Scucca

It simply cannot be denied that, following the 1998 OECD anti-bribery convention, we've fallen further behind in our failure to control bribery. Compared to the numerous prosecutions elsewhere in Europe, the Brits have managed the sum of zero. Given your Europhiling status, it strikes me as most amusing how prepared you are to accept the British "ignore it and hope no one notices" stance.

The British arms industry is harmful. It reduces Britain's economic growth. There is agreement from a variety of empirical analysis: from Keynesian modeling to endogeneous growth analysis. That New Labour have been prepared to allow the profiteering to go unhindered is dreadful. That they have been encouraged to do it because of corporate bribery infecting their government makes it despicable

You don't seem to mind that its the British people suffering because of this criminal behaviour. But hey, there's no reason for you to care...

__________________

PeteEU

And you dont get it. Yes european countries have prosecuted some cases, but they are nothing but token cases when you consider the amount of graft and business that is done around the world. That the UK has not prosecuted any cases, even token cases means just that they either are lazy or someone in politics has not pissed off the wrong people enough. This has nothing to do with the UK, France, or Europe, as all countries accept bribery to some extent, when it happens in the 3rd world... regardless of OECD conventions.

Whatever... live in a world of theories that cant work in the real world. Seems to me you are anti anything and critical of everything.

Give me a freaking break. Not everything revolves around the UK. Everyone suffers because of this behaviour but as I have stated before, there is nothing that can be done as it happens in the 3rd world or other countries, outside the western legal world. Punishing companies and people for paying bribes in Colombia, China, or random african country, only hurts our companies as our competitors from the US, Russia and other countries are very willing to pay such bribes.

__________________
PeteEU

Scucca

The UK follows a policy of ignoring its problem. The opportunistic profiteerers will of course have a “its the public interest, honest” nonsense to fall back on (with New Labour whores able to bogusly crow “its about jobs, guv”). This was made even more obvious with BAE, where the Saudis introduced a nice slice of blackmail to discourage the legal process. However, the fight against welfare-harming corruption requires constant attention. We haven't seen any such action in the UK. Britain provides too little resource in investigating the problem and has adopted only a shallow level of support for the OECD anti-bribery convention.

I'm certainly critical of our arms industry. It is every decent person's duty to join CAAT and fight against the arms trade destructiveness (for both our economy and for foreign populations that fall victim of the corruption)

Certainly the case! It is your prerogative not to give a toss about the welfare of the British peoples.

Red_Dave

The exemption they where given by Blair when he ended the S.F.O investigation and the exemption this bill would give them. I belive the article i posted explains. Thus the central issue here is whether we are and whether we will remain equal under the law [though it has to be said we shouldnt be coluding with the saudis in the first place]

Red_Dave

Which is a situation we urgently need to do something about. The wests relationships with totalitarian regimes, as well as being imoral in my view, frequently tend to end up biteing it in the behind. Look at Saddam, Pervez Musharraf, Noreiga, and the Argentine military dictatorship that invaded the Falklands

PeteEU

Oh that exemption. Well yea I agree with you, that part was dubious, but as I have stated before, the whole case was politicaly motivated to target Blair and his goverment, not to fight "corruption".

If it had been about corruption, then where are the trials of conservative politicans and backers during the Maggie and Major area? Why no investigations of all the weapons sales to Saudi Arabia during the 1980s, because I bet there were huge kickbacks given then too, and BAE was only one of many. Sorry this was a political witchhunt pure and simple.

Scucca

The concerted attempt to reduce the welfare harming effects of corruption occurred after the Tory cronies. I made that clear with reference to the 1998 OECD anti-bribery convention

This should be about reducing the British tendency to rely on bribery, given it harms the British people. The attempt to suggest "national interest" is idiotic and fails to appreciate how our economy has suffered because of its arms industry. New Labour, as usual, are clueless and merely protecting the status quo.

Red_Dave

I worked on CAATs campaign to shut DESO for a while so i agree that the arms trade is destructive for foriegn populations but how is it economically destructive?

Scucca

Good on yer!

Britain suffers from a shortage of scientists and engineers. Our R&D focus on the military sector therefore operates like a "crowding out" effect. Scarce resources are wasted on arms production, with the civilian sector suffering from reduced growth. This negative effect has increased because any "spin-off" gains have been stunted by an increased tendency towards "spin in" (i.e. our military sector provides fewer economic opportunities and spends more of its time finding military use for civilian know-how)

Red_Dave

Is there that much of a shortage though? I thought we where supossed to be a knowledge economy?