Africa

since apartheid, he says that the NUM favours management and high

skill work is over the wreck and file. I don't know where she gets

that information. It is not a matter of us are favouring any

particular workers. We look after the interests of our members across

the board. The critical issue is more about the into a democratic

process. People who are elected tend to the mark educated at the

lower level. This marginalised the better operators. Let us extend is

beyond the union and what happened specifically at Marikana to the

problems facing the ANC government. The NUM has been a critical support

of the ANC government. It has been an important voice in helping to

fight apartheid and a bigger voice in modern South Africa. What do you

think of the achievements of the 18 years since that system was

demolished? There has been so much. In the

first place, I no longer fear being arrested. That means that for the

first time, I can participate in a regular elections. There are a

number of changes that have happened. Education, empowerment -

we are now allowed to occupy positions that were previously

forbidden. There is a range of positive things that the ANC was

Black people can get the top -- to the top in Africa, but yet there

are many people who are still left behind, you were in dispute that?

That is fair. The problems are behind the fall of unemployment, --

poverty and inequalities. Education remains a problem. And worryingly,

inequality has grown since apartheid is a poet. The gap

between rich and poor is among the world's largest. This is a

concerned that we have raised. It is why we have said to the African

nation of Congress in this month's conference -- Congress, if they're

not going to craft policies that deal with the underlying factors,

they may as well be relevant. They need to come up with policies and

positions that will deal seriously with the problems. A how close of

eight to making themselves irrelevant? From the discussions we

have had and that the policy conference earlier this year, there

is no doubt that they are equally concerned about these issues.

is the leadership conference in December which will decide whether

or not Jacob Zuma, the President of South Africa, did re-elected as ANC

leader. The President called Marikana when he was on a trip to

Belgium an unfortunate incident. Nobody expected such an event. Is

that true? Nobody expected that they could be such a shooting and

killings. There had been strikes going on for most of the year.

There has been violence and other incidents that the protests ad's

public service failures. People could not have been blind to the

change of mood that was gripping many in South Africa. The point he

was rising is that we did not expect the skirmishes to the extent

with 34 people the issue of -- 34 people. The issue of inequality is

a ticking bomb. That is why every attempt had to be made to deal with

that, especially with the high level of youth unemployment. It is

exactly the message the former leader of the game seemed Youth

League, Julius Malema, has been pushing. He actually spoke to the

Marikana miners before the President did. You cannot stop

someone interacting with others. You have to see it -- look at his

intention. It is a serious intention to speak to them or is it

about him repositioning himself? Out interest is in the broader

interest of the country. This was a terrible event, which everyone

subsequently acknowledges. Many people were injured and that it was

a big death toll. Many people were charged with collective offences of

murder. A big inquiry set up. The President seems to have been called

on the hob. The President would want to speak for himself. What do

you think of it? The President was out of the country in the first

place. The day after the President disrupted his engagement in

Zimbabwe to visit the site and took a position on the spot that a

commission of inquiry must be established to look at the event.

You back him before. It will be union-backed him again at the

leadership conference? Those issues are internal matters. When we go to

the conference it is up to the delegates who decide who we vote

for. Isn't the violent also on the streets, not just in the minds, a

bit of evidence that people are losing faith in the political

system? That 18 years of past of -- post-apartheid South Africa just

have not delivered for the majority of black South Africans? Undoing

the Hunslet of apartheid will never take 18 years. There has to be that

understanding in the first place. If you look at the housing, how

many houses were delivered. More than the Arpad had put together in

its era. And yet the number of people living in shacks has gone up.

We have a decrease in the number of people -- an increase of people

with flush toilets from 50% to 57%. It will take for ever to give

people a decent standard of living. That is why we are telling the ANC

to accelerate delivery. Why haven't you been saying this for the last

18 years? We have been saying it. So they are ignoring? There have

been improvement in areas and lapses in others. We are quite

confident that some of the service delivery issues... That sounds a

bit complacent. The President has said that people will get a clinic

and a school and a library and a police station in every community

by 2030. Their -- that is another 18 years away. Five years ago, at

the last leadership conference, I talked to be distinguished leading

figure in the ANC, a Minister for Education. He said he was

astonished at how patient Paul black South Africans have been.

Five years on, isn't this an indication that their patience is

simply running out? It is indeed running out. That is why there is a

national plan that is put together a booking of the long-term and had

to deal with these issues in a well structured plan, rather than in

piecemeal and on a short-term basis. The bottom line is that in order to

get resources to deal with the issues, we must grow the economy.

If the economy is not growing, you will not get the resources to do

public spending. We then have the consequences of these strikes. You

have mentioned the importance and need of the economy. Mining is a

huge player. Half a million people employed directly. Goodness knows

the numbers affected by the spending that comes from that. Are

you worried about the prospects for the mining industry now? That

investors might be scared off. The Finance Minister was talking about

exactly that risk. As one miner who had been on strike told BBC in

September, violence works. When they just talk, they get peanuts.

When they fight them, they get pay rises of nearly 22%. These events

do worry us. The interaction with mining investors, you can see that

the morale is slightly lower. I think their confidence should be

boosted very soon. The main concern is the consequence of these strikes

where they may result in job losses. Already a number of companies have

said any indication of an intention to lay off people. You have talked

about policies. One of those under consideration is nationalisation of

the mines. Julius Malema saying the minds belong to us and we must

benefit. If we do not benefit, we must fight until we benefit. We're

not scared of the white man and by implication the foreigner.

Nationalisation would be one solution. Is it when you would

support? The issue is what do we want out of these mines? South

Africa must benefit out of the mineral resources we have in this

country. They are not benefiting today. State intervention, which is

structured in such a manner that they can be returned to the economy

and to the people at large. So the government buying stakes in mining

companies? Yes the government taking a partnership. In other

instances, taking 100% ownership. The cosy relationship like that you

have had for 30 years and it has not delivered. If we are to take