Archive for March, 2010

Close the revolving door

March 31st, 2010

How can former senior MPs and military officers bring themselves to work for security firms who provide armed forces in troubled parts of the world – often referred to as mercenaries? 

A cynical friend replied – incorrectly – “People will do anything for money”. 

When former cabinet minister in the Blair government, Paul Boateng, became the British High Commissioner in South Africa he repeatedly lobbied the Pretoria government about proposed anti-mercenary legislation which would prevent South Africans from joining foreign military forces. 

The ANC-led government rejected Britain’s proposals, claiming that the bill would have created loopholes allowing South Africans not only to join foreign armies but also to become mercenaries with private security companies. 

Paul Boateng left his post in South Africa to become a director of Aegis Defense Services, a private security company with overseas offices in Afghanistan, Bahrain, Iraq and the USA. It is run by Tim Spicer, after the closing down of Sandline, which was in the news for its activities in Papua New Guinea and Sierra Leone. 

An audit found several causes for concern, including a random survey of 20 Aegis employees issued with AK-47 and M4 assault rifles which showed that the company did not have the needed weapons training documentation for 14 of them. It was also alleged that a “trophy video” was posted on an Aegis employees website showing Aegis Defense personnel shooting Iraqi civilians as a form of entertainment. 

Lord Inge, the former Chief of the Defence Staff, is now non-executive chairman of Aegis. He had to apologise to his peers for failing to declare an interest whilst advocating an increase in western military levels in Afghanistan, where Aegis forces are employed and where Aegis is paid by the US army to monitor and regulate those working for other private security contractors. 

Time for change.

Will there be loop-holes in the register of lobbying activities?

March 30th, 2010

The One World Trust has claimed that ‘accountable lobbying’ will not be achieved even if all the recommendations of the PASC report into Westminster lobbying are implemented. 

The think-tank said that the proposed register of lobbying activities – including the requirement requiring all meetings between lobbyists and the lobbied to be minuted and published – ‘would still contain loopholes, particularly relating to organisations’ abilities to lobby Parliament without revealing potential sources of bias’.

The One World Trust advocates rules to ensure that:

  •  non-profit organisations have to register their donor and grassroots support
  • all statistics and ‘supporting evidence’ used in lobbying are cited formally and made publicly available
  • an ombudsman (to supplement the powers of the PASC-suggested ‘umbrella group’) offering ‘formal complaints-handling powers’ on ‘irregularities’.

One World Trust research manager Brendan Whitty said: “Our research supports the main findings of the PASC paper, but suggests a lot more is necessary to ensure accountable lobbying.”

Power is: “stealing from the many to the few”

March 29th, 2010

On the Ekklesia website, Peter Facey of Unlock Democracy – formed in 2007 as the successor to Charter 88 – comments:

“This latest incident illustrates how the political class have consistently failed to take the growing sense that Parliament is riddled with sleaze seriously. Even after the lobbying scandal that rocked the House of Lords in 2009 and the expenses scandal, far too many politicians still see nothing wrong with using their privileged position for personal enrichment. . . .

“It is time Parliament went back to basics. MPs should work solely on behalf of their constituents and be accountable to them. It is crucial that we have a statutory register of lobbying activity to ensure that this is the case, but it is also important that lobbying is not defined too narrowly so that politicians can continue to sell their expertise and contacts to the highest bidder whilst being able to claim to not be involved in the business [of] pressuring ministers themselves.”

PCU sees the beneficial work of many people hampered or blocked – because their proposals would not bring large profits for the few – or would actually threaten corporate interests.

This post will be sent directly to such individuals. Exposing and thereby reducing the power of vested interest would greatly enhance their chances of achieving a decent financial system, a wholesome & secure food supply, peace, the reduction of emissions/use of fossil fuel, strong local economies, helping the victimised, poor or addicted, arms conversion, justice for indigenous people, better healthcare, ethical redirection of science, true democracy, recycling, clean energy, good public transport, honest politics and corporate responsibility.

The latest newsletter from Localise West Midlands refers to solutions to be considered which include “exposing the influence of vested interests” .

The Association for Accountancy and Business Affairs sheds light on many ‘darker practices’. 

Scientist for Global Responsibility have published Science and the Corporate Agenda: the detrimental effects of commercial influence on science and technology.

Readers should be alert to – and publicise – any signs of undermining by moneyed interests – one example being the pressures brought to bear last year over the third Heathrow runaway – concern even being voiced in Hansard.

Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty – power is ever stealing from the many to the few: Wendell Phillips, US abolitionist (1811 – 1884)

Censured: deal by UK civil servant with US authorities

March 29th, 2010

The Serious Fraud Office [SFO] is part of the government’s criminal justice system. It works with a remarkable number of organisations connected with the police, business, banking, insurance and retail. 

Lord Justice Thomas warned Richard Alderman, Serious Fraud Office director, not to repeat a deal that led to a chemicals company yesterday being fined $12.7m (€9.5m, £8.5m) for paying off Indonesian government officials to win contracts for a toxic lead petrol additive.

He said that Mr Alderman had exceeded his powers in striking a joint deal with the US authorities over the total penalty of a little more than $40m the company would have to pay; the UK part of the fine was “wholly inadequate” and should have been in the tens of millions for a “very serious” offence, warning that: “The director of the SFO had no power to enter the arrangements made and no such arrangement should be made again.” 

The SFO’s website reported none of these remarks, and  – unabashed – SFO Director Richard Alderman said, “This has been a ground-breaking case involving a global settlement that the SFO has brought to the English courts. I am deeply grateful to Lord Justice Thomas for the detailed guidance he has given on all the complex issues involved. This is a very important decision which will guide the SFO in our approach to these matters in future.”