The Rich Need YOUR Help

Here's an interesting little paradox. Here we are, in the midst of an economic crisis where all the talk is of things getting worse before they get better. Amidst all this talk of crisis, there is re-assurance from both the Conservatives and the Conservatives Lite...sorry, Labour, that the rich must pay the price for their failures. Fine words. Question is, when taxpayers are bailing out the rich to a massive degree, are the rich really hurting? Well, it appears not according to this story in today's Guardian which highlights just how much the rich are really hurting:

Super times for superyachts as billionaires buy into maritime bling
Monte Carlo boat show finds demand for floating palaces higher than ever

While others panic about the financial crisis, this weekend's Monaco Yacht Show proved that the mega-rich have never been richer. Yacht brokers describe an eastern European new rich, boosted by oil wealth, keen to outdo their rivals. Middle Eastern viewers and occasional Latin Americans are following suit.

As the number of multi-billionaires grows, the superyacht industry is enjoying such a boom that demand for the most expensive models outstrips supply. Boats built to personal specifications have grown to such vast proportions that the labels superyacht and megayacht are no longer enough. Those on the dockside now talk of the gigayacht - multi-storey, 120-metre floating mansions that resemble cruise liners. The cost of the biggest new boats exceeds €200m.

So, are the rich really paying the price? Or is it the average tax payer?

Drug Companies Spend Millions on Direct Advertising

Following on from the attack by NICE on the drug industry in The Observer, The Guardian reveals today that the drug industry plows millions into persuading medical professionals to use their products. According to the report:

Drug companies are spending millions of pounds every year on all-expenses-paid trips to conferences around the world for doctors and other hospital staff, in what critics say is a massive marketing exercise dressed up as medical education.

The Guardian can reveal the scale of pharmaceutical company sponsorship following an examination of the registers of gifts and donations to doctors that all hospitals are required to keep. They show considerable largesse - from drug companies regularly picking up hefty bills for travel to international conferences in Europe, Asia and America, to specialist nurses' salaries, and weekly sandwich lunches for hospital staff training sessions.

Examples of the firms' hospitality include:

· Astra Zeneca paid £2,500 for a doctor at the Royal Bournemouth trust and £1,500 for a doctor at Sheffield teaching hospital to attend a cancer conference in Texas

· Sanofi-Aventis, the world's fourth biggest pharmaceutical company, paid for doctors at the Countess of Chester trust to go to conferences in Cape Town, New Orleans and Barcelona. At Gateshead trust, their reps gave a breakfast for 30 staff "to discuss drugs for the treatment of breast cancer". The trust's register records that "the donor was seeking to secure business".

· Roche spent £2,000 for an oncology consultant at Addenbrooke's hospital in Cambridge to go to a conference in May last year.

· GSK, the biggest British pharmaceutical company, paid £1,200 for a consultant at Sheffield teaching hospital to attend the 11th international congress of Parkinson's disease and movement disorders in Turkey last June.

· Companies have also been taking hospital staff to top football and rugby matches. Carillion, a public sector construction firm, spent £180 taking a senior manager at Milton Keynes trust to lunch and then a rugby match at Twickenham last August.


Fortunately, drug companies cannot advertise direct to the patient......yet. Only last year, drug companies and so-called 'patient groups' (funded by drugs companies funnily enough) lobbied the European parliament to relax the regulations on direct advertising. Should these patient groups be successful in battering NICE into submission, there is no doubt that the pressure would increase to allow the drug companies to advertise direct to the patient - a very dangerous prospect indeed when one considers the issues surrounding drugs such as Vioxx.

These are dangerous times in the medical world. Drug companies are scared of a decline in profits that will inevitably follow the expiration of their lucrative patents. This fear will drive them to ever ambitious attempts to secure their bottom line and patient groups are one of their biggest weapons. NICE must be allowed to carry out its work, no matter how hard it is for some patients to accept, or else we could find ourselves in a dangerous world where drugs are rushed to the market place after insufficient testing - leading to many more cases like Vioxx. NICE does a very difficult job, but it deserves everyone's support.

China - Human Rights - Bad, Economy - Gooooood

Much has been made of Bush's criticisms of China, but it wasn't all bad news for the Chinese government:

US President George W Bush has expressed "deep concerns" over China's human rights record in a speech on the eve of the Beijing Olympics.

"The US believes the people of China deserve the fundamental liberty that is the natural right of all human beings," he said in the Thai capital, Bangkok.

Mmm, very good. Almost makes you look like you give a shit. But what's this:

In his address, Mr Bush said the US recognised that the growth sparked by China's free market reforms was "good for the Chinese people" and the country's' purchasing power was "good for the world".

Ah yes, the free market reforms that were one of the driving forces behind the demonstrations in Tiananmen Square all those years back. Yes, Bush condemns the abuse of human rights whilst also giving a back handed compliment to one of the major factors in those abuses. You got to hand it to old Bushie - he sure knows how to pull the wool over the eyes don't he??

Chevron Lobbyists Accused of 'Misleading Congress'

The Chevron/Ecuador scandal rumbles on:

Leaders from Ecuador's rainforest, suing Chevron over the "Amazon Chernobyl", are accusing the oil giant of misleading the Bush Administration and Congress to escape a potential $16 billion liability in an environmental lawsuit.

The indigenous leaders - from the Cofan, Secoya, and Siona tribes - are planning a trip to Washington, DC in September to talk directly with Members of Congress and the office of the U.S. Trade Representative.

"We are coming to tell the truth about Chevron's desperate attempt to quash the legal claims of thousands of vulnerable people in the Amazon rainforest who are struggling to survive due to oil contamination," said Pablo Fajardo, the lead Ecuadorian lawyer for the plaintiffs.

"These people deserve their day in court without interference from Chevron," he added. "Chevron must respect the rule of law."

The damages report prompted Chevron to disclose the liability to its shareholders for the first time, and to hire a slew of Washington lobbyists who have dedicated themselves to trying to block the extension of U.S. trade preferences for Ecuador. Luis Gallegos, Ecuador's U.S. ambassador, has said a failure to extend the trade preferences by the end of the year would cost the country 350,000 jobs and force 1.2 million people into poverty.

Among the lobbyists hired by Chevron are former Senators John Breaux and Trent Lott, and Mac McLarty, former White House Chief of Staff in the Clinton Administration. Their work has been focused on Ambassador Susan Schwab, the United States Trade Representative; key Members of Congress; and John Negroponte, Deputy Secretary of State.

Fajardo said the aim of Chevron's lobbyists is to use the threat of canceling trade preferences to intimidate Ecuador's government into extinguishing the legal rights of its citizens to save the country's economy.

Interestingly, one Democrat senator has alreay been involved in this case on the side of the Ecuadoreans.....one Barak Obama. From February 2006:

Senators Barack Obama (D-Ill) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt) have stepped up the pressure on Chevron, sending a letter to U.S. Trade Representative Rob Portman urging him to ignore company's campaign to improperly exclude Ecuador from trade negotiations until the Ecuadorian government shuts down the lawsuit.

The senators write: "We are writing to seek your assurances that the U.S. Trade Representative will not allow negotiations over the Andean Free Trade Agreement to interfere with a case involving Chevron that is under consideration by the Ecuadorian judiciary, particularly one involving environmental, health and human rights issues that have regional importance. While we are not prejudging the outcome of the case, we do believe the 30,000 indigenous residents of Ecuador deserve their day in court."

Question is, will Obama stand by this letter when the time comes, or will he give in to pressure from the oil giant? Failing that, will Chevron increase the pressure so they can persuade the Bush administration of their case before it's too late (should there be an Obama presidency)? Or will Chevron fund a massive smear campaign against Obama? The people of Ecuador have a lot riding on the next couple of months. Let's hope that their day in court finally arrives.

More at Ecuador Rising.

The City of London - Sponsored By Porsche

Once again, we see how easily the Tories defer to the interests of big business, even in the face of their new found passion for the environment. Eager not to upset the bigwigs at Porsche, Boris Johnson has proven that he has no bollocks whatsoever and caved in to the pressure exerted by the gas guzzling manufacturer. As always with the Tories, big business comes first, the environment a very distant last. Whilst the taxpayer is forced to pay compensation to the manufacturing giant, Boris Johnson and his capitalist chums are laughing all the way to the bank. Any chance a sweetener might have been involved? From The Guardian:

London mayor Boris Johnson is to pay about £400,000 to Porsche after agreeing to scrap a plan to levy a £25 charge on the most polluting vehicles in the capital, it emerged last night.

The luxury sports car specialist had begun a legal challenge to the proposal, put forward by the former mayor, Ken Livingstone, earlier this year.

Yesterday Johnson withdrew the proposal, and a court ruled that the Greater London Authority should pay Porsche's legal costs. The company says that it will give the money to Skidz - a charity which offers youngsters training in mechanical skills and maintenance.

Last night Jenny Jones, Green party assembly member, said she was appalled by the decision. "This is a mayor who is telling us he wants to see value for money, and to account for every penny, and here he is paying one of the richest car companies in the world hundreds of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money."

And how many green initiatives will be cut by the Tories when they come to power? Leaders of big business must be dropping to their knees and praying to the Almighty for a Tory victory. For the rest of us, Johnson's regime in London has shown has just how far they are prepared to go to protect the giants of capitalism. And you thought Labour were a bunch of right-wing economic extremists, Cameron's mob just might have the edge on them and that's no mean feat.

Boris Johnson Determined To Screw Londoners and the Daily Mail Provide 'Proof' of Nuclear Intentions of Terrorists

A couple of stories that I have picked up on from the latest issue of Private Eye (no.1212) that I think are worthy of sharing. First off, more revelations about the Boris Johnson debacle in London. Hot on the heels of Johnson's attempts to recruit former members of Shirley Porter's administration, Johnson has now added Steve Norris to the board of Transport for London. So far, so what. However, Norris has a rather chequered history in relation to transport.

Steve Norris was a director of Jarvis from 2000, and had a seat on the board at the time of the Potters Bar rail crash. Jarvis had a contract to ensure the maintenance of the line and, as a result of the crash, admitted liability for the crash after initially refusing responsibility and suggested that if the accident was a result of wear and tear, it would have been detected and fixed. After the revelation that the incident was not down to sabotage, Jarvis formally accepted "legally justified claims" and provided a provision of £3m. The company eventually wrote letters to relatives and passengers apologising for the "hurt and anger" it caused by blaming sabotage for the crash.

But it doesn't end there. According to PE, Norris sits on the board of a company called AMT-Sybex, alongside one William Hague. AMT-Sybex was a leading subcontractor to Metronet, the consortium running half of the tube PPP. In 2005, it sold Metronet a £15m computer system to list all the firm's assets. As a result of the privatisation, no-one really knew what had actualy been handed over, so a register would help to produce a schedule that would identify which parts of the rail and cabling would need fixing.

In 2006, the Tube regulator found that Metronet's costs were rising, in part due to the extra costs of the AMT-Sybex system. Despite this system, Metronet failed to get a grip on its assets and, due to problems with prices and schedules, eventually collapsed. The system was an unmitigated disaster.

As a result of Steve Norris' record regarding transport, it seems a little odd that Boris Johnson would want to put him in such an influential role in London, particularly as we are supposed to be witnessing the birth of the 'New' Conservatives. Guess they ain't so different after all. Corporations and shareholders first, general public a very distant last. [Much of the above is copied verbatim from Private Eye, who do not actually publish stories to the net yet - as far as I am aware. If you want to find out more, I suggest you seek out the latest issue.]

One other interesting story involved this headline and picture from the Daily Mail:

A terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack

A story to strike fear into the minds of any discerning Mail reader (does such a thing exist). However, it appears this story is not what it seems:

A piece of concept art of a decimated Washington, D.C. from Bethesda Softworks post-apocalyptic RPG Fallout 3 (PC, PS3, 360) has been circulated through a handful of news publications, reported as terrorist propaganda after an intelligence contractor said the image was used in al Qaeda-related videos.

The artwork was released as part of Bethesda's early promotional campaigns for Fallout 3, which takes place in and around the Washington, D.C. area decades after a nuclear catastrophe. The image appeared on the Daily Mail's website under the headline "Al-Qaeda's terrifying vision of a devastated America in the wake of a nuclear attack."

"This is the apocalyptic scene terrorists hope to create if they ever get their hands on a nuclear bomb... posted on an Islamic extremists' website yesterday," wrote the Mail's Barry Wigmore.

The image also appeared on the Australian news outlet News.com.au, citing terror watchdog organization SITE Intel as having released the image "which reportedly appeared on an Islamist forum."

Though several members of the press have since pointed out the gaffe, neither the Daily Mail nor News.com.au have updated their stories with corrections or retractions of the claim.

Interestingly, according to Private Eye, if you try pointing this out in the comments thread on the Mail website, they will refuse to publish it. Still, I guess they made their point and scared enough people (conveniently just a few days before the 42 days vote, hmmm).

Chevron Post Record Profits

The company accused of destroying the environment in Ecuador and who also employs the man who green lit the human rights abuses in Iraq and Guantanamo, has posted has reported a first-quarter net income increase of 10%. From MarketWatch:

NEW YORK (MarketWatch) -- Rounding out an impressive set of results from the major oil producers, Chevron Corp. on Friday said first-quarter net income climbed 10% as revenue jumped on higher prices for crude oil, natural gas and refined products.

The San Ramon, Calif. integrated oil and gas giant said earnings for the three months ended March 31 increased to $5.17 billion, or $2.48 a share, from $4.72 billion, or $2.18 a share in the year-ago period, which included a one-time $700 million gain.

Revenue rose to $65 billion from $46 billion, as the company's oil and gas production business grew, even as its refining and marketing results were essentially break-even for the period.

They will, of course, need all the revenue they can muster should the Ecuadorean case go against them. Fingers crossed.

William Haynes Chevron

(Apologies for the poor grammar in the headline, there is a reason.)

Well, someone at Chevron certainly is keeping their eye on blogs posting about Ecuador, Chevron and William Haynes. In the past week, I have had no less than four visits from someone holed up at Chevron HQ (lucky old me). Generally speaking, they appear to use the search term that I have used as the title of this post, which then leads them to this lovely little post I wrote on the connection between William Haynes and the 'war on terror'. One wonders how many other visits they will pay to this blog in the near future.

In honour of my new found friends at Chevron, I would like to dedicate the following short animation to their tireless work in Ecuador. You deserve it chaps, no really.

Chevron in Ecuador

Given Chevron's existing links to the White House (Condoleeza Rice sat on the board of Chevron for many years), it is perhaps unsurprising that another name connected to the White House has joined the company. However, given the recent revelations about the extent to which those at the seat of power had authorised torture techniques, it is quite surprising to learn who this man is, a certain William Haynes II.

Haynes was general counsel to the Pentagon from 2001 until February this year. As general counsel, Haynes was heavily involved in crafting legal policies that led to the horrific abuses at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. So involved was Haynes, that he is currently under investigation by the Senate for his role at the Pentagon during this period. Perhaps his most important contribution to the Bush terror regime, was a memo relating to a further memo that claimed that torture conducted overseas is not covered by federal law. Consequently, Haynes and his boss, Donald Rumsfeld, used this memo to justify harsh interrogation techniques at Guantanamo. In short, Haynes was a crucial component of the Bush presidency who was particularly close to both Bush and Dick Cheney. In fact, he was such an ally to Bush, he even volunteered to make calls on Bush's behalf when Bush was up for election in 2000.

Haynes' role as chief corporate counsel could have serious repercussions for Chevron's ongoing battle in Ecuador relating to a charge of environmental damage. The damage is such that Richard Cabrera, a geologist appointed by the court, set a minimum of $7 billion in damages to remediate damage. He also added a maximum figure of $16 billion which would include penalties for "unjust enrichment." Of course, Chevron dismissed the findings out of hand and have attempted to have the report struck from the case claiming it is "flawed and patently partisan". Furthermore, there have been numerous accusations about Chevron's conduct during investigations, particularly regarding the efforts of Cabrera.

During the course of the investigations, Chevron has been accused of "engaging in a pattern of vicious,defamatory and unethical attacks" . These attacks include full page advertisements accusing Cabrera of being a criminal, stalking him whilst he was completing his fieldwork and filing a separate motion with another court to have him removed from the case. In fact, the harassment became so grave, that the trial judge 'ordered security agents to keep Chevron representatives away from Cabrera so he could complete his field work without interference or fear of intimidation'. Furthermore, although there is no proof that Chevron were responsible, Cabrera's office was broken into and a laptop containing files relating to the case went missing. Undoubtedly, there have been real concerted efforts to de-rail this case by Chevron. The efforts they have gone to underline quite how damaging this court case could be if they are ordered to pay damages to the people of Ecuador.

Chevron have already shown how far they prepared to push the boundaries of the law in Ecuador in order to protect their interests in the country. With the addition of Haynes to the team, there is no doubt that Chevron seem set to explore new methods to achieve their aims. If Chevron are willing to appoint a man who is partially responsible for gross human rights abuses in the name of national interest, one wonders just how far they are prepared to go in defending corporate interest. One can be sure that both Chevron, and Haynes, are preparing to take this battle to another level - a level that could have serious consequences for those seeking justice in Ecuador.


Further Information: ChevronToxico: Clean Up Ecuador Campaign

Message From Wal-Mart Watch

Some rare good news, taken from Wal-Mart Watch:

On April 1, 2008, Wal-Mart dropped all pending litigation against the Shank family. Thanks in part to the hundreds of people who wrote in to the company, as well of the contribution of many major news outlets, Debbie's family will be able to keep the money currently being held in trust for her future care. THANK YOU to everyone who helped make this victory possible. Click here to learn how you can help make sure this never happens to another Wal-Mart employee.

For more, watch the following clip:

Immigrants, Capitalists and Tax

Remember this:

Labour's 'open door' policy on immigration costs every household £350 a year, it was claimed yesterday.

David Coleman, an Oxford University academic, puts the total annual bill to the taxpayer at almost £8.8billion.

In a submission to a House of Lords committee, he said there had been an 'absent-minded commitment' to increase the population by one million every five years.

Perhaps not that individual story, but something like it repeated ad nauseum in papers such as the Daily Mail and the Express. A quick search on either paper's website should find a plethora of stories such as this one (a staggering 41,630 articles on the Daily Mail alone using the search terms 'immigrants', 'cost' and 'tax'). Of course, this created the usual fuss about immigration. After all, £8.8billion does appear to be an awful lot of money lost in taxpayers money. There is, however, a section of society that costs us far more and you are unlikely to ever see them on the front page of the Daily Mail day after day. Yes, you guessed it, those pesky capitalists.

For around three years now, Private Eye has been trying to extract information about tax lost due to avoidance and evasion from HM Revenue and Customs. In typical fashion, the department tried everything they could to get out of revealing such information, perhaps aware of how damaging this might be. Then, as is the norm in these days of 'burying bad news', the figures were released on budget day amongst a raft of other paperwork sure to distract the public. The figures were shocking and underlines that the section of society most deserving of our scorn and hatred are not the immigrant communities, but the capitalists. The following is taken from Accountancy Age:

HM Revenue and Customs dramatically abandoned its attempts to keep details of the 'tax gap' secret just before the Budget.

HMRC estimates the sum lost to tax avoidance and evasion to be somewhere between £11bn and £41bn each year. Total government tax receipts for 2008 are expected to reach £575bn. The take from corporation tax alone is only £52bn.

That means up to £41bn is lost every year due to capitalists avoiding their obligations, that's five times as much as the cost to the taxpayer of the 'influx of immigration' (as the Mail puts it). So, presumably we will see a prolonged attack by the mainstream media on this section of society. Don't count on it. The interests of the capitalists will always take priority over those seeking to improve their lives or fleeing from persecution. The real criminals in our society are not the immigrants, they are the capitalists and whilst sections of society continue to attack 'foreigners', the rich and sitting in their expensive yachts laughing at our stupidity. It's time for the laughter to stop.

....And So Do Lidl....

Looks like Lidl really is in competition with Wal-Mart/Asda, in more ways than one:

The German discount supermarket chain Lidl has been accused of spying on its employees, including recording how many times they went to the toilet as well as details about their love lives, personal finances and menstrual cycles.

An investigation by the German news magazine Stern uncovered an extensive espionage system in its shops across Germany. It obtained hundreds of pages of documents gathered by detectives allegedly employed by the chain to find out about its staff. The surveillance took place via mini-video cameras installed by detectives. The official reason given to store managers was to reduce shoplifting.

Critics have accused Lidl of using "Stasi methods", referring to the secret police of the former communist East German state who kept track of the most banal and intimate details of hundreds of thousands of citizens' lives.

The detectives' records include details of precisely where employees had tattoos as well as information about their friends. "Her circle of friends consists mainly of drug addicts," reads one record. The detectives also had the task of identifying which employees appeared to be "incapable" or "introverted and naive".

Capitalism and right-wing politics will lead us towards a police state where corporations have immunity from prosecution. Let no-one lead you to believe that corporations can be any less totalitarian than states.

Asda/Wal-Mart - They Really Hate Their Staff

Via an email alert from Wal-Mart Watch (Asda's parent company):

Today's lead story on CNN.com is about former Missouri Wal-Mart employee Debbie Shank. Debbie used to stock shelves at night for Wal-Mart. Now she owes Wal-Mart almost $500,000.

Tell Wal-Mart not to take her money:

http://action.walmartwatch.com/debbieshank

The 52 year-old was a Wal-Mart employee when she was left "brain damaged, disabled and penniless" from a car accident seven years ago. But after the Shank family received a settlement from the trucking company at fault, Wal-Mart demanded reimbursement for every cent it had paid for Debbie's medical bills - plus interest and legal fees.

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear Debbie Shank's case, leaving her family no choice but to pay Wal-Mart $470,000. Now her family doesn't know how they're going to be able to afford Debbie's nursing home bills.

To make things worse, the $470,000 exceeds the remaining $277,000 in Debbie's trust from the settlement, which means Wal-Mart may even go after the donations given to the Shank family for Debbie's care, including the money you helped raise in November. This is just wrong.

Wal-Mart may have won the lawsuit, but the Shank family has already lost enough. The company claims that it has to collect the money for the good of all Wal-Mart employees. But, in this particularly egregious situation, surely the largest company in the world run by the wealthiest family in the United States can give this family a break.

Write to Wal-Mart executives and ask them to tell Lee Scott to do the right thing and let Debbie Shank keep her money:

http://action.walmartwatch.com/debbieshank

This company already has a reputation for treating its employees poorly, and this tragic situation exposes the company's pure heartlessness. The Shank family is living most people's worst nightmare - and Wal-Mart is only making it worse.
Debbie's husband, Jim, told reporters:

"She's 52 and she's going to live a life in a nursing home. I just got a call today from the head nurse, and (Debbie) hasn't eaten in a couple days and she's talking about wanting to die," Shank said. "It makes the visits hard."

... "Be a human being; don't be a corporation," Shank said, "for the sake of one lady who is going to be miserable for the rest of her life. Take your victory. Let us pay some bills and get some quality of life."

Capitalist bastards.

SEC Urged To Impose 'Substantial' Sanction on Chevron Over Possible $10 Million Liability

Taken from the PR Newswire:

SAN FRANCISCO, March 26 /PRNewswire/ -- The Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) has been urged to impose a "substantial" sanction on
Chevron for misrepresentations to shareholders over a potential $10 billion
liability resulting from a class-action environmental lawsuit in the
Ecuadorian Amazon.

In a letter to SEC Chairman Christopher Cox, environmental group Amazon
Watch said Chevron had told shareholders a "series of falsifications,
exaggerations, omissions, and misleading public statements" to downplay its
liability in a lawsuit brought by thousands of rainforest residents over
what experts say is the worst oil-related disaster on the planet. The full
text of the letter can be seen on http://www.chevrontoxico.org.

A court-appointed expert is preparing a damages assessment, which the
plaintiffs expect to be more than $10 billion.

"Chevron created an environmental catastrophe in Ecuador and as a
result thousands of vulnerable rainforest residents are suffering from
dangerous toxic pollution," said Luis Yanza, a representative of the 80
communities and five indigenous groups that brought the lawsuit.

Last month, Chevron conceded to the office of the U.S. Trade
Representative that it expects "a near-term unfavorable finding from the
Ecuadorian court and potentially enormous ... financial liability,"
according to a copy of the submission obtained by Amazon Watch. Chevron
also said it was the victim of an "unfair" trial, an assertion that the
plaintiffs dispute.

Yet Chevron for years has refused to mention this potential liability
in its public filings as required by securities law, the group said in the
letter. Chevron also placed information on its corporate website that
suggests it faces no risk in Ecuador, according to the organization.

"Chevron misleads its shareholders by claiming in public that it has no
liability in Ecuador, while in private it claims to face an enormous
liability," said Atossa Soltani, Amazon Watch executive director. "Which is
it? The SEC must ensure that Chevron tells the truth about its liabilities
in public as well as in private discussions."

Expected to conclude this year, the Ecuador lawsuit accuses Chevron of
digging close to 1,000 open-air waste pits in the rainforest and filling
them with toxic-laden oil sludge that has leeched into the soil and
groundwater. The company is also accused of dumping 18 billion gallons of
toxic wastewater into rainforest waterways from 1964 to 1990, the years it
operated a lucrative oil concession in Ecuador.

Chevron's sub-standard operational practices in Ecuador "threaten the
survival of rainforest indigenous groups and can be linked to hundreds of
deaths from cancer and other oil-related diseases," said the letter.

Pharmaceutical Accused of "Cheating" NHS

Here is the real problem facing the NHS. Corporations and doctors are doing their level best to destroy the NHS and create the right environment for it to be abolished and replaced with a more lucrative (for them anyway) system. The latest example of corporate attempts to damage public healthcare, concerns the activities of Reckitt Benckiser. The following is taken from The Guardian:

A drug company faces accusations of cheating the NHS by blocking a generic version of Gaviscon, the lucrative treatment for indigestion.

Internal documents leaked from Reckitt Benckiser reveal the existence of Project Eric, a secret plan by the company to manipulate doctors and regulators.

Gaviscon is one of Britain's most common remedies, prescribed in large quantities to people with heartburn. It costs little to produce but its high price makes millions for its Hull-based manufacturer. Although Gaviscon has been out of patent for almost 10 years, a cheap generic version wanted by the government has never been developed. Such a drug could have saved the NHS up to £40m.

The leaked documents reveal in detail how the company blocked the generic version. It is a tactic known in the pharmaceuticals business as "evergreening".

The company says the memos were "inappropriate" and did not reflect Reckitt's eventual actions.

Extracts, due to be broadcast tonight on BBC Newsnight, disclose Reckitt's plan to manipulate regulators on supposed safety grounds, threaten legal challenges and spin out procedures.

Generic drugs are a real threat to the major pharmaceuticals. When a patent on a drug expires, they no longer have a monopoly on the market, this allows generic equivalents to be produced at a cheaper cost (without affecting quality). Cheaper generics = loss of business for pharmaceuticals. It also means massive financial savings for the NHS which can then be plowed into life saving equipment, or better paid nurses and medical staff. Of course, the more the big corporations can extract from the NHS, the more damage it does to our system of healthcare, paving the way for a system based on insurance that would penalise the poorest citizens.

There is a way that all of us can take action regarding this issue. Doctors are often persuaded to prescribe branded drugs by the big pharmaceuticals, rather than the cheaper generic versions. As I have said above, this costs the NHS huge sums of money unnecessarily. So, next time you get a prescription from your doctor, ask that s/he prescribes the name of the drug rather than the brand name. When taking your prescription along to a pharmacy, they are obliged to dispense the generic version and hence save the NHS lots of money (not to mention making you feel good about yourself for being so conscientious). The big pharmaceuticals may not like it, but what is more important, universal healthcare or corporate profit?

Tesco - Every Little Hurts

Tesco must be scared. After yesterday's revelations in The Guardian, there are rumours that the corporate giant is considering suing the newspaper. Perhaps they are just pissed because they have been rumbled. Who knows?

Tesco - You Pay Tax So They Don't Have To

I was going to post on this myself, but RickB at Ten Percent beat me to it. Go read his post on how Tesco are "pulling an Enron".

Prozac, Drug Companies and the "Normality Myth"

See the man on the right? The man with the self-satisfied grin that cries out "rich bastard"?? Well, he's been, allegedly, selling a lie. A lie, allegedly, that has made him a lot of money. You may, at this point, be wondering why I am using the phrase "allegedly" so frequently at the moment. Well, I'm a coward and he is a CEO of a major pharmaceutical and they tend to be a little litigious. This man is, in fact, Sidney Taurel the chairman and CEO of Eli Lilly, the manufacturers of Prozac. A drug that is the centre of a new storm of controversy surrounding the drug industry.

The following is lifted from The Independent:

The pharmaceutical industry came under assault from senior figures in medical research yesterday over its practice of withholding information to protect profits, exposing patients to drugs which could be useless or harmful.

Experts criticised the stranglehold exerted by multinational companies over clinical trials, which has led to biased results, under-reporting of negative findings and selective publication driven by the market, which was worth £10.1bn in the UK in 2006, amounting to 11 per cent of total NHS costs.

The latest attack was triggered yesterday by an analysis of published and unpublished trials of modern antidepressants, including Prozac and Seroxat, showing they offer no clinically significant improvement over placebos (dummy pills) in most patients. But doctors said patients on the drugs should not stop taking them without consulting their GPs.

While I would accept that, in some cases, the prescribing of such drugs is necessary, the massive growth in their usage has been part of a disturbing trend in the last twenty years. What we have seen in the recent past is an attempt by certain sections of the medical profession trying to sell us the myth of "normal behaviour". This myth sought to stigmatise any extremes in human behaviour as abnormal, particularly if these were negative emotions. Suddenly, we no longer feel sadness or sorrow, we feel "depression". Suddenly, we were told that this is not "normal" behaviour and treatment must be sought. As Christopher Lane explained in his book, "Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness":

"Before you sell a drug, you have to sell the disease."

This has certainly proved to be the case. And the drug companies have been quick to seize an opportunity to diagnose a new illness and sell us a wonderful "cure".

However, it is not only financial gain that has proved an attractive aspect of the "normality myth". It is one thing creating a myth for financial gain, sustaining the momentum behind the initial surge is more difficult to maintain. In order for this to occur, there needs to be more than just a massive marketing campaign, there needs to be a massive cultural shift. And this is where the establishment, and particularly the media, come into play. While the "normality myth" is an opportunity for the drug companies, they need a concerted effort by various other interests to propagate this myth and make it believable. This myth has particular advantages for the establishment. A society that conforms to an agreed behaviour pattern is much easier to control. By prescribing drugs such as Prozac to people behaving outside these norms, they hope to normalise their behaviour and thus make them easier to manage. A people that behave within certain boundaries are easier to predict. People who behave outside the realms of the "normality myth" are hard to predict and, therefore, difficult to control. In short, the growth of the industry surrounding the "normality myth" has been part of an effort to make it easier to predict an otherwise unpredictable populace.

The exposure of the reality of this particular aspect of the drug industry should come as no surprise to those who follow developments within the industry. The pretence that they are there for the common good is exactly that, pretence. Drug companies are there to seek out opportunities and make a profit. If that means concocting an illness to further their business, so be it. To believe anything else is to be incredibly naive.

Government in the Pay of Big Business

Proof, if proof be need be, that New Labour just lurve the filthy lucre:

They are among Britain's wealthiest businessmen, with access to the heart of Downing Street. Yet little has been known about the elite group of multinational chairmen, or exactly what they talk about during their breakfast meetings with the prime minister. Until now, that is.

Downing Street documents disclosed to the Guardian reveal how the secretive lobbying group, which consists of the heads of Britain's most powerful corporations, including BP, Unilever, HSBC, Shell and British American Tobacco (BAT), have used their private access to protect the pensions of the ultra-rich.

The exclusive club, known as the multi-national chairmen's group, consists of fewer than 10 executives. Its members are invited to Downing Street to tell the prime minister how they believe government policies are affecting international corporations.

Downing Street has been forced to release the prime ministerial documents after a two-year battle over freedom of information. They show the executives:

· outmanoeuvred Gordon Brown, then chancellor, to shield "fat cat" pensions from his proposals to tax them more heavily;

· wanted Tony Blair, then prime minister, to lobby George Bush to treat corporations more favourably in return for supporting the invasion of Iraq;

· and lobbied for less "burdensome" red tape so multinational corporations would continue basing themselves in Britain.

And they call this a Labour government.

BP and Shell Eager to Get Their Hands on Iraqi Oil

From Scenta:

BP has been holding meetings with Iraqi oil officials as it speeds up plans to re-enter one of the biggest but politically most controversial oil provinces in the world, five years after the toppling of Saddam Hussein by the British and US military.

The move comes as BP is drawing fire for abandoning any pursuit of green credentials. Environmental groups accuse the new chief executive, Tony Hayward, of "recarbonising" a once enlightened oil group.

BP said it was "possible" some of its executives might meet the Iraqi oil minister, Hussain al-Shahristani, today at a Royal Institute of International Affairs conference in London, sponsored by BP, Shell and other western oil majors.

A spokesman for BP, which will report annual profits of about $18bn, confirmed managers met Iraqi oil officials last week in Jordan and talked about providing technical assistance.

Iraq has more than 115bn barrels of recoverable reserves, an attraction for oil groups at a time when easily recoverable reserves are becoming more difficult to secure.

BP was last night playing down any likelihood of an imminent move into Iraq. "It is a country of interest to us but we are waiting for political and security stability to return before we will take anything further," a spokesman said.

The group has already undertaken technical studies on the Rumeila oilfield for the new government of Iraq. It is gearing up for further involvement following the drafting of a new oil law in Iraq. The chief executive of Shell, Jeroen van der Veer, also admitted last week that his company was looking closely at re-entering Iraq.

Yes, Shell and BP are poised to get their grubby little hands on Iraq's oil, courtesy of the proposed Iraq Oil Law. And they said the war was about oil. Pish.