Watching a documentary on BBC1 on the multi-national Glencore, with strong Zug links 'Billionaires behaving badly' and it is pretty damning. Child labour, heavy pollution, torture, killings...
Having worked for a company in Scotland that was targeted by the media with false news stories I now take programmes like the Panorama one with a big pinch of salt. They tend to be one sided and ignore facts directly delivered to them
Well Lou - having seen the programme and the very well known charities involved, the pollution of all the waterways, killing of natives for the land, slave labour, including young kids, etc. I believe it would be very hard to make it up to that extent. Why don't you watch the Programme before you comment, or have you already seen it?
As a Swiss, I feel sickened that 'we' are involved, same as a Brit (I am and feel, both) as they are very strong on the stock exchange - a fact the many charities felt was totally wrong.
I did watch it, I don't trust the media and the spin they put in things. I am not naive enough to think that Glencore are 100% innocent, that would be impossible for a company that size with operations in so many countries. I did find a response to the programme on their website, read it to see their side of the story. The truth is probably somewhere in the middle.
Well each to their own- even if near the middle, it is just toooooo far. What about all the charities involved right there on the ground, with those kids and families? Are they lying just for the fun of it perhaps?
There is nought so blind that those who don't want to see.
Surely, such a powerful and rich company could make mince-meat of the BBC, if the facts presented were no where very close to the truth? Why does the Company not sue the Beeb if they are so sure that the facts presented are wrong? BBC lawyers are very thorough, and wouldn't allow a programme to go ahead if they could be sued with ease.
No I don't work for them. It is my experience with the media and knowing what the full story was and then reading the fairy tale written by the journalist that makes me a huge media sceptic. This was by a supposedly reputable newspaper.
Charities are also known to be quite ruthless when it comes to how they raise funds and the charity featured in the programme has itself been targeted by the media with an investigation into the people employed to raise funds for it. IIRC Watchdog did a big feature on them several years ago. So no I don't believe all they say either, they need to raise money and just got a bucket load of free publicity. (I do give to charities and believe they do a lot of good work and not all charities are ruthless and the one featured does a heck of lot of good work).
I think you need to research the company and its activities quite a bit more to pass a judgement. I have come to the conclusion that Glencore, Vale & other very large mining and commodity trading companies are probably the least bad option. Smaller private and state owned mining companies are much worse as evidenced by exactly these forceful evictions and paramilitary activities mentioned in the article.
At the end of the day mining was and remains a "dirty" business me thinks, lots of money, environmental issues, one of the most dangerous professions, commodity traps etc.. for me the question isn't whether or not Glencore is an ethical company (I am under no illusion that they aren't) but what the alternatives are and how they compare to competitors. Don't get me wrong, I appreciate public pressure because that's exactly what forces these companies to be more transparent and socially responsible, but I would take these "investigative reports" with more than a grain of salt.
Glencore is a shame for Switzerland and Baar ZG in particular. They should move their HQs where they are making their business and pay taxes there.
It's very sad that many NGO's in Geneva are helping to sort out the mess caused by companies like this one settled down in the same country. Just with completely different means.
Which of the countless countries would that be? Their whole management is here, ever seen their HQ?
Oh and they do pay taxes locally of course..it's a major source of income for the countries mentioned, whether that money actually reaches the people is another question...
edit: I don't mean to condone any of their actions by the way, the reality just isn't quite as simple as it seems.. remember that silly Kony video? This is a bit like that one.. the road to hell is paved with good intentions they say..
I suspect the truth is rather closer to Glencore's account than the journalist. I've seen too many cases of poor journalism where the journalists were at best incompetent and had no clue about the subject matter, or at worse, just writing to a brief with a specific angle to report.
Not seen the programme or even read the list of charges, but I cant help think I wouldnt be overly shocked. Glencore was founded by none other than Marc Rich who was pardoned by Bill Clinton in his very last act in office. Now im not saying there is anything dicey about that but... oh wait I am. Complete flouting of international bans such as the Iranian embargo. I guess you could say there is a rich lineage of questionable dealings, pun intended.
Now I remember... wasn't that the local Reto Schibli und Soehne company that decided to expand their Baar family mining business to Congo and elsewhere...?
Not disagreeing nor agreeing just like to side note that many big industrial companies side step the Iranian ban to use third countries to re route their products there is not that unusual. In fact I think one might say slapping an embargo on Iran makes for less competition for big companies, and no access for much smaller ones without the elaborate networks.
And yet the 99% you a referring to has nothing to do with the 99% argument.
Surely, you know better than that. See the recent "investigation" into "Apple's" Foxconn factories. Never mind that that Foxconn is independent of Apple (major manufacturer for many companies), earlier this year someone did an investigative report of the horrible working conditions there and blamed Apple. It was all over the news.
A while later, it came out that he lied about his report. Witnesses he supposedly talked to never existed. Etc. The station in question did the honorable thing and broadcast a fair and comprehensive rebuttal, where appropriate, but the point is the original broadcast was fabricated.
If that kind of thing can happen to Apple, a company with insane cash reserves that can quite literally buy whatever it wants, why is it hard to accept that it can happen to Glencore as well?