FFS II

BrianH

At the Start
Joined
May 3, 2003
Messages
6,108
Location
Banstead, Surrey
British American Tobacco, whose Chairman and Chief Executive was until recently Martin Broughton, BHB Chairman and fellow owner at both Henrietta Knight's and Richard Phillips's, and who still pay Tory leadership hope (well, he thinks so) Kennrth Clarke £170,000 a year as Deputy Chairman, were forced to pull out of their manufacturing plant in Myanmar (formerly Burma) two years ago because of that country's appalling human rights record.

It has now come to light that BAT has been operating a factory for the last four years in, of all places, North Korea!

The British government says that it will not support investment in North Korea because of its nuclear ambitions. Oh, not because of its public executions of those who disagree with the Great Leader Kim Jong-Il, the starving dying in the streets and severe repression of the population, then?

Dubya has condemned North Korea as part of the "axis of evil" and human rights organisations have condemned the state as having the worst human rights record in the world.

Not surprising, you might think, that BAT has never mentioned the factory in its annual reports and accounts.

But a BAT spokeswoman denied the factory was "a secret", adding: "If we are asked about our investment there, we respond appropriately. The investor community know of it." Asked about North Korea's human rights record, she said: "It is not for us to interfere with the way governments run countries." She said BAT could "lead by example" and assist the country's development by meeting internationally accepted standards of businesses practice and corporate social responsibility. Yeah, right.

Even one of BAT's own public relations officers, in Japan, was astonished when questioned about the joint venture company. "Business with North Korea?" he asked. "Where there are no human rights?"

The depth of concern about the suffering of people in North Korea is expressed in a series of reports by the United Nations and human rights watchdogs.

Last August, in an excoriating report presented to the UN General Assembly, Vitit Muntabhorn, special rapporteur on North Korea for the UN's Commission on Human Rights, pointed to the "myriad publications" detailing violence against detainees. He expressed "deep concern" about reported torture, the killing of political prisoners, the large number of prison camps and use of forced labour. Finally, he protested at the "all pervasive and severe restrictions on the freedom of thought, conscience, religion, opinion and expression, peaceful assembly and association and on access of everyone to information".

In its latest report on the country, Amnesty International highlighted concerns about the torture and execution of detainees, and worries over the lack of basic political freedom. The charity said that millions of North Korean people were suffering hunger and malnutrition. It added that there had been reports of public executions of people convicted of economic crimes, and that Christians, whose churches have been driven underground, were reported to have been executed because of their faith.

According to human rights observers in South Korea, about 200,000 people are held in prison camps in the north.

Human Rights Watch, meanwhile, describes the Pyongyang regime as being "among the world's most repressive governments", adding that its leader, Kim Jong Il, "has ruled with an iron fist and a bizarre cult of personality" since the death of his father, Kim Il Sung, in 1994.

BAT carried on its business in Myanmar for four years, running a cigarette factory in a joint venture with that county's military dictatorship. It pulled out only after the UK government had asked it to withdraw and after Mr Clarke had been forced to admit, at a shareholders' meeting, that "Burma is not one of the world's most attractive regimes". And North Korea is, Ken?

For those who can stomach it, Channel4's Dispatches shows Undercover In The Secret State tonight at 8.00. The programme was filmed undercover in North Korea and shows public executions, scenes of brutality, dead bodies lying in the streets and the illegal sale of rice donated by the World Food Programme.
 
Meanwhile people are worried whether David Cameron has ever snorted a line of coke.
 
rumours, I'm not sure what you mean but the existence of the factory has only just been discovered. As I said above, BAT has kept it quiet and it has never been listed as a subsidiary in the annual report ans accounts.

Also, the Dispatchesprogramme is on tonight. Quite current, I'd say.
 
Brian.
It's time to vote for the person who is to lead the Conservatives.

Just seems to be timed on the button to put KC in a hole.

Are you saying that no one knew of this Joint Venture,apart from those who were directly involved?

If so KC could probably be unaware,although no bugger would believe him.

I shall watch the programme,if my wife will let me. :)

I agree with you that,in light of the vote,it is current,but,the fact that it has been there for 4 years suggests that some bugger knew.
 
rumours, check Google - News and you'll see that there are reports from around the world today that The Guardian has discovered the North Korean plant through its journalists investigations and has published its findings this morning.

This was in the closed society of North Korea, so there is no reason at all why anyone outside of a chosen few would know about it, particularly as BAT were not mentionng it in any of their official documents. From the report you will be aware that BAT's own PR representative in Japan had no idea of the plant's existence.

As for Ken not knowing about it, BAT has confirmed that he was aware of the decision to invest in North Korea. Of course he was - he attends board meetings!
 
Brian.
Ok.Don't look good for KC.

He must be thick if he thought that it would remain secret.

A description that does not seem to fit in with his previous posts in Government.

Are you happy that it comes out on the day that voting starts?

I am fairly cynical myself,in this case.
 
I don't think that it'll make a happorth of difference to the vote. There is such a groundswell of "ABC" voters (anyone but Clarke) that I'm sure the bookmakers had it right when they made him favourite to go out first. In fact, in a two horse race (Clarke and Fox) 4/6 is probably a good bet.

You have to remember that most of those voting wil tink that investment in a low pay economy shows shrewd decision making of the highest level...
 
Saw the programme, sketchy as it was. The dead people in the streets - very, very odd indeed. They looked quite well dressed, but were just lying where they'd dropped, gawped at by passers-by who seemed horrified, but did nothing. The begging children, clearly desperately malnourished, were pitiful, though - pinched and wizened like little London urchins who Henry Mayhew would've recognized just over 100 years ago. The brutality of the regime is beyond doubt, but what will the West do about it, that's the rub? It's unlikely that the USA will carpet-bomb it to promote democracy through mass slaughter.

I am absolutely appalled by BAT, but if I recollect, this isn't the first time this company has been embroiled in less than savoury exploits. I can't recall now what it was, but it was some time ago - maybe it was their support of a divided South Africa (apartheid days) when I know they had factories out there? They sure go for the ethical choice, don't they?
 
Originally posted by krizon@Oct 18 2005, 12:47 AM
I can't recall now what it was, but it was some time ago - maybe it was their support of a divided South Africa (apartheid days) when I know they had factories out there?
That would apply to nearly all major British companies, krizon.
 
I'm aware that British companies operated through third parties to circumvent the boycotts and supposed bans, but I'm not sure how many actually manufactured after these were in place, as BAT did.
 
krizon, there were no government boycotts against South Africa - only those organised by pressure groups. Many large British companies had South African subsidiaries, including one for which I worked.

re you confusing it with Rhodesia?
 
The point made regularly by those who supported sporting ties (cricket, rugby, Olympics) when they were cut would always make the point that business supported the state much more than sport so how come trade and commerce was allowed if games wern't?
 
Back
Top