Latest news with #PIC
Sky News
a day ago
- Business
- Sky News
Apollo-backed Athora eyes £5bn deal for Pension Insurance Corporation
A savings and retirement services group backed by Apollo Global Management is plotting a multibillion pound takeover of Pension Insurance Corporation (PIC), one of the City's biggest specialist insurers. Sky News has learnt that Athora, which was established by Apollo, the US-based alternative investments giant, is in talks to acquire control of PIC. If successfully completed, the deal - which bankers estimate could be worth between £4bn and £5bn - would represent a landmark transaction in the pension risk transfer market. Companies such as PIC, Legal & General and Rothesay take over companies' defined benefit pension schemes and the assets behind them, and have grown significantly in the last decade. RSA, the insurer, and British American Tobacco are among the corporate names with which PIC has transacted. It has also signed agreements with Chemring and Qantas. PIC's shareholders include CVC Capital Partners, BlackRock-owned HPS, a subsidiary of the Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and Reinet, a vehicle created from the restructuring of luxury goods group Richemont. Further details of a potential deal between Athora and PIC, including its pricing and structure, were unclear on Friday. Apollo previously looked at an offer for PIC in 2023, with rival bidders including Carlyle and KKR also emerging. The market for BGL annuities has exploded in recent years as companies seek to offload a variety of pension-related financial risks. PIC recently announced the retirement of its long-serving chief executive, Tracy Blackwell, and has yet to name her successor.
IOL News
2 days ago
- Business
- IOL News
Cosatu hails PIC's R3 trillion milestone as it urges vigilance against corruption
Cosatu commends the Public Investment Corporation's reaching an historic R3 trillion milestone. Image: File Trade union Cosatu on Wednesday lauded the Public Investment Corporation (PIC) for surpassing R3 trillion in assets under management, marking what it described as a historic milestone for the continent's biggest investment fund. The PIC, which primarily manages assets on behalf of the Government Employees' Pension Fund (GEPF), has seen significant growth from R2.7trl a year ago and R1.8trl during the Covid-19 pandemic. Roughly 87% of the PIC's funds are sourced from the GEPF, with additional contributions from the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) and the Compensation Fund, among others. "It is sacrosanct that at all times the PIC invests and manages these funds, workers' hard-earned monies, in a manner that expands and enables them to fulfill their legislative mandates of allowing public servants to retire in security and comfort, to provide relief to workers who've lost their jobs or support them whilst they are on maternity, parental or adoption leave; as well as to compensate workers' whose health and lives have suffered in the course of their occupations," Cosatu said. The union called on the PIC to ramp up development-focused investments, aligning with its legislative mandate to stimulate economic growth, create jobs, and promote sustainability. South Africa's economy has struggled to reach its growth targets, with Cosatu reiterating the need to reach and surpass the 3% threshold. The PIC, a state-owned asset manager, has in recent years faced scrutiny over governance lapses and exposure to politically connected investments. It has since undertaken reforms, including tighter oversight and risk management frameworks. 'Whilst appreciating the efforts by the PIC to shut out the lecherous hands of those who seek to enrich themselves at the expense of workers and their funds, it must remain hyper vigilant to these realities and do more as this cancer of corruption has not disappeared altogether and remains an ever present threat to workers, the nation and the programme of renewal,' the statement warned. Cosatu said it would continue to work closely with the PIC to safeguard workers' interests. BUSINESS REPORT Visit:
News18
3 days ago
- General
- News18
'We Don't Have Runway Left': Revisiting How Pilots Were Blamed In 2 Big Boeing Crashes In India
The jury is still out in the latest June 12 accident involving an Air India Dreamliner at the Ahmedabad Airport during take-off, which has killed nearly 280 people 'Sh*t, Sh*t', 'we don't have runway left' – these were the last words of pilots captured in cockpit voice recorders in the two previous worst crashes in India in the year 2020 and 2010 respectively involving the Air India Express. Detailed probes in both the cases blamed the pilots while Boeing and the airline had got a clean chit. A total of 176 persons died in these crashes which happened during landing – the accident at the Calicut airport killed 18 in 2020, while the one at Mangalore killed 158 in 2010. The jury is still out in the latest June 12 accident involving an Air India Dreamliner at the Ahmedabad Airport during take-off, which has killed nearly 280 people, including many on the ground. Like the earlier two crashes, a Boeing aircraft is involved in this crash too. The 2020 crash Air-India Express Limited B737-800 aircraft VT-AXH was operating a quick return flight on sector Kozhikode-Dubai-Kozhikode under 'Vande Bharat Mission' to repatriate passengers who were stranded overseas due to closure of airspace and flight operations owing to the Covid-19 pandemic. It made two approaches for landing at Kozhikode. The aircraft carried out a missed approach on the first attempt while coming into land on runway 28. The second approach was on runway 10 and the aircraft landed at 14:10:25 UTC. The aircraft touched down approximately at 4,438 ft on 8,858 ft long runway, in light rain with tailwind component of 15 knots and a ground speed of 165 knots. The aircraft could not be stopped on the runway and this ended in runway overrun. The aircraft exited the runway 10 end at a ground speed of 84 knots and then overshot the RESA, breaking the ILS antennae and a fence before plummeting down the tabletop runway. The inquiry by the AAIB concluded that the probable cause of the accident was the non-adherence of SOP by the 'Pilot Flying' (PF), wherein, he continued an unstabilised approach and landed beyond the touchdown zone, half way down the runway, in spite of 'Go Around' call by the 'Pilot Monitoring' (PM) which warranted a mandatory 'Go Around' and the failure of the PM to take over controls and execute a 'Go Around'. The report also said that the actions and decisions of the 'Pilot in Command' (PIC) were steered by a misplaced motivation to land back at Kozhikode to operate next day morning flight AXB 1373. 'The PIC had vast experience of landing at Kozhikode under similar weather conditions. This experience might have led to over confidence leading to complacency and a state of reduced conscious attention that would have seriously affected his actions, and decision making," the report said. Poor (Crew Resource Management) CRM was a major contributory factor in this crash, the report said. 'As a consequence of lack of assertiveness and the steep authority gradient in the cockpit, the First Officer did not take over the controls in spite of being well aware of the grave situation," the report added. 'Shit…Shit" were the last words of the pilots (PF and PM) recorded in the cockpit voice recorder – when the aircraft was about to leave the paved surface of the runway and entered soft ground. The 2010 crash Pilot error was also blamed for the Air India Express plane crash at Mangalore airport in 2010, which killed 158 people. The final inquiry report said the flight commander ignored the warnings of his co-pilot and the aircraft coming from Dubai crashed while negotiating the tricky landing at Mangalore's table-top airport and over shot it to fall into a forest. Pilot Captain Zlatko Glusica allegedly slept for over 90 minutes during the flight due to fatigue and later did not heed three warnings given by co-pilot Capt HS Ahluwalia for taking 'a go-around" and not to land. The flight path taken was also wrong. Last year, the Bombay High Court ruled that the family of the Serbian captain Zlatko Glusica was entitled to compensation of around Rs 4.11 crore. First Published:
Business Recorder
13-06-2025
- Politics
- Business Recorder
IWT in ‘abeyance': a national wake-up call
On April 24, 2025, India's sudden and unilateral suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) jolted the foundations of regional stability and transboundary water diplomacy. The move, officially framed as a retaliatory response to the tragic Pahalgam incident of two days earlier, was more than a symbolic gesture. It marked a watershed moment in the history of South Asia's most critical water-sharing agreement—one that has functioned for over six decades as a buffer against hot war, a framework for peaceful negotiation, and a model for international cooperation. For Pakistan, a country overwhelmingly dependent on the Indus River system, the stakes could not be higher. The decision threatens not only the equitable distribution of a vital natural resource but also Pakistan's economic integrity, food security, and internal cohesion. In addition, India's blatant suspension of a sanctified treaty was a proof that all earlier actions to somehow jeopordise Pakistan's water re-source was in fact a prelude to its present conduct and a part of its belligerence towards all of its negotiations. Since its signing in 1960 under the auspices of the World Bank, the Indus Waters Treaty has been regarded as one of the most successful and durable international agreements in modern history. It divides control of six rivers—allocating the eastern rivers (Ravi, Beas, and Sutlej) to India and the western rivers (Indus, Jhelum, and Chenab) to Pakistan. This arrangement has withstood wars, crises, and prolonged diplomatic freeze. The treaty also established the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC), a forum for technical exchanges and dispute resolution, supported by a three-tier settlement mechanism that includes neutral experts and arbitration. Unfortunately, India's suspension of the treaty bypasses these institutional mechanisms, undermining both the letter and the spirit of the agreement. It erodes long-standing norms of international water law, particularly the principles of equitable utilization, no significant harm, and prior notification. Besides, any other incident — even if tangential to the treaty, cannot ever be considered as having effect on this venerated document. The implications for Pakistan are profound. The Indus River system is not merely a source of water — it is the country's circulatory system. Approximately 90 percent of Pakistan's agriculture depends on these rivers, supporting nearly half of the national labour force. The system irrigates 18 million hectares of land and generates around 5,000MW of hydropower. Urban centers such as Karachi, Lahore, and Islamabad rely on it for municipal and industrial use. In the context of escalating water stress, climate variability, and rapidly declining aquifer levels, any disruption to these flows could have cascading effects: crop failures, food insecurity, inflationary pressures, and mass displacement. The country faces an existential challenge, caught between upstream political manoeuvring belligerence and downstream vulnerability. Exacerbating this risk is India's accelerated development of hydropower projects in the upper Indus basin, particularly in the disputed territories of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh. Projects like Nimoo Bazgo and Chutak have already pushed treaty boundaries, while ten new hydropower initiatives — including Achinthang-Sanjak, Parfila, and Khalsti — are further testing the limits. Though many of these are run-of-river schemes and technically permissible under the IWT, the lack of prior notification and cumulative hydrological impact of these projects undermines treaty's integrity. It is a classic case of incremental encroachment — each project appears compliant in isolation, but collectively they alter seasonal flows, sediment dynamics, and the broader ecological regime downstream. Unfortunately, India's past conduct proves the basis that all of the above excesses are by design and an effort to make the treaty at best, simply dysfunctional. Equally concerning is India's bid to secure international carbon credits for these hydropower projects under the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) of the Kyoto Protocol. The absence of Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessments (TEIAs), despite cross-border implications, allows India to monetize these developments while externalizing ecological and economic costs onto Pakistan. This evasion of accountability not only breaches environmental norms but also highlights deficiencies in global climate finance frameworks, which currently fail to factor in transboundary externalities. Adding to the strategic complexity is India's construction of an inland waterway in Ladakh — extending 45 kilometers along the Indus River — supported by newly built barrages. While presented as an infrastructural project aimed at enhancing connectivity, the scale and location raise concerns. Given Ladakh's sparse population and rich solar potential, the project's economic rationale is tenuous. Its strategic utility, however, is apparent: to consolidate control over headwaters and reinforce upper riparian leverage. This must be viewed not as a standalone development but as part of a broader playbook aimed at asserting dominance over shared resources – a norm for India. India's rationale for suspending the IWT—couched in the language of national security—is a dangerous precedent. The Prime Minister's declaration that 'water and blood cannot flow together' reflects a disturbing shift in discourse, where essential resources are securitized for political ends. Such rhetoric undermines decades of cooperative riparian governance and opens the door to weaponizing water in bilateral relations. Global water security experts have long warned of the destabilizing effects of such moves. The consequences, once triggered, may prove difficult to reverse. Pakistan must now respond with clarity and resolve. The government should immediately invoke Article IX of the IWT to initiate dispute resolution mechanisms and consider seeking recourse at the International Court of Justice. Parallel diplomatic engagement at the United Nations and other international fora will be critical to building moral and legal pressure. The time has come to adopt a forward-leaning posture in water diplomacy and assert Pakistan's rights under international law. At the domestic level, institutional preparedness is essential. Priority must be given to fast-tracking strategic water infrastructure such as the Diamer-Bhasha and Mohmand Dams, improving irrigation efficiency through modern technologies, and revising water pricing to reduce wastage. Smart canal monitoring, watercourse lining, and agro-tech adoption must move from policy papers to implementation. Aligning provincial and federal agendas under a national water resilience framework is no longer optional—it is urgent. Public awareness is equally critical. Citizens must be informed of the strategic gravity of this issue. Academia, civil society, and industry must be engaged in shaping a national consensus. As the saying goes, 'a stitch in time saves nine' — proactive coordination today can avert irreparable damage tomorrow. Once water disputes escalate beyond diplomacy, restoring balance becomes exponentially more difficult. In water conflicts, as in diplomacy, crisis prevention is more effective than crisis management. In closing, India's suspension of the Indus Waters Treaty represents more than a treaty violation—it is a challenge to Pakistan's strategic coherence and sovereign resilience. As water emerges as the new theatre of geopolitical contestation in South Asia, Pakistan must act with foresight, unity, and sophistication. It must understand India's psyche and the belligerence it shows in such cases, it has to be ensured that the Indus River, cradle of an ancient civilization, must not be allowed to be transformed into a fault line of modern conflict. The path forward demands calm determination and a readiness to safeguard national interests through lawful, firm, and well-calibrated action. Actually, the effort to thwart Indian designs needs thorough professionalism and resolve. In this arena, as ever, fortune favours the prepared. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
News24
12-06-2025
- Business
- News24
PIC leads a R660 million pledge for green hydrogen
Roughly R660 million has been pledged by development finance institutions to fund green hydrogen projects. The Public Investment Corporation leads the pledge and other parties include the Development Bank of Southern Africa and the Industrial Development Corporation. The parties will finance the SA-H2 fund, which blends public and private capital. For climate change news and analysis, go to News24 Climate Future. South Africa's Public Investment Corporation (PIC), the continent's biggest money manager, and two development institutions have pledged roughly R660 million to a fund for financing green hydrogen projects. The Development Bank of Southern Africa and the Industrial Development Corporation of South Africa will help finance the SA-H2 fund, which blends public and private capital. It is managed by a partnership between Hague-based Climate Fund Managers and Invest International, a Dutch development finance institution. Over various tranches, the IDC and DBSA will each invest $10 million (~R180 million), with PIC putting in $17 million (R300 million). READ | Daniel Mminele | Green and blue bonds are great, but more is needed 'As a long-term investor, the PIC is committed to supporting infrastructure that generates attractive commercial returns while delivering inclusive, broad-based economic impact,' PIC Chief Investment Officer Kabelo Rikhotso said in the statement. Various green hydrogen projects in the region, many of which would be initially geared for exports, are looking to gain momentum. The European Union announced grants last year to get the industry going. Sasol has a project at the port of Boegoebaai on South Africa's northwest coast that would ship the fuel and provide domestic supply for its own operations, though the fuel and chemical maker has made some strategy changes. Climate Fund Managers also committed as much as $20 million (~R360 million) through the SA-H2 fund to complete the development stage of a project by Hive Hydrogen. The company is planning the first large-scale green ammonia production facility in the Eastern Cape province, expected to produce about one million tonnes of green ammonia annually, for export. The project will create over 20 000 jobs during construction and operations. Financial close is expected by the end of 2026, with commercial operations to begin in 2029.
