Information blackout?

May 16th, 2012 by PCU »
Why isn’t the media reporting the National Gallery’s decision not to host the planned reception for arms dealers?

Despite the shadow of corruption culminating in its President’s resignation a few months ago, arms company Finmeccanica has been buying access to the National Gallery‘s rooms for ‘corporate entertaining’, in order to impress its clients and lobbying decision-makers – for £30,000 a year. 

Lest we forget the fruits of their labour

 

After receiving hundreds of letters condemning its support for arms fairs, the Gallery has said it will not host a reception for arms dealers during this July’s Farnborough Airshow. 

The Gallery, on this occasion, will no longer be giving practical support and a veneer of legitimacy to an industry which benefits from death and destruction.

*

However, despite the innocuous website presentation below, the Natural History Museum, has more dubious activities. It will be hired for the Farnborough Reception for arms dealers on Monday 9th July - hosting an industry which is responsible for human and environmental destruction – what price bluebells? 

 

 

In the words of the organisers, the reception is “THE most important event during the Farnborough week, exclusively attended by key industry senior level figures, international delegations and exhibitors … a must attend event and an unparalleled networking opportunity.” 

Libya was feted in 2010: how many tyrannical regimes will be ‘networking’ this year?  

In 2010 international delegations included Libya, Bahrain, Algeria, China and Saudi Arabia. Government officials were on hand to buyers from Libya around the arms fair and even arranged for Ministers and the Duke of York to join the sales effort. 

Seven months later the UK was condemning the country for the murder of civilian protesters and preparing for missile strikes.

 * 

Sarah Waldron hopes that readers will contact the Natural History Museum and ask those concerned not to support the promotion of arms sales to human rights abusers: Email the Museum’s Director today.

 

»

Posted in Accountants, Arms industry, Aviation, Coalition government, Conflict of interest, Corporate political nexus, Drones, Feral elite, Government, Lobbying, Manufacturing, Military interests, Ministers, MPs, Protest, Vested interests, War, Warfare

Tags:

HS2: Democracy in action – not!

May 14th, 2012 by PCU »
55,000 responded to the HS2 consultation and disagreed with everything in it 

Guardian columnist Zoe Williams writes: 

“It always amazes me that the more closely you examine any local plan – from a Sainsbury’s Local on a London street to a £33bn rail project – the clearer it is that the locals have no say in anything at all. HS2 was put out to consultation: 55,000 people responded, and they disagreed with everything in it. They disagreed with the necessity, the route, the principles and specifications, the appraisal of sustainability, the assistance to those whose “properties would lose a significant amount of value”. Sentences so convoluted with jargon a passer-by couldn’t even unpick them, they still disagreed with, by huge margins.” 

Public meetings were organised by town and villages along the proposed route. At a packed public meeting at Wendover Memorial Hall [below] so many people attended that a sound system had to be set up outside the hall to relay the presentations to crowds standing outside.

 

Why is the majority view brushed aside?  

An insight came in an email message from a transport consultant who is challenging the proposal. He writes: 

“On Sunday I travelled on the Chiltern line. There is a non stop service from Warwick Parkway to London Marylebone in 70 minutes. In most of the world that would be considered high speed.” 

“At the recent Birmingham Transport Summit I had the impression of a total power vacuum, in which businessmen are clamouring for ever-more-expensive solutions that their companies can get a slice of in contracts, irrespective of actual public benefit or sustainability. £1,000 million for a high speed rail station at Curzon Street!! plus new Metro lines, expanded airport … I felt they had been driven insane by greed.

*

»

Posted in Corporate political nexus, Democracy undermined, High Speed 2, Parliamentary failure, Planning, Transport, Vested interests

Tags:

Corporate misbehaviour undermining Britain’s food security

May 12th, 2012 by PCU »

Earlier testimony on this subject came from Lee Woodger, Head of the NFU’s Food Chain Unit, Peter Kendall, NFU President, addressing the EFRA committee and Andrew Simms, author of Tescopoly , but yesterday it was summarised in the Farmers Guardian [11.5.12].

 

A list collated by the NFU gives examples of ‘the sort of bad behaviour retailers have indulged in over recent years’, including: 

 

  • Buyers requiring a fee from potential suppliers so they could be considered as suppliers
  • Suppliers asked to pay to have a product displayed on the shelves
  • Forced contributions from suppliers to run promotions
  • Unilateral and retrospective changes to contractual conditions, mostly prices.
  • Unilateral breach of contract by the buyer.
  • Exclusivity clauses/ requiring a fee from suppliers in order to be their exclusive customer
  • Imposing payment for waste processing removal, for example of perishable products past their best-before date. 

 

The Fresh Produce Journal reports that NFU is now investigating the fresh produce supply chain and will publish a report in summer detailing extremes of retailer, packer and processor behaviour, expose bad practice in the chain and make recommendations for improving relationships and transparency between growers, packers and retailers.

Why does this undermine Britain’s food security?

Year after year dairy farmers choose or are forced to leave the sector and we will become ever more dependent on imported milk -  at present 40% of the total food consumed is imported.  As supermarkets stock foreign produce when ours is in season, our fruit and vegetable growers have been adversely affected.

The supply chain is sensitive to economic, political and environmental events; these include:
  • natural disasters
  • animal disease
  • sharp rises in fuel and other input costs
Promote self-sufficiency in staples rather than relying  on global markets for food

The NFU president, Peter Kendall rejects the suggestion  that the UK could rely on global markets for food.  He defends the food export bans that some countries put in place following record rises in food prices in 2010-2011 and ends:

 

“I honestly believe that a country short of food trying to protect its own people’s supplies by banning grain exports is nothing compared to rich countries allowing their agriculture to decline and then expecting the rest of the world to feed them.” 

 

*

»

Posted in Agriculture, Alternatives, Books or reports, Corporate political nexus, Economy, Energy, Environment, Food-related, Globalisation, Government, Imports, Multinationals, Supermarkets, Vested interests

Tags:

The revolving door yet again: European Food Safety Agency compromised by links with GM industry

May 10th, 2012 by PCU »

Yesterday The Grocer reported that Dr Banati, was asked to resign over a potential conflict of interest between her work with EFSA and her plan to become executive and scientific director at the International Life Sciences Institute, a pro-GM body where she sat on the board until 2010.

In 2010, French Green MEP José Bové called for the resignation of the chair of the management board of European Food Safety Agency (EFSA), Dr. Diana Banati, over a conflict of interest scandal.

He outlined the details of Dr Banati’s extensive links to the food industry, which completely undermined the need for independence at the EFSA.

Among its other roles, the EFSA is responsible for assessing genetically modified organisms as part of the EU approval process, for which it has been frequently criticised.

According to José Bové, Dr Banati was a member of the board of the International Life Science Institute, an organisation representing a myriad of businesses, including Monsanto, Syngenta, Dupont, Nestlé and Kraft, among others, which has a history of lobbying for the interests of the food industry.

ILSI describes itself as a ‘non-profit, worldwide organisation whose mission is to provide science that improves public health and well-being.’ 

EFSA had already faced one conflict of interest controversy, with the revolving door case of GM regulator Suzy Renckens who moved from EFSA to food industry giant Syngenta. 

The Mail Online reports that Green campaigners are demanding that any decisions made by EFSA to approve GM crops and food in recent years should be revoked pending further investigation.

»

Posted in Advisors and consultants, Agriculture, Agrochemicals, Campaigns, Conflict of interest, Corporate political nexus, Environment, EU, GM, Lobbying, Multinationals, Political action, Protest, Vested interests

Tags:

WordPress Mobile