Tepco Shareholders Annual Meeting, June 28, 2011
These are the English-translated tweets of Yasumi Iwakami as he attended Tepco’s annual meeting Tepco held on 28 June 2011. The meeting started from 10:00 A.M. and finished at 16:09 P.M. There were no breaks, so the meeting lasted in total 6 hours and 9 minutes. The number of shareholders attending was 9,309.
First, Tepco apologized for the nuclear power plant accident and their plan for scheduled blackouts. Then they proceeded to the business of the day. Company Proposal No. 1 regards the appointment of 17 directors. Company Proposal No. 2 regards the appointment of 2 auditors. 402 Shareholders’ Proposal No. 3 regards the partial change of company bylaws; namely an addendum to chapter 7 stipulating the disengagement from power generation by means of nuclear power plants.
The new chapters which would need to be added based on the shareholders’ proposals are as follows. Article 41: We, Tepco , shall take the nuclear reactors offline, and decommission them sequentially, starting from the oldest. Article 42: We, Tepco, shall not newly build or increase the number of nuclear power plants.’
Our reasons: “We, the shareholders, have made proposals suggesting how to deal with the nuclear power plants’ problems over these 20 years. Every time we attended the annual meeting, Tepco’s board members have disregarded our suggestions by saying things like ‘the power plants were designed and built durable enough to withstand a maximum level earthquake.’ (2005)
And at the same time, in the past, Tepco covered up the presence of an active fault zone and falsified its data in order to keep the nuclear power plants in operation.
The consequence of all this is the disaster we saw in March.” “Tepco’s calling the disaster “unforseeable” is unforgivable。 Tepco is also still very unclear on how to actually cope with the radioactive substances and on the costs Tepco will have to bear. As we can see from the results of the incident, if we rely on nuclear power plants, CO2 will ultimately increase.” and ‘As Tepco tells us nothing but lies about the nuclear power plants, as our future generation must bear the accident’s negative legacy, and as Tepco forces responsibility on local inhabitants, we strongly believe that Tepco must immediately cease, and remove itself from the business of nuclear power plants.” Tepco’s board members respond that they are “against the proposal of the shareholders.”
Tepco then answered shareholders’ questions collected before the meeting. The pay cut in board members’ compensation. Regarding how to address renewable energy, Tepco will also take into account a sustainable energy supply. On analysis of the cause of incident, Tepco repeated the same comments as always, that the nuclear power plants could endure the earthquake but not the unexpected tsunami. Regarding carrying out the radioactive-contaminated water by tanker as recommended by Hiroaki Koide, Tepco says it is difficult to do so as there is nowhere to tie up the tanker near the plants. Tepco denies separation of electrical power generation and transmission cables. Regarding what will become of the plants from here, Tepco says they will keep up to date on national discussions of long- and midterm energy policy; essentially they shelved the issue.
An attendee asked some questions. First, why is Tepco able to assert exemption of liability stated in the Act on Compensation for Nuclear Damages? Second, weren’t the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plants originally designed to be built on a deeply-indented coastline, which may the tsunami resulted in this human disaster? Third, Tepco should disclose the nuclear analysis results of the contaminated water. Tepco answers. For the first question, a Court of Justice will decide whether the exemption of liability will apply or not. For the second, the tsunami was not a human disaster. Third, strontium alone was detected from the reactor building.
The second questioner shouted ‘Die in the reactor!’, the room became tumultuous for a moment, although there were giggles in the Tepco press room. The third questioner was an old lady. Her first question requested of Tepco to immediately announce the fact of the higher risk of infertility for women who are exposed to radiation. Second, she asked that ex-Tepco employees give up their corporate pension. Tepco answers. First, it is afact that women are more sensitive to radiation than men. Second, Tepco will review the issue of corporate pension.
The next questioner was a specialist in corporate accounting. First, the statement of accounts presently put out by Tepco is not real, because the amount of compensation is not included. Second, the management responsibility of Tepco board members. Aside from war. the nuclear accident this time is the greatest human disaster possible. Since it was caused by Tepco, Tepco board members must reduce their salary to the same level as those living on public assistance. Tepco answers. First, until the government clearly defined the national policy, the nuclear amount ofcompensation for the accident can not be appropriated. Second, from May, Tepco’s representative director gave up the whole amount, and 60% of executive managing directors’ pays have been cut.
Another question. Is the temperature of the board members’ rooms air-conditioned to too cold a level? Tepco’s answer. Tepco will save energy by 25% company-wide, including the boardroom.
Another question. If the pooled contaminated water spills out, this nation will end. Before repayment, Tepco must fully address the issue of coping with the contaminated water. Tepco’s answer. We are injecting water to cool the reactors, so the water level will increase anyhow. We are now preparing for decontamination, and facilities to pool the contaminated water.
The next questioner complained in an angry tone since Tepco never responded in detail to the 40 questions submitted before the meeting. “I have continuously pointed out possible risks. As a shareholder, I feel very sorry about the accident. However, the Tepco board members sitting on the stage right now do not seem to feel responsibility for the accident. I am quite skeptical that we can rely on them to manage the company. The main reason for the accident is Tepco’s nature to keep hiding accurate data.
More questions. Since the group’s financial condition is getting worse, the management team has been asking the government for help under Article 16 of the Act on Compensation for Nuclear Damage. This means the management team admits that they are responsible for the cause of the accident. If a loss of over 20 trillion yen is recorded, Tepco will fall into negative net worth. That’s why Tepco couldn’t post a loss for the business year ending in March, 2011. The current management team has an enormous responsibility; can we appoint such management again? Tepco says, “Some may think that we should select totally new management and have them provide remedy for the victims, settle the series of problems incurred by the accident and try to keep Tepco in business; however, we believe we can make use of our knowledge and experience. Therefore, we cut board members’ compensation and chose mostly from the current management team as candidates for the job.”
A female questioner. “First, I think late cancer and other diseases will surely develop in the future. Hence, I demand lifetime compensation. Secondly, it has been said to this date that the contaminated water is about to overflow. I doubt that. In fact, it has already been overflowing.” Tepco gave no substantial answer to neither the first nor the second question.
“Despite excess electricity in western Japan, we are unable to share due to the difference in frequency. Can we not adjust the frequency and borrow electricity from them?” Tepco says, “It is not easy because not only the facilities of the electric power companies, but also customers’ electric appliances would need to be changed.”
“The full amount of board members’ compensation should be applied to compensate the victims. It was supposed to be returned due to the criticism of the public and the government against Tepco for not taking the situation seriously enough. Yet, as shown on page 19 of the Report, a total of 723 million yen and a total of 141 million yen have already been paid to 24 directors and 9 auditors, respectively. Why is that? Tepco should disclose how much each board member received.” Tepco says, “There is no need to disclose the amount of board member compensation individually.”
One shareholder said, “Once Tepco abandons nuclear power stations, it will make a comeback and the share price will recover. Everyone, let’s keep holding Tepco’s shares and accomplish the abolition of nuclear power stations together. Please join me for a meeting which will be held at the Shiba Park after this shareholder meeting.” *It was surprising that this remark provoked derision in the press room located in Tepco’s head office in Shimbashi, where I (Iwakami) was.
A questioner said, “There once was a murder case between Tepco and a subcontractor. The case has a connection with Yamaguchi-Gumi, a notorious Japanese gang. I am in the publishing business, and I have neither received any ad commission from Tepco nor requested any, ever.” Tepco answers, “We have not heard that there was such murder case.”
Another question of compassionate allowance for retirees. Answer from Tepco. Present situation does not allow them to make a resolution to issue such allowance.
I do not think all of this is Tepco ‘s fault, says a stakeholder. Even during the economic crisis, Tepco was not charged. Don’t you think Tepco should be more vocal about in how much detail it has been in obeying the authorities?
Even if it takes several years to complete, I would like to see a detailed report. Audible applause. Tepco answers, “We have placed an investigation committee on the accident, in order to have objective points of view, for investigation into the cause of this accident.
Questions about total expenses of ads. This is something raised at Tepco’s press conferences day after day, but they refuse to answer on the grounds that the contracts are private. They do answer at the stakeholders’ meeting, however. According to the answer, 11.6 billion yen was spent on ads last year. They intend to cut more than 70% of the amount this year.
(Continued) “How much debt on interest does Tepco hold?” Answered, “We hold 8 trillion and 900 billion yen of debt on interest.”
Urgent motions.
1) Dismissal request of the meeting chair Tepco CEO Katsumata.
2) Request for 1 hour lunch break.
3) Request on taking questions from the shareholders until all questions are answered.
As for 1), CEO Katsumata said that he was a fair meeting chair and asked for the shareholders’ to vote, resulting in the request being rejected and his retaining his position as chair of the meeting.
As for 2), a motion made as a result of empty stomachs and parched throats, this was also rejected by majority decision and the meeting went on. I really wanted to participate in the 2) vote, to vote for a lunch break.
As for 3), the chair dismissed it without any clear explanation or vote, which threw the shareholders into an uproar. I don’t know why but he didn’t take a vote and accepted only one more question.
The last appointed questioner stood up and turned around to face the share holders to start a long speech. Firstly, he demanded that they release the information about exactly how much radiation had leaked, measured in number of atomic bombs. Secondly, how much radiation has been leaking per hour. Thirdly, he declared that a proposed appropriation of loss should be discussed, even though it hadn’t been provided at the meeting.
The long speech still kept going on. The meeting chair Katsumata headed the interrogator off by asking further questions, as it took too long time, and by the time the interrogator just started saying that the Fukushima nuclear power plant power loss and reactor damage was caused by the earthquake not by the tsunami, as Diet member Hidekatsu Yoshii of the Japanese Communist Party had asserted in the Diet. Executive Vice President Muto answered these questions coolly and with no emotion. Cesium leakage was about 10 to the 16th becquerel. There was no direct answer addressed to the question of how much radioactive fallout there was in equivalence to atomic bomb damage.* *As a matter of fact, I, Iwakami had asked the same question at the Tepco press conference and General Manager Matsumoto had answered in same manner.
There was an explanation about renewable energy, such as wind power plants under construction in Izu, plans to build water and solar power plants. Not much reaction from the meeting attendees.
The meeting chair Katsumata tried to shut off the questions from shareholders and start discussing the meeting agenda. A resolution on how the matters to be resolved are to be discussed was made. Again, Katsumata went into discussing the meeting agenda with cooperation from a majority of shareholders mobilized by Tepco. The first proposal is the appointment of 17 directors. Katsumata took only a few questions from the shareholders and tried to take a vote, however a middle-aged female shareholder made a motion. The female shareholder’s question was “Shareholders are gathering not only in this main venue but also in the second through fifth venues. Is it fair to only hear the opinions of the shareholders who are in this main venue and mobilized by Tepco. Opinions (for and against) from all the shareholders gathered in all venues should be heard.” The meeting chair Katsumata put this motion to a vote and easily rejected it. It is obvious that a motion proposing to hear opinions not only of the shareholders mobilized by Tepco, but also of all shareholders would be voted down if such motion is brought to a vote by such mobilized shareholders. It was nothing but a farce. There was also opinion claiming that persons working in the field such as the head of a power plant should be be able to be appointed as directors. Katsumata chairman only responded saying “I appreciate your valuable comment”.
A motion to amend claiming “It is impossible to appoint directors without knowing who the candidates are. Each candidate should disclose how they view the accident.” was made. Katsumata CEO responded to this saying, “For smooth proceedings, I would like this proposal to be resolved by one time voting rather than by taking votes for each candidate”. The number of approvals and disapprovals was, for the first time, about the same for this motion. The press room got heated up as well. However, Katsumata CEO deemed his proposal was supported and rejected this motion. There were voices of complaint in response to Katsumata’s decision.
Katsumata CEO disclosed that 9282 persons attended today’s meeting, the number of votes being 1,360,000, and the number of votes for which a proxy had been determined in advance was 1,070,000. Therefore, in effect, regardless of the resolutions to be made in this meeting, the proposals have already been decided because a majority support the board of directors. A female shareholder furiously protested to this saying “Then what is the point of holding this shareholders meeting!?”
In response to a remark regarding pre-determined passage resulting from two shareholders (probably corporations) having submitted their votes by proxy, there is great opposition. A woman shouted into the microphone, “Why are you sitting in chairs on the stage?! All of you should come down here and kneel down on the ground”. In response to this, Katsumata CEO just said “Please hold the microphone a little further away from yourself”.
A question from a male shareholder:“Do you know the share price? As of 2:40 P.M. today, it is 314 yen, down 2 yen from the day before. Rating agencies, such as Moody’s rated Tepco shares low. Please give us hope! We want to hear hope!” He screamed at the end. In response, Katsumata CEO only said “I would like to ask for your guidance and encouragement”. This is like beating air.
Proposal 2 was easily passed. Two corporate auditors were appointed.
Proposal 3 made by shareholders regarding withdrawal from nuclear power plant operation. A male shareholder gave a supplemental explanation. Having been forced to evacuate from Fukushima to Ishikawa prefecture, he made an emotional plea about the suffering the victims of this disaster are going through. Everyone in the venue came under complete silence .
A comment from a male shareholder who is from Fukushima prefecture, “Doctors who are working in the radioactively contaminated area are seeing hundreds of patients everyday. Tepco has a 7-story hospital in Shinjuku. Why doesn’t Tepco send half of the doctors working for its hospital out to Fukushima?”
Why doesn’t Tepco insist on application of indemnity based on article 3.1 of the law on compensation for nuclear damage? Tepco must not take the blame for the compensation of trillions of yen, since Tepco is holding our money. This was rather an opinion than a question by a shareholder. Chairman Katsumata, “Yes, Tepco finds that such a law is quite applicable to indemnity. However, it does take much time to have approval from a court in such a case.” “The power of the earthquake was 44 times as big as that of the Kanto earthquake in 1923. So, we find that the earthquake corresponds to “an earthquake which is extraordinary and of an enormous scale” as stipulated in article 3.1 of the law on compensation for nuclear damage, but again it takes much time to have approval from a court. If we cannot have financial support from the government during that period of time, we will run out of our source of financial support, which means we will not be able to get any profit from our business.”
Another question, related to the last one, by another shareholder. You’re showing regret in
article 3.1 regarding the law on compensation for nuclear damage, while applying for governmental financial support based on article 16. Once Tepco insists on article 16, Tepco has to admit resposibility for everything. So, which article is it?” Chairman Katsumata, “Tepco requested financial support from the government, on the basis of article 16.” This was all he said in response to the question.
Female questioner, “I have been investing part of my father’s legacy in Tepco, along with a request in his will, which is that I hold stock in a stable electric power company. I believe I myself have been a good supporter of Tepco. Shareholders who have come here today are all desperate. Tepco now has the worst reputation, but look at Tohoku Electric Power Company. They have made 20 yen dividend, say, by a miracle. Why? Because they do not own nuclear plants.” “We shareholders want profit. Tohoku Electric Power Company can make a dividend even though they were effected by the earthquake. If so, why doesn’t Tepco aim for a new direction? I will remain supportive. Let’s do it together.” Chairman Katsumata, “Thank you very much.” He did not touch on the issue of no nuclear plants.
Katsumata chairman deemed there were no further question and tried to start the resolution process. Shareholders in the venue were seething. Thereafter, questions were once again taken.
Masaki Kito, a lawyer, questioned, “I am a shareholder of Tepco for over 20 years. Tepco, renowned as a superbly prestigious company in the world, falls into bankruptcy after only one nuclear accident. Well, this shareholder proposal is going to be important, because this proposal is going to show what executives really think about the nuclear accident.” “This proposal requests Tepco ‘s withdrawal from nuclear power. This proposal motions that Tepco should give us an explanation as the board of directors, divided into articles 41 and 42, and also Tepco should make a resolution on this. If there is another nuclear accident in the future, all of you must be responsible for everything. In that case, you will have to make compensation with your own money, you will be to be blame for objection to this shareholder proposal.” Applause in the meeting place. As for resolution of the motion, it is clear that most shareholders agree with Kito’s motion. Chairman Katsumata is in trouble, he does it over but this time more shareholders assent. Then, “the motion is resolved as being opposed by the major shareholders, including deputies.” No way! What was the meaning of that resolution? It is the same as in the resolution of the shareholder’s proposal. Even though it was quite obvious that there were many more hands in favro, Katsumata, the chairman, forcibly resolved it as opposed by the majority.
(Translation: Maori Sato, Kiyomi Nakajima, Jeremy Harley)
<Repudiate 20mSv! Call For Action at MEXT building, May 23, 2011To the previous articleTo the following articles11/07/28 Public Talk by Ichiro Ozawa and Karel van Wolferen>