BAe Systems: Influence/Lobbying - Revision history

Melissa Jones: /* Moving into the educational sector */

2017-11-08T01:28:39Z

Moving into the educational sector

Melissa Jones: /* Lobbying groups */

2017-08-26T08:16:31Z

Lobbying groups

Melissa Jones: /* Monopoly over the defence industry */

2017-08-26T08:14:35Z

Monopoly over the defence industry

David: /* DESO */

2010-01-29T16:56:54Z

DESO

Claire Robinson: /* Tony and Dick */

2010-01-29T16:20:26Z

Tony and Dick

Claire Robinson: /* Lobbying groups */

2010-01-29T16:10:04Z

Lobbying groups

Claire Robinson at 16:09, 29 January 2010

2010-01-29T16:09:38Z

Claire Robinson at 16:04, 29 January 2010

2010-01-29T16:04:59Z

Claire Robinson: /* Monopoly over the defence industry */

2010-01-29T16:00:04Z

Monopoly over the defence industry

Claire Robinson at 15:58, 29 January 2010

2010-01-29T15:58:35Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:28, 8 November 2017
Line 48:		Line 48:

	In addition to the 'virtual university', BAE SYSTEMS has partnerships of varying natures with many other universities, cooperating with Sheffield Hallam in the production of curriculum materials, and having research partnerships with Cambridge, Sheffield and Southampton Universities, amongst others. It also sends many of its young engineers back into secondary schools, to extol not only the benefits of an engineering career, but one with BAE SYSTEMS. In addition, the company has sponsored various events and ‘educational’ displays, such as the Mind Zone in the Millennium Dome, further linking its name with scientific and engineering excellence, and avoiding its real business of manufacturing weapons to kill people. Having capital far in excess of any other UK engineering firm (partly because of its size, and partly because of its massive reserves from the Al-Yammamah deal) it offers extremely rewarding packages to the best UK engineering students, ensuring that the arms industry continues to leech off the most promising talents in the sector.		In addition to the 'virtual university', BAE SYSTEMS has partnerships of varying natures with many other universities, cooperating with Sheffield Hallam in the production of curriculum materials, and having research partnerships with Cambridge, Sheffield and Southampton Universities, amongst others. It also sends many of its young engineers back into secondary schools, to extol not only the benefits of an engineering career, but one with BAE SYSTEMS. In addition, the company has sponsored various events and ‘educational’ displays, such as the Mind Zone in the Millennium Dome, further linking its name with scientific and engineering excellence, and avoiding its real business of manufacturing weapons to kill people. Having capital far in excess of any other UK engineering firm (partly because of its size, and partly because of its massive reserves from the Al-Yammamah deal) it offers extremely rewarding packages to the best UK engineering students, ensuring that the arms industry continues to leech off the most promising talents in the sector.
		+
		+	BAE also co-sponsors with Blackpool and The Fylde College the 'Gazette Education Awards' which supposedly 'celebrate primary and secondary education across Blackpool and The Fylde'. These awards, which have been held for the past eight years, aim to 'showcase and celebrate the very best students, teachers, schools and employees in the area' and 'recognise the achievements that schools and pupils make within the education sector on a daily basis'. <ref> [http://www.blackpoolgazette.co.uk/whats-on/the-education-awards-are-back-1-8752088 The Education Awards are back!], The Gazette, accessed 7 November 2017 </ref>

	==Serious fraud==		==Serious fraud==

@@ Line 29: / Line 29: @@
 ==Lobbying groups==
-Despite its ability to coerce the UK Government, BAE SYSTEMS also belongs to several lobbying groups. The company is prominent in the TABD (Trans-Atlantic Business Dialogue), which is a trans-continental business lobbying group, which describes itself as ‘a unique business-led process launched by the EU and US in 1995, [which] seeks to reinvigorate our economies by increasing transatlantic trade and investment opportunities through the removal of costly inefficiencies from excessive regulation, duplication and differences in EU and U.S. regulation.’{{ref|12}} As anyone conversant with corporate speak will know, what this actually means is that the TABD is dedicated to eliminating all regulation which stops profit-making activity, regardless of its worth or importance; environmental regulations, labour standards and nationally owned public services have all come under attack from the TABD. Tellingly, the CEO of BAE, Mike Turner, is to be one of two co-chairs of the organisation for this year (2002).
+Despite its ability to coerce the UK Government, BAE SYSTEMS also belongs to several lobbying groups. The company is prominent in the TABD ([[Trans-Atlantic Business Dialogue]]), which is a trans-continental business lobbying group, which describes itself as ‘a unique business-led process launched by the EU and US in 1995, [which] seeks to reinvigorate our economies by increasing transatlantic trade and investment opportunities through the removal of costly inefficiencies from excessive regulation, duplication and differences in EU and U.S. regulation.’{{ref|12}} As anyone conversant with corporate speak will know, what this actually means is that the TABD is dedicated to eliminating all regulation which stops profit-making activity, regardless of its worth or importance; environmental regulations, labour standards and nationally owned public services have all come under attack from the TABD. Tellingly, the CEO of BAE, Mike Turner, is to be one of two co-chairs of the organisation for this year (2002).
-BAE SYSTEMS is also a member of the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC). This organisation describes itself as the 'World Business Organisation’, and has similar neo-liberalist aims to the TABD.. The European based research group, Corporate Europe Observatory, has this to say about the ICC: 'The ICC has a long history of vigorously lobbying to weaken international environmental treaties…Examples include the Kyoto Protocol, the Convention on Biodiversity, and the Basel Convention against trade in toxic waste. In all of these UN negotiations, the International Chamber's obstructive lobbying is in direct opposition to the Global Compact [a UN pledge for transnational corporations] principles it has pledged to pursue.’{{ref|13}}
+BAE SYSTEMS is also a member of the [[International Chamber of Commerce]] (ICC). This organisation describes itself as the 'World Business Organisation’, and has similar neo-liberalist aims to the TABD.. The European based research group, Corporate Europe Observatory, has this to say about the ICC: 'The ICC has a long history of vigorously lobbying to weaken international environmental treaties…Examples include the Kyoto Protocol, the Convention on Biodiversity, and the Basel Convention against trade in toxic waste. In all of these UN negotiations, the International Chamber's obstructive lobbying is in direct opposition to the Global Compact [a UN pledge for transnational corporations] principles it has pledged to pursue.’{{ref|13}}
 BAE also belongs to SBAC ([[Society of British Aerospace Companies]]), and, as by far the largest member, exercises a lot of power. John Weston, their ex-CEO, is currently President of SBAC. It seems unlikely that control of SBAC is very important to BAE however, given its own direct links to Government and the House of Commons.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Monopoly over the defence industry==
-BAE SYSTEMS owns most of the surviving shipbuilding capacity in Britain (see [[BAe Systems: Products/Projects]]). As such it has the ability to use its massive holdings to influence government procurement policy, and to ensure the best deal for itself, rather than the taxpayer. Despite its international aspirations, BAE uses its status as a British company to further influence the Ministry of Defence; as the Defence Review put it, ‘deals with the MoD tend to come wrapped in the Union flag’.<ref>Defence Review, Summer 1999, cited in Wrigley, C. (2000) BAE SYSTEMS Alternative Report 2000, CAAT</ref> Threats over job cuts and relocation are skilfully used to ensure that BAE lands the lions share of all MoD contracts. For instance, the MoD attempted in 1999 to break the monopoly enjoyed by Royal Ordinance (a BAE subsidiary) over fuel supply by purchasing propellant from a South African source. BAE reacted quickly, closing a propellant plant near Glasgow and threatening to shut down Royal Ordinance altogether. As a result, RO now has a guaranteed ten-year contract from the Ministry of Defence.
+BAE SYSTEMS owns most of the surviving shipbuilding capacity in Britain (see [[BAe Systems: Products/Projects]]). As such it has the ability to use its massive holdings to influence government procurement policy, and to ensure the best deal for itself, rather than the taxpayer. Despite its international aspirations, BAE uses its status as a British company to further influence the Ministry of Defence; as the Defence Review put it, ‘deals with the MoD tend to come wrapped in the Union flag’.<ref>Defence Review, Summer 1999, cited in Wrigley, C. (2000) BAE SYSTEMS Alternative Report 2000, CAAT</ref> Threats over job cuts and relocation are skilfully used to ensure that BAE lands the lions share of all MoD contracts. For instance, the MoD attempted in 1999 to break the monopoly enjoyed by [[Royal Ordinance]] (a BAE subsidiary) over fuel supply by purchasing propellant from a South African source. BAE reacted quickly, closing a propellant plant near Glasgow and threatening to shut down Royal Ordinance altogether. As a result, RO now has a guaranteed ten-year contract from the Ministry of Defence.
 This behaviour has not gone unnoticed by other interested parties, with the chairman of Vosper calling BAE’s behaviour ‘outrageous’, and an article in the Spectator commenting on the ‘all-too comfortable relationship between a public-sector customer and one giant UK provider.’<ref>The Spectator, 9 December 2000, cited in [http://www.caat.org.uk/companies/BAES2001.pdf BAE SYSTEMS Alternative Report 2001], CAAT website, html version: http://www.caat.org.uk/companies/BAES2001.html, accessed 29/4/02</ref> Perhaps the recent dismissal of John Weston from his position as CEO of BAE SYSTEMS indicates that BAE is worried about this criticism; Weston had been widely criticised for ‘bullying’ the MoD, and it was a badly-kept secret that Geoff Hoon, the Minister for Defence, and Weston were not working well together. However, it seems unlikely that BAE will give up all of the advantages that their near-monopoly position gives them, simply because at the moment the MoD is in no position to go elsewhere for their supplies, given that it is government policy to ‘buy British’ wherever possible. At the time of writing, nearly 85% of the MoD’s procurement went through British companies<ref>Ingram, P. & Davis, I. (2001) The Subsidy Trap: British Government Financial Support for Arms Exports and the Defence Industry, Oxford Research Group.</ref>, and most of that purchasing involved BAE SYSTEMS, in one way or another.

@@ Line 18: / Line 18: @@
 ===DESO===
-Another government organisation that makes life easier for the arms industry is DESO (Defence Export Services Organisation). Most Government support to the arms industry is co-ordinated by DESO which has over 300 staff and provides a range of services to the arms industry and potential customers. These include technical and logistical support, advice on negotiation, offset and financing arrangements, assistance to industry in regional marketing, market research funding for exhibitions and facilitation for military support to sales. DESOs marketing and most military support services are provided free to industry. Net operating costs to the MoD are £16m, according to a press briefing by Saferworld.{{ref|9}}
+Another government organisation that makes life easier for the arms industry is DESO ([[Defence Export Services Organisation]]). Most Government support to the arms industry is co-ordinated by DESO which has over 300 staff and provides a range of services to the arms industry and potential customers. These include technical and logistical support, advice on negotiation, offset and financing arrangements, assistance to industry in regional marketing, market research funding for exhibitions and facilitation for military support to sales. DESOs marketing and most military support services are provided free to industry. Net operating costs to the MoD are £16m, according to a press briefing by Saferworld.{{ref|9}}
 In addition, the Government uses MoD personnel, as well as embassies and defence attaches to promote arms exports. Also, the Government spends lots of money on official visits to promote the sale of defence equipment. Official visits by ministers and high-level delegations such as the Royal Family are frequently used to promote the sale of defence equipment. Another example was mentioned before; The Secretary of State for Defence met with BAE SYSTEMS and held talks with the Indian Government this year to discuss a BAe Hawk jet proposal. According to Saferworld, the Government's efforts to promote arms exports cost the taxpayer £69 million.{{ref|10}}

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 ===Tony and Dick===
-Whilst exploring the world of arms exports, BBC correspondent Will Self confirmed the existence of an intimate relationship between Tony Blair and BAE Systems chairman Sir Dick Evans. "It's Evans, with his abrasive style and no-nonsense salesmanship, who is widely credited with bringing Our Tone on to the export team. Dick got Blair to write a piece for the BAE SYSTEMS newsletter in the run-up to the 1997 election saying: 'Winning exports is vital to the long-term success of Britain's defence industry.' He also pledged New Labour's support for the industry. Evan's is said to enjoy the PM's ear whenever he wants."{{ref|11}}
+Whilst exploring the world of arms exports, BBC correspondent Will Self confirmed the existence of an intimate relationship between Tony Blair and BAE Systems chairman Sir Dick Evans. "It's Evans, with his abrasive style and no-nonsense salesmanship, who is widely credited with bringing Our Tone on to the export team. Dick got Blair to write a piece for the BAE SYSTEMS newsletter in the run-up to the 1997 election saying: 'Winning exports is vital to the long-term success of Britain's defence industry.' He also pledged New Labour's support for the industry. Evans is said to enjoy the PM's ear whenever he wants."{{ref|11}}
 ==Lobbying groups==

@@ Line 38: / Line 38: @@
 http://www.baesystems.com/AboutUs/InternationalPartnerships/index.htm
 http://www.baesystems.com/Businesses/index.htm
 ===Affiliations===

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 ==Government support for the defence industry==
-In fact, far from reining in an out-of-control company, the British government goes out of its way to promote and protect the British defence industry. In BAE SYSTEMS’ case, that effort goes right to the top, with Sir Richard Evans (Chairman of BAE) being described as ‘one of the few businessmen who can see Blair on request.'{{ref|4}} This relationship between the company and the government is not something that is hidden, in fact in April 2001, Dr Lewis Moonie (Under-Secretary for Defence) informed the House of Commons that: ‘MoD has given full support to BAE SYSTEMS’ bid to supply Hawk jets to India…the Secretary of State for Defence and the Minister for Defence Procurement have met with BAE SYSTEMS and the Indian Government to discuss the Hawk proposal.’{{ref|5}} According to the Guardian, The British government subsequently mounted an intensive campaign to sell 60 Hawk jets worth £1bn to India, in spite of the tremendous tensions in the Kashmir area. BAE SYSTEMS has already sold Jaguar combat aircraft to India in licensing deals the MoD refuses to disclose (see section on Corporate Crimes).{{ref|6}} In other words, the Government has not only a policy of permitting, but also of supporting, promoting and even covering up arms deals. BAE boasts of commanding the loyalty of over 200 MPs, even describing them as “its” MPs.{{ref|7}}
+In fact, far from reining in an out-of-control company, the British government goes out of its way to promote and protect the British defence industry. In BAE SYSTEMS’ case, that effort goes right to the top, with Sir Richard Evans (Chairman of BAE) being described as ‘one of the few businessmen who can see Blair on request.'<ref>Morgan, O. (2001) [http://www.observer.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,458405,00.html A gun at the MoD's head], 18/3/01, The Observer website, accessed 29/4/02</ref> This relationship between the company and the government is not something that is hidden, in fact in April 2001, Dr Lewis Moonie (Under-Secretary for Defence) informed the House of Commons that: ‘MoD has given full support to BAE SYSTEMS’ bid to supply Hawk jets to India…the Secretary of State for Defence and the Minister for Defence Procurement have met with BAE SYSTEMS and the Indian Government to discuss the Hawk proposal.’<ref>Hansard [http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200001/cmhansrd/vo010409/text/10409w02.htm House of Commons Daily Debates, 04 April 2001], House of Commons website, accessed 10/5/02</ref> According to the Guardian, The British government subsequently mounted an intensive campaign to sell 60 Hawk jets worth £1bn to India, in spite of the tremendous tensions in the Kashmir area. BAE SYSTEMS has already sold Jaguar combat aircraft to India in licensing deals the MoD refuses to disclose (see section on Corporate Crimes).<ref>Norton-Taylor, R. (2002) [http://www.guardian.co.uk/kashmir/Story/0,2763,688932,00.html British plane sales to India raise fears of nuclear use], The Guardian website, 23/4/02, accessed 10/5/02</ref> In other words, the Government has not only a policy of permitting, but also of supporting, promoting and even covering up arms deals. BAE boasts of commanding the loyalty of over 200 MPs, even describing them as “its” MPs.<ref>National Asset: The Westminster Briefing, No. 13, September 1999, cited in Wrigley, C. (2000) BAE SYSTEMS Alternative Report 2000, CAAT</ref>
 ==Financial backing from the Government==

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Monopoly over the defence industry==
-As has already been explained, BAE SYSTEMS owns most of the surviving shipbuilding capacity in Britain (see Products). As such it has the ability to use its massive holdings to influence government procurement policy, and to ensure the best deal for itself, rather than the taxpayer. Despite its international aspirations, BAE uses its status as a British company to further influence the Ministry of Defence; as the Defence Review put it, ‘deals with the MoD tend to come wrapped in the Union flag’.{{ref|1}} Threats over job cuts and relocation are skilfully used to ensure that BAE lands the lions share of all MoD contracts. For instance, the MoD attempted in 1999 to break the monopoly enjoyed by Royal Ordinance (a BAE subsidiary) over fuel supply by purchasing propellant from a South African source. BAE reacted quickly, closing a propellant plant near Glasgow and threatening to shut down Royal Ordinance altogether. As a result, RO now has a guaranteed ten-year contract from the Ministry of Defence.
+BAE SYSTEMS owns most of the surviving shipbuilding capacity in Britain (see [[BAe Systems: Products/Projects]]). As such it has the ability to use its massive holdings to influence government procurement policy, and to ensure the best deal for itself, rather than the taxpayer. Despite its international aspirations, BAE uses its status as a British company to further influence the Ministry of Defence; as the Defence Review put it, ‘deals with the MoD tend to come wrapped in the Union flag’.{{ref|1}} Threats over job cuts and relocation are skilfully used to ensure that BAE lands the lions share of all MoD contracts. For instance, the MoD attempted in 1999 to break the monopoly enjoyed by Royal Ordinance (a BAE subsidiary) over fuel supply by purchasing propellant from a South African source. BAE reacted quickly, closing a propellant plant near Glasgow and threatening to shut down Royal Ordinance altogether. As a result, RO now has a guaranteed ten-year contract from the Ministry of Defence.
 This behaviour has not gone unnoticed by other interested parties, with the chairman of Vosper calling BAE’s behaviour ‘outrageous’, and an article in the Spectator commenting on the ‘all-too comfortable relationship between a public-sector customer and one giant UK provider.’{{ref|2}} Perhaps the recent dismissal of John Weston from his position as CEO of BAE SYSTEMS indicates that BAE is worried about this criticism; Weston had been widely criticised for ‘bullying’ the MoD, and it was a badly-kept secret that Geoff Hoon, the Minister for Defence, and Weston were not working well together. However, it seems unlikely that BAE will give up all of the advantages that their near-monopoly position gives them, simply because at the moment the MoD is in no position to go elsewhere for their supplies, given that it is government policy to ‘buy British’ wherever possible. At the time of writing, nearly 85% of the MoD’s procurement went through British companies{{ref|3}}, and most of that purchasing involved BAE SYSTEMS, in one way or another.

@@ Line 25: / Line 25: @@
 ===Tony and Dick===
-Whilst exploring the world of arms exports, BBC correspondent Will Self confirmed the existence of an intimate relationship between Tony Blair and BAE SYSTEMS chairman Sir Dick Evans. "It's Evans, with his abrasive style and no-nonsense salesmanship, who is widely credited with bringing Our Tone on to the export team. Dick got Blair to write a piece for the BAE SYSTEMS newsletter in the run-up to the 1997 election saying: 'Winning exports is vital to the long-term success of Britain's defence industry.' He also pledged New Labour's support for the industry. Evan's is said to enjoy the PM's ear whenever he wants."{{ref|11}}
+Whilst exploring the world of arms exports, BBC correspondent Will Self confirmed the existence of an intimate relationship between Tony Blair and BAE Systems chairman Sir Dick Evans. "It's Evans, with his abrasive style and no-nonsense salesmanship, who is widely credited with bringing Our Tone on to the export team. Dick got Blair to write a piece for the BAE SYSTEMS newsletter in the run-up to the 1997 election saying: 'Winning exports is vital to the long-term success of Britain's defence industry.' He also pledged New Labour's support for the industry. Evan's is said to enjoy the PM's ear whenever he wants."{{ref|11}}
 ==Lobbying groups==
@@ Line 49: / Line 49: @@
 In addition to the 'virtual university', BAE SYSTEMS has partnerships of varying natures with many other universities, cooperating with Sheffield Hallam in the production of curriculum materials, and having research partnerships with Cambridge, Sheffield and Southampton Universities, amongst others. It also sends many of its young engineers back into secondary schools, to extol not only the benefits of an engineering career, but one with BAE SYSTEMS. In addition, the company has sponsored various events and ‘educational’ displays, such as the Mind Zone in the Millennium Dome, further linking its name with scientific and engineering excellence, and avoiding its real business of manufacturing weapons to kill people. Having capital far in excess of any other UK engineering firm (partly because of its size, and partly because of its massive reserves from the Al-Yammamah deal) it offers extremely rewarding packages to the best UK engineering students, ensuring that the arms industry continues to leech off the most promising talents in the sector.
 ==References==
@@ Line 65: / Line 72: @@
 #{{note|13}} Corporate Europe Observatory (2001) High time for UN to break 'Partnership' with the ICC, (briefing), CEO website: http://www.xs4all.nl/~ceo/un/icc.html, accessed 30/4/02
 #{{note|14}} EPSRC homepage: http://www.epsrc.ac.uk, accessed 10/5/02
+==Notes==
 [[Category:Transnational Corporations]][[Category:Arms Industry]]