|
Newsletter Issue 2 March - April 2001 |
||||||||
|
CORPORATE EYE Merger Reform The government is planning to change the law regulating the merger of UK companies. The core of the proposal is that mergers should be regulated by independent competition authorities, not by ministers, and should be assessed only on the basis of their effect on competition rather than the existing general public interest test. This change is scarcely surprising; it follows the general trend to shift economic policy decisions away from publicly accountable politicians to independent bodies and equating a free market with the public good. The proposal claims that 'benefits to UK consumers' will be taken into account in decisions, but what does this really mean? Does taking 'impact on jobs, regional policy, social exclusion, environmental issues' into consideration benefit the UK consumer? Apparently not: these issues were raised by the few critical voices in the consultation and are mentioned in the report, but were not included in the final proposal. Instead any merger that does not enable 'the merged business to raise prices, reduce choice, or operate inefficiently, without being punished by the market' is taken to benefit the UK consumer. Once again, society is buying power - people are acknowledged only as consumers, not workers or communities, and companies are merely sellers of goods, not employers or the 'corporate neighbours' their advertising would have us believe. Sounds a bit odd? Not when you know that about half of the 60 respondents in the consultation are large corporations (Tesco, Unilever, etc), investors, banks and law firms. The rest of the respondents are an assortment of individuals, interest groups (from the Confederation of British Industry to the Campaign for Real Ale) and unions. Of the 60 respondents only eight (including the trade union respondents) argued that wider public interests need to be taken into account. But can one compare numbers in a consultation where there is an initial bias among the respondents for a certain political agenda? However, the DTI's report repeatedly refers to the number of respondents supporting their reform and in this way avoids dealing with the actual arguments brought forward by the critical voices. For further information: www.dti.gov.uk/cacp/cp/summary.htm Paula Mallick, Merger Reform, Competition Policy Directorate, Department of Trade and Industry, Room 642, 1 Victoria Street, London, SW1H 0ET 0207 215 6017 Opening up Tibet After 50 years of discussing the logistics, plans are underway for the Chinese government to build a railway linking China and Tibet as part of its plan to 'accelerate economic and social development' in the occupied territory. Obviously, the plan would also assist with China's attempt to exterminate Tibet and its people by 'reinforcing unity among various ethnic groups'. Europe-based corporations are believed to be lining up for the contracts. Lets hope that geology outsmarts them. Engineers are already expressing doubts that the terrain will support such an enormous feat. Guardian 10/02/01 Funding logging The UK's Natwest bank and Prudential are helping to destroy some of the world's prime old forest. The Prudential Insurance Company is a major shareholder in Boise Cascade, the American forestry giant and the generosity of the Natwest bank (and others), finances Boise's dubious activities in the Amazon, South East Asia and Canada. They are responsible for deforesting an area the size of Luxembourg each year. EcoNet, IGC Internet http://headlines.igc.apc.org 08/03/01 www.focusonfinance.org/Boisecascade.htm BP and US threat to Arctic and its people With George Bush, self-confessed climate sceptic, ensconced in the White House the threat of oil exploration in the Arctic wilderness looms closer. BP has previously lobbied the US government to open up the Arctic National Wildlife refuge and has already begun building ice roads to Northstar Island where it wants to drill 30 oil wells. Only a vote by BP's shareholders 2 years ago prevented them from pushing ahead. Instead they wanted to see more investment in renewables such as solar power. However, BP has recently spent more on upgrading its corporate image than on alternative energy. The indigenous Gwich'in people have been battling against the proposed destruction of their livelihood for the past ten years. The irony is that the US Geological Survey think there is only 6 months of useful oil beneath the tundra. EcoNet IGC Internet, Gwich'in Nation Fights for Cultural Survival Against Arctic Drilling, Steven C Dinero, 12/03/01 New GM crop trials There will be ninety six trials this spring - and no safety zones to protect neighbouring conventional or organic crops. Government ministers admit that contamination will happen by up to 1% but the Scottish Crop Research Institute says it is more likely to be 5%. Apparently the purpose of the trials is to observe cross-pollination between GM and non GM crops and the effect on wild flora and fauna. So the large scale UK experiment continues out in the massive open countryside |
||||||||
| Page: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. |