A woman of influence 
Mit ihren 43 Jahren hat die kanadische Unternehmerin und Politikerin Belinda Stronach schon eine bewegte Karriere hinter sich. Auch zukünftige Aufgaben werden sie nicht weniger in Anspruch nehmen, wie Margaret Davis berichtet.
She's intelligent, attractive and powerful. Both Time and Forbes magazines have placed her on their lists of influential businesswomen. Even her two ex-husbands speak warmly of her. So why do the Canadian media give Belinda Stronach such a hard time?
When Stronach left her job as CEO of Magna International in 2004 to enter politics, one newspaper called her “Magna Spice”. Likening the head of an international company to one of the Spice Girls was harmless compared to what came later. Stronach has been described as everything from an opportunist to a prostitute. Unparliamentary language indeed!Stronach is now back at Magna, where she is the executive vice-chairwoman. She was a member of parliament for Newmarket-Aurora, Ontario from 2004 until 2008, having decided not to run for re-election in the federal election in 2008. Stronach says the decision was taken out of a sense of responsibility “to my family and the family business”.
Belinda Stronach’s story begins with her immigrant father, Frank. Born Franz Strohsack in Weiz, Austria, he went to Canada in 1954. In 1957, he formed a tool-and-die company, Multimatic Investments Limited, which later expanded to produce auto parts. In 1969, Multimatic merged with Magna Electronics Corporation to form Magna International Inc.
Today Magna has revenues of Can$ 24.billion (about €17 billion), making it one of the country’s biggest businesses. A flamboyant figure, who is also one of Canada’s top breeders of racehorses, Frank Stronach is seen by some as a visionary. Perhaps reflecting its founder’s Austrian background, Magna International is run almost like a European business. The company has an employee charter stating that “employees and management share in the responsibility to ensure the success of the company”. The charter promises “job security”, “a safe and healthful workplace” and “competitive wages and benefits”, as well as a share of the company’s profits.














