Statement of assurance

INDEPENDENT ASSURANCE REPORT ON SELECTED SUSTAINABILITY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

TO THE DIRECTORS OF SIBANYE GOLD LIMITED

We have undertaken a limited assurance engagement on selected sustainability performance indicators, as described below, and presented in the Sibanye Gold Limited (SGL) Integrated Annual Report for the year ended 31 December 2015 (the Report). This engagement was conducted by a multi-disciplinary team of health, safety, environmental and assurance specialists with relevant experience in sustainability reporting.

SUBJECT MATTER

We are required to provide limited assurance on the selected sustainability performance indicators set out in the table below. The assured data is presented in the table below.

Selected sustainability performance indicators Unit
(a) Prepared in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (GRI G4 Guidelines)
Environment
Total CO2 equivalent emissions, Scope 1-2 Tonnes
Total CO2 equivalent emissions, Scope 3 Tonnes
Electricity MWh
Number of environmental incidents – Level 3 and above Number
Total water withdrawal ML
Diesel TJ
Health  
Number of cases of silicosis reported Number of cases
Number of cases of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) reported Number of cases
Number of cases of chronic obstructive airways diseases (COAD) reported Number of cases
Cardiorespiratory tuberculosis (TB) total (new and retreatment cases) Number of cases
TB incidence (new and relapse cases) Number of cases
Highly active antiretroviral treatment (HAART) patients alive and on treatment (in active SGL employment) Number of patients
HIV prevalence among employees Percentage (%)
% workforce tested positive, negative and unknown for HIV Percentage employees and
contractors tested for HIV (%)
Safety  
Lost-time injury frequency rate (LTIFR) Rate per million hours worked
Medically treated injury frequency rate (MTIFR) Rate per million hours worked
Number of fatalities Number
Social  
Total socio-economic development (SED) spend in Rands R million
(b) Prepared in compliance with the Broad-Based Socio-Economic Empowerment Charter for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (BBSEEC) (2002) and related scorecard (2004)
Rand value spent on approved social and labour plan (SLP) projects R million
(c) Prepared in compliance with the Amendment to the BBSEEC (2010) and related scorecard (2010)
Employment equity  

Percentage HDSAs in management who are classified as designated groups and who are employed at management levels (excluding foreign nationals and white males) at:

  • Top management (Board)
  • Senior (Executive Committee)
  • Middle (E Band)
  • Junior (D Band)
Total percentage (%)
Procurement and enterprise development  
Total procurement spend from black economic empowerment (BEE) entities R million
BEE procurement spend: Capital goods Percentage (%)
BEE procurement spend: Services Percentage (%)
BEE procurement spend: Consumable goods Percentage (%)

DIRECTORS RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE REPORT

The Directors are responsible for the selection, preparation and presentation of the selected sustainability performance indicators. This responsibility includes the identification of stakeholders and stakeholder requirements, material issues, for commitments with respect to sustainability performance and for the design, implementation and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation of the Report that is free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.

The Directors are also responsible for the selection and application of the following reporting criteria used in the preparation and presentation of the respective selected sustainability performance indicators:

  1. (a) the GRI G4 Guidelines;
  2. (b) the BBSEEC (2002) and related Scorecard (2004); and
  3. (c) the Amendments to the BBSEEC (2010) and related Scorecard (2010).

OUR INDEPENDENCE AND QUALITY CONTROL

We have complied with the independence and all other ethical requirements of the Code of Ethics for Professional Accountants issued by the International Ethics Standards Board for Accountants, which is founded on fundamental principles of integrity, objectivity, professional competence and due care, confidentiality and professional behaviour.

KPMG Services Proprietary Limited applies the International Standard on Quality Control 1 and accordingly maintains a comprehensive system of quality control including documented policies and procedures regarding compliance with ethical requirements, professional standards and applicable legal and regulatory requirements.

OUR RESPONSIBILITY

Our responsibility is to express limited assurance conclusion on the selected sustainability performance indicators in (a), (b) and (c) based on the procedures we have performed and the evidence we have obtained. We conducted our limited assurance engagement in accordance with the International Standard on Assurance Engagements (ISAE) 3000 (Revised), Assurance Engagements other than Audits or Reviews of Historical Financial Information issued by the International Auditing and Assurance Standards Board. The Standard requires us to plan and perform our engagement to obtain limited assurance about whether the selected sustainability performance indicators are free from material misstatement.

A limited assurance engagement undertaken in accordance with ISAE 3000 (Revised) involves assessing the suitability in the circumstances of SGL's use of the reporting criteria set out above as the basis of preparation for the selected sustainability performance indicators, assessing the risks of material misstatement of the selected sustainability performance indicators whether due to fraud or error, responding to the assessed risks as necessary in the circumstances, and evaluating the overall presentation of the selected sustainability performance indicators. A limited assurance engagement is substantially less in scope than a reasonable assurance engagement in relation to both risk assessment procedures, including an understanding of internal control, and the procedures performed in response to the assessed risks. The procedures we performed were based on our professional judgment and included inquiries, observation of processes followed, inspection of documents, analytical procedures, evaluating the appropriateness of quantification methods and reporting policies, and agreeing or reconciling with underlying records.

Given the circumstances of the engagement, in performing the procedures listed above we:

  • Interviewed management and data owners to obtain an understanding of the internal control environment, risk assessment process and information systems relevant to the sustainability reporting process;
  • Tested the processes and systems to generate, collate, aggregate, monitor and report the selected sustainability performance indicators;
  • Inspected supporting documentation on a sample basis and performed analytical procedures to evaluate the data generation and reporting processes against the reporting criteria;
  • Evaluated the reasonableness and appropriateness of significant estimates and judgments made by the directors in the preparation of the sustainability performance indicators;
  • Undertook site visits at Beatrix, Kloof, Driefontein, Cooke and Libanon Business Park; and
  • Evaluated whether the selected sustainability performance indicators presented in the Report are consistent with our overall knowledge and experience of sustainability management and performance at SGL.

The procedures performed in a limited assurance engagement vary in nature from, and are less in extent than for a reasonable assurance engagement. As a result the level of assurance obtained in a limited assurance engagement is substantially lower than the assurance that would have been obtained had we performed a reasonable assurance engagement. Accordingly, we do not express a reasonable assurance opinion about whether SGL's selected sustainability performance information as set out in (a), (b) and (c) have been prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the relevant reporting criteria.

LIMITED ASSURANCE CONCLUSIONS

In relation to the Report for the year ended 31 December 2015, we report

(a) On the selected sustainability performance indicators prepared in accordance with the GRI G4 Guidelines
Based on the procedures we have performed and the evidence we have obtained, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the selected sustainability performance indicators in (a) above are not prepared, in all material respects, in accordance with the GRI G4 Guidelines.

(b) On the selected sustainability performance indicators prepared in compliance with the BBSEEC (2002) and related Scorecard (2004)
Based on the procedures we have performed and the evidence we have obtained, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the selected sustainability performance indicators in (b) above are not prepared, in all material respects, in compliance with the BBSEEC (2002) and related Scorecard (2004).

(c) On the selected sustainability performance indicators prepared in compliance with the Amendment to the BBSEEC (2010) and related Scorecard (2010)
Based on the procedures we have performed and the evidence we have obtained, nothing has come to our attention that causes us to believe that the selected sustainability performance indicators in (c) above are not prepared, in all material respects, in compliance with the Amendment to the BBSEEC (2010) and related Scorecard (2010).

OTHER MATTERS

The maintenance and integrity of the SGL's Website is the responsibility of SGL management. Our procedures did not involve consideration of these matters and, accordingly we accept no responsibility for any changes to either the information in the Report or our independent limited assurance report that may have occurred since the initial date of its presentation on the SGL Website.

RESTRICTION OF LIABILITY

Our work has been undertaken to enable us to express limited assurance conclusions on the selected sustainability performance indicators to the Directors of SGL in accordance with the terms of our engagement, and for no other purpose. We do not accept or assume liability to any party other than SGL, for our work, for this report, or for the conclusion we have reached.

KPMG Services Proprietary Limited

PD Naidoo

Director
Johannesburg
18 March 2016

KPMG Crescent
85 Empire Road
Parktown
Johannesburg 2193

J Erasmus

Director
Johannesburg
18 March 2016

KPMG Crescent
85 Empire Road
Parktown
Johannesburg 2193

ASSURED DATA

Key sustainability performance data selected by Sibanye for assurance by KPMG Services

Selected sustainability performance indicators Unit SGL data
(a) Prepared in accordance with the Global Reporting Initiative G4 Sustainability Reporting Guidelines (GRI G4 Guidelines)
Environment    
Total CO2 equivalent emissions, Scope 1-2 Tonnes 5,015,626
Total CO2 equivalent emissions, Scope 3 Tonnes 866,745
Electricity MWh 4,231,362.59
Number of environmental incidents – Level 3 and above Number 8
Total water withdrawal ML 114,735.03
Diesel TJ 231
Health    
Number of cases of silicosis reported Number of cases 186
Number of cases of NIHL reported Number of cases 105
Number of cases of COAD reported Number of cases 57
Cardiorespiratory TB total (new and retreatment cases) Number of cases 679
TB incidence (new and relapse cases) Number of cases 744
HAART patients alive and on treatment (in active SGL employment) Number of patients 5,750
HIV prevalence among employees Percentage VCT cohort including employees and contractors (%) 21.98
% workforce tested positive, negative and unknown for HIV Percentage employees and contractors tested for HIV 21.98 tested positive
78 tested negative
0.01 unknown
Safety    
LTIFR Rate per million hours worked 6.74
MTIFR Rate per million hours worked 3.6
Number of fatalities Number 7
Social    
Total SED spend in Rands R million 691.496
(b) Prepared in compliance with the Broad-Based Socio-Economic Empowerment Charter for the South African Mining and Minerals Industry (BBSEEC) (2002) and related scorecard (2004)
Rand value spent on approved SLP projects R million 27.094
(c) Prepared in compliance with the amendment to the BBSEEC (2010) and related scorecard (2010)
Employment equity    
Percentage HDSAs in management who are classified as designated groups and who are employed at management levels (excluding foreign nationals and white males) Total percentage at
Top management (Board)
Senior management (Executive Committee)
Middle management (E Band)
Junior management (D Band)
Top management: 31
Executive Committee: 43
Middle management: 30
Junior management: 48
Procurement and enterprise development    
Total procurement spend from BEE entities R million 4,700
BEE procurement spend: Capital goods Percentage (%) 56
BEE procurement spend: Services Percentage (%) 76
BEE procurement spend: Consumable goods Percentage (%) 72
  • For the parameters assured, total Scope 1 and 2 emissions, diesel, electricity and safety, the Burnstone project data was included.
  • For all other parameters, the Burnstone project data was excluded.
  • For all other parameters, the Burnstone project data was excluded.

Search this report