ACSR Discusses Banking Practices

The Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility (ACSR) discussed Wednesday the actions it will urge the Corporation to take against major banks lending money either to the South African government or its public corporations.

In a marathon four-hour meeting, the ACSR considered several draft proposals of possible actions the Corporation might take to convince banks--either ones in which Harvard now holds investments, or those in which it might invest in the future--to end their support for the apartheid system.

With seven of its 12 voting members present, the committee unofficially decided to send letters to, or schedule meetings with, officials of such banks.

Last week the ACSR discussed which banking practices in South Africa it would condemn Committee members said its final report will probably urge the University to take action against banks loaning money to the South African government or to its public corporations, but will not condemn banks that loan money to private South African corporations or to United States firms operating in South Africa.

The ACSR probably will not urge the Corporation to call for total withdrawal of U.S. banks from South Africa, ACSR members said yesterday.

The committee also decided at its last meeting not to advise the Corporation to adopt a general investment policy of refusing to purchase stocks or bonds in any banks operating in South Africa. Harvard now owns $17 million worth of bonds in such banks, which will mature in June.

Julie E. Fouquet '80, who introduced the motion, said yesterday it was meant as a compromise measure to allow the Corporation to take a public stand against banks operating in South Africa, without having to admit that banks are "too intransigent" to help promote progressive racial policies in that nation.

Lawrence F. Stevens '65, secretary of the ACSR, said yesterday the draft proposals were not "hard and fast positions, just attempts to clarify our feelings on certain issues."

He added that the absence of five voting ACSR members from Wednesday's meeting did not hamper the ACSR's deliberations, because "there was still a diversity of viewpoints at the meeting, and we're no where near the voting stage yet."

However, one ACSR member said yesterday the absence of almost half the official ACSR members, only a few weeks before the committee's unofficial mid-March deadline, suggested a lack of concern on the part of some members to reach a decision as soon as possible.

In an attempt to meet that deadline, the ACSR will hold two meetings in each of the next two weeks.

One ACSR member said yesterday there is "no way to meet the deadline unless we break down corporations into strategic and non-strategic sectors and let the Corporation decide which companies fall into each category, because we sure can't.