With a former Chairman of Union Carbide India Limited, Keshub Mahindra, and seven others convicted and sentenced to two years imprisonment by a trial court, the 26-year-old Bhopal tragedy case has reached a new stage.
The long wait for the families of thousands of victims who were either killed or seriously injured by toxic gas that leaked from the Union Carbide's chemical pesticide plant has not brought justice to these people, most of who are poor. This is a heart-rending case of justice delayed, justice denied. The subject therefore is back in the arena of public discussion.
Moves are on to take the issue to higher courts, either in India or the United States or both. Meanwhile questions are being raised and discussed over the whereabouts of Union Carbide Chairman Warren Anderson, the principal accused in the case and a proclaimed absconder. A hot question raised is who facilitated the escape of Anderson who visited Bhopal a couple of days after the disaster after being assured of “safe passage.” He was arrested along with a few other executives of Union Carbide but freed and allowed to return to the United States.
The main issue
The key issue, as it often happens, is being sidetracked: it is the accountability and culpability of those in Bhopal and New Delhi who made the critical decisions preceding and following the calamity....
-------------------------

Corporate Governance as Warren Buffet Sees It

From the Introduction...Cook County government has been a dark pool of political corruption for more than 140 years. The first public corruption scandal occurred in 1869 when a number of Cook County Commissioners accepted bribes to approve a fraudulent contract to paint city hall. During the last several decades, Cook County has been a center of corruption with scandals emerging in many different units of county government. By chronicling the cases we hope to call attention to the need for meaningful reform.

When county government such as Cook County Clerk David Orr’s office or Assessor James Houlihan’s office do undertake meaningful reform, others sink back into the mire. Public or political corruption occurs when government officials use their public office for private gain or benefit. In Cook County government this includes outright bribes as well as campaign contributions made by individuals or corporations in exchange for jobs, inflated contracts or political favors. It includes ghost payroll jobs in which individuals get a paycheck but do no work.

With an annual budget of more than $3billion — dishonest public servants find many different ways to profit illegally.The purpose of this report is to summarize the many different forms of corruption and to recommend basic reforms that need to be enacted to clean up Cook County government.

This report provides a roster of nearly 150 convicted Cook County politicians and government officials along with descriptions of each of their illegal schemes. It includes private citizens and businessmen who were also convicted in connection with public corruption scandals. There are eight individuals named who are under investigation or have been indicted but not yet convicted. Criminal convictions are just the tip of the iceberg in Cook County. For each corrupt official who is convicted—there may be dozens more who are involved in the same or similar schemes but escape prosecution. The pattern of political corruption in county government is widespread and not confined to a single unit of government. An especially egregious example was Judge Thomas J. Maloney. He was convicted in Operation Greylord of accepting thousands of dollars in bribes to fix felony cases including murder trials. Another outrageous example was Marie D’Amico convicted in Operation Haunted Hall of having three no-work jobs. D’Amico is the daughter of Alderman Tony Laurino and wife of then Deputy Commissioner of Chicago’s Department of Streets and Sanitation John D’Amico, who did 2 years in federal prison for his involvement in the ghost payroll scheme.

Finally, in addition to systemic corruption, county government is infested with conflicts of interest that often result in contracts being awarded to the friends, family and political cronies of public officials. See the full report

______________

Feb 16, 2010 – Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga has accused President Mwai Kibaki of overstepping his powers, in an increasingly bitter row over corruption allegations. The BBC reported that Mr Odinga suspended the ministers of education and agriculture on allegations of embezzlement only for President Mwai Kibaki to reverse his decision. The US ambassador, Michael Ranneberger, has called on both leaders to work together to tackle corruption. "My government feels very strongly that this is a time for dialogue in the interest of the nation, not a time for finger-pointing or mutual recrimination," he said. Mr. Odinga has called on former UN Secretary-General Annan to mediate, while his cabinet allies have threatened to boycott cabinet meetings, according to the BBC. A recent audit into a maize scandal revealed that $26m (£16.5m) had been diverted while more than $1m was stolen in an education scam.

-----------------------------------------------

February 5, 2010 -- Fines of $450 million for BAE Systems - Europe's biggest military contractor, will pay around $450 million in fines in the United States and Britain and admit to wrongdoing in Saudi Arabia, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Tanzania. Announcements by the UK's Serious Fraud office and the US Department of Justice underscored patterns of false statements to officials, secret offshore bank accounts and unrecorded payments to various agents by BAE Systems. Chandrashekhar Krishnan, Executive Director of Transparency International UK said the conclusion of the BAE cases, "Highlight the need for a new Bribery Act in the UK. For a Bribery Act to be successful, sufficient resources for effective enforcement will be crucial in order to deliver faster prosecutions and encourage companies guilty of corrupt practices to admit their guilt and not spend years blocking investigations.”_________________

UPDATE: BAE Court Appeal Rejected (see main stories below)

The two groups are taking legal advice on whether or not to appeal the decision.Application for judicial review of Serious Fraud Office's BAE settlement turned down The Corner House and the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) have their BAE appeal refused (initial stories below) and stated, "The Honourable Mr Justice Collins today announced his decision to refuse to grant permission to Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT) and The Corner House to bring a full judicial review hearing against the decision by the UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO) to make a controversial plea bargain settlement with BAE Systems. (24 March 2010)

UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO) Challenged Over BAE System’s Settlement. London, UK, February 12, 2010. Challenge brought by The Corner House and the Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT). The challenge highlights the very different approaches to foreign corrupt payments’ cases in the UK and the US.

Lawyers acting for the two organizations have sent a detailed letter laying out their intention to request a judicial review of the 5 February 2010 decision by the SFO to enter a plea agreement, which involved a fine of £30 million arising from one aspect of a case involving Tanzania – directly after the UK announcement, the U.S. Department of Justice announced an agreement with BAE involving a fine of $400 million with regard to alleged bribery payments by the firm on contracts for Saudi Arabia, Tanzania, Czech Republic and Hungary.

The UK organizations asserted that the SFO agreement agreement fails to reflect the seriousness and extent of BAE's alleged offenses. Nicholas Hildyard, for The Corner House, said: "Plea bargains should only ever be entertained when companies have really come clean. BAE has not. Once again, an SFO decision has reinforced the UK's reputation for letting big companies get away with bribing. Once again, it has shown a blatant disregard for the rule of law." Kaye Stearman, CAAT's spokesperson, added: "The SFO plea bargain is unlawful. Investigations into alleged corruption in at least three countries have simply been dropped. It is in the public interest that BAE should not be let off the hook."

The groups' lawyers also requested that the Serious Fraud Office delay applying for court approval of its settlement with BAE Systems. If it does not do so, the two groups will seek an injunction against the court application. Background: In December 2006 the SFO dropped its bribery and corruption investigations into BAE's arms sales to Saudi Arabia, following pressure from BAE and Saudi Arabia and a direct intervention from then Prime Minister Tony Blair. The decision was subject to severe criticism and prompted CAAT and The Corner House to launch a judicial review of the decision.

In April 2008, the High Court ruled that the SFO Director had acted unlawfully by stopping the investigation; a decision subsequently overturned by the House of Lords in July 2008, which ruled that he acted lawfully when faced with a threat to national security. On 1 October 2009 the SFO began drawing up legal papers to recommend prosecution of BAE, following its six-year investigation into alleged bribery in BAE arms deals with several other countries (Chile, Czech Republic, Qatar, Romania, South Africa and Tanzania). BAE is alleged to have paid bribes, often in the form of commissions to "advisers" to clinch the deals. Under the SFO settlement announced on 5 February 2010, BAE would plead guilty to minor charges of "accounting irregularities" in its 1999 sale of a radar system to Tanzania for which the SFO proposed it should pay penalties of £30 million. The SFO would not bring charges relating to alleged bribery and corruption in BAE's arms deals elsewhere. Additional information at CAAT.
_________________

February 4, 2010 ---First Major Banking Crisis Charges
New York Attorney General Acts Against Bank of America and Its Former Top Two Officers

Just as Bank of America settled a case against it from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission with a fine of $150 million related to the adequacy of information it provided to shareholders on acquiring Merrill Lynch, the New York Attorney General, Andrew Cuomo, has brought a major civil action. He has charged the bank, together with its former Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Kenneth Lewis and its former Chief Financial Officer Joe Price. This is the first case brought against one of the most powerful global bankers who played critical roles in the last few months of 2008 as the world's financial system appeared on the brink of collapse.

In mid-September 2008, as Lehman Brothers was about to fail, Mr. Lewis agreed that Bank of America should acquire the giant brokerage firm of Merrill Lynch. The deal was finalized at the start of 2009, by which time it was evident that Merrill's losses were far greater than had previously been publicly known, that it was unclear how much information the bank had given the US Government in obtaining a $20 billion "bail-out" to push through its acquisition, and whether shareholders were dealt with honestly. These are the issues, strongly contested by Lewis and Price and the Bank, that Cuomo will now take to court. See The New York Times as well as its “DealBook” report for details and links.

• French President Nicholas Sarkozy Calls for Fundamental Reforms of Globalization and Capitalism - His Vision Looks to radically Change the Roles of Corporations and the State and Global Governance Arrangments
  Speech on January 27, 2010 in Davos...see full text at World Economic Forum
  
  

• We are all responsible for the crisis. And we are all responsible for the world we are going to leave to our children. Not to draw the conclusion that we must, therefore, change our ways would be, quite simply, irresponsible.

  
  This crisis is not just a global crisis. It is not a crisis in globalization. This crisis is a crisis of globalization. It is our vision of the world which, at a given moment, revealed its failings. That is what we must correct.
  
  Globalization first took the form of globalization of savings. It gave rise to a world in which everything was given to financial capital and almost nothing to labor, in which the entrepreneur gave way to the speculator, in which those who lived on unearned income left the workers far behind, in which the use of leverage, to an unreasonably disproportionate extent, created a form of capitalism in which taking risks with other people’s money was the norm, allowing quick and easy profits but all too often without creating either prosperity or jobs.
  
  ...We will never put an end to hunger, poverty and misery in the world if we do not succeed in stabilizing the prices of raw materials, which at present are completely erratic. That is not an issue only for the experts. It concerns us all.
  
  ...We will not save the future of our planet if we do not pay the true price of scarcity. That is not an issue only for the experts. It concerns us all. We will not reconcile our citizens to globalization and to capitalism, if we are not capable of offsetting market forces with counterbalances and corrective measures. That, too, concerns us all. By discarding all our responsibilities in the marketplace, we have created an economy which has ended up running counter to the values on which it was nominally based, and to its own objectives.
  
  By over-mutualising ownership and risk, we have diluted responsibility. By placing free trade above all else we have weakened Democracy, because citizens expect from Democracy that it should protect them…
  
  We can only save capitalism by rebuilding it, by restoring its moral dimension. I know that this expression will call forth many questions. What do we need, in the end, if it is not rules, principles, a governance that reflects shared values, a common morality?....
  
  We cannot govern the world of the 21st century with the rules and principles of the 20th century. We cannot govern globalisation while relegating half of Humanity to the sidelines, without India, Africa or Latin America. We cannot look at the post-crisis world in the same way as the world before the crisis. Each of us must hold the conviction that the world of tomorrow cannot be the same as the world of yesterday. There are indecent behaviors that will no longer be tolerated by public opinion in any country in the world. There are excessive profits that will no longer be accepted because they are without common measure to the capacity to create wealth and jobs. There are remuneration packages that will no longer be tolerated because they bear no relationship to merit.
  
  That those who create jobs and wealth may earn a lot of money is not shocking. But that those who contribute to destroying jobs and wealth also earn a lot of money is morally indefensible.
  _________________
  
  
  

  
  
• January 19, 2010 United Nations releases report on corruption in Afghanistan
  

  
  based on interviews with 7,600 people (a reliable sample) in 12 provincial capitals and more than 1,600 villages around Afghanistan. Overview by Antonio Maria Costa Executive Director United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC).
  
  Poverty and violence are usually portrayed as the biggest challenges confronting Afghanistan. But ask the Afghans them-selves, and you get a different answer: corruption is their biggest worry. As revealed in this new UNODC report, for an over- whelming 59% of the population the daily experience of public dishonesty is a bigger concern than insecurity (54%) and unemployment (52%).

• According to this report, it is almost impossible to obtain a public service in Afghanistan without greasing a palm: bribing authorities is part of everyday life. During the past 12 months, one Afghan out of two, in both rural and urban communities, had to pay at least one kickback to a public offcial. This was not just done through a wink and a nudge: more than half of the time (56%), the request for illicit payment was explicit by the service providers. In most instances (3/4 of the cases), baksheesh (bribes) are paid in cash. The average amount was $160 – in a country where GDP per capita is a mere $425 per year. This is a crippling tax on people who are already among the world’s poorest. cumstances the social contract is torn apart: loyalty is lost and discontent can erupt into violence.

• The problem is enormous by any standards. In the aggregate, Afghans paid out $2.5 billion in bribes over the past 12 months – that’s equivalent to almost one quarter (23%) of Afghanistan’s GDP. By coincidence, this is similar to the revenue accrued by the opium trade in 2009 (which we have estimated separately at $2.8 billion). In other words, and this is shocking, drugs and bribes are the two largest income gen- erators in Afghanistan: together they amount to about half the country’s (licit) GDP.

• Members of the government (much more than those sitting in Parliament) are perceived as villains. Corruption in their ranks was rampant last year: Afghans were asked to pay a bribe 40 percent of the times that they had contacts with senior politicians. A political system operating under such corrupt conditions cannot survive.

• This survey did not address the question of possible foreign involvement in fomenting corruption in Afghanistan. Yet it makes a stunning observation: over half of the Afghans (54%) believe that international organizations and NGOs, the transmission belts of foreign assistance, “are corrupt and are in the country just to get rich”. (Read the full report at UNODC)

January 13, 2010 --

FREEDOM OF SPEECH - PROTECTING HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVISTS IN CHINA

full GOOGLE statement

A new approach to China

1/12/2010
Like many other well-known organizations, we face cyber attacks of varying degrees on a regular basis. In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google. However, it soon became clear that what at first appeared to be solely a security incident--albeit a significant one--was something quite different.

First, this attack was not just on Google. As part of our investigation we have discovered that at least twenty other large companies from a wide range of businesses--including the Internet, finance, technology, media and chemical sectors--have been similarly targeted. We are currently in the process of notifying those companies, and we are also working with the relevant U.S. authorities.

Second, we have evidence to suggest that a primary goal of the attackers was accessing the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists. Based on our investigation to date we believe their attack did not achieve that objective. Only two Gmail accounts appear to have been accessed, and that activity was limited to account information (such as the date the account was created) and subject line, rather than the content of emails themselves.

Third, as part of this investigation but independent of the attack on Google, we have discovered that the accounts of dozens of U.S.-, China- and Europe-based Gmail users who are advocates of human rights in China appear to have been routinely accessed by third parties. These accounts have not been accessed through any security breach at Google, but most likely via phishing scams or malware placed on the users' computers.

We have already used information gained from this attack to make infrastructure and architectural improvements that enhance security for Google and for our users. In terms of individual users, we would advise people to deploy reputable anti-virus and anti-spyware programs on their computers, to install patches for their operating systems and to update their web browsers. Always be cautious when clicking on links appearing in instant messages and emails, or when asked to share personal information like passwords online. You can read more here about our cyber-security recommendations. People wanting to learn more about these kinds of attacks can read this Report to Congress (PDF) by the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission (see p. 163-), as well as a related analysis (PDF) prepared for the Commission, Nart Villeneuve's blog and this presentation on the GhostNet spying incident.

We have taken the unusual step of sharing information about these attacks with a broad audience not just because of the security and human rights implications of what we have unearthed, but also because this information goes to the heart of a much bigger global debate about freedom of speech. In the last two decades, China's economic reform programs and its citizens' entrepreneurial flair have lifted hundreds of millions of Chinese people out of poverty. Indeed, this great nation is at the heart of much economic progress and development in the world today.

We launched Google.cn in January 2006 in the belief that the benefits of increased access to information for people in China and a more open Internet outweighed our discomfort in agreeing to censor some results. At the time we made clear that "we will carefully monitor conditions in China, including new laws and other restrictions on our services. If we determine that we are unable to achieve the objectives outlined we will not hesitate to reconsider our approach to China."

These attacks and the surveillance they have uncovered--combined with the attempts over the past year to further limit free speech on the web--have led us to conclude that we should review the feasibility of our business operations in China. We have decided we are no longer willing to continue censoring our results on Google.cn, and so over the next few weeks we will be discussing with the Chinese government the basis on which we could operate an unfiltered search engine within the law, if at all. We recognize that this may well mean having to shut down Google.cn, and potentially our offices in China.

The decision to review our business operations in China has been incredibly hard, and we know that it will have potentially far-reaching consequences. We want to make clear that this move was driven by our executives in the United States, without the knowledge or involvement of our employees in China who have worked incredibly hard to make Google.cn the success it is today. We are committed to working responsibly to resolve the very difficult issues raised.
_________________

• Noori Al-Maliki, Prime Minister of Iraq announced Iraq’s plans to implement the EITI at the Iraqi EITI launch conference in Baghdad. Iraq plans to become an EITI “Candidate” country in February. For too long Iraq’s natural resource wealth has brought the country conflict and corruption, rather than development and prosperity.
  
  The EITI is an instrument to build trust and create a safe forum for wider discussion about the management of the oil revenues. The Government of Iraq formally committed to implement the EITI in May 2008. With 11% of the world’s proven oil reserves, Iraq will become the country with the largest oil reserves to implement the EITI standard.
  
  The EITI is an instrument to build trust and create a safe forum for wider discussion about the management of the oil revenues. The Government of Iraq formally committed to implement the EITI in May 2008. With 11% of the world’s proven oil reserves, Iraq will become the country with the largest oil reserves to implement the EITI standard. The oil industry is at a critical stage in Iraq following a series of contract awards.
  
  Peter Eigen, Chair of the EITI, sent a greeting which included the following: “With well managed oil resources, the future of the Iraqi people could be very bright. For those of us who have spent our career tackling the root causes of corruption and conflict, and for the whole international community which follows Iraq closely, the Government’s plan to implement the EITI is a massive signal of Iraq’s determination to build a brighter future.”
  
  The launch conference, the Head of the EITI International Secretariat, Jonas Moberg, said: “We believe that the implementation of the EITI will be important in driving the recovery of the nation and ensuring that its abundant oil and gas wealth is managed for the benefit of its citizens and sustained peace. It demonstrates the Government’s commitment to good governance and is part of wider efforts to rebuild the nation. The adaptation of the global EITI standard in Iraq shows the Government’s ownership and dedication to develop its own transparency and governance framework.”
  
  
• EITI noted that 3.5 billion people live in countries rich in oil, gas and minerals. With good governance the exploitation of these resources can generate large revenues to foster growth and reduce poverty. However when governance is weak, it may result in poverty, corruption, and conflict. EITI aims to strengthen governance by improving transparency and accountability in the extractives sector. More information from EITI.
  _________________
  

• January 7, 2010: New Haven Declaration On Human Rights and Financial Integrity
  
  Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Global Financial Integrity, Oxfam and others sign precedent-setting declaration as Anti-Money Laundering and Human Rights organizations join together in what they have named the New Haven Declaration (following a meeting at Yale University in New Haven):
  
  

• Human rights and international financial integrity are intimately linked. Where poverty is pervasive, civil, political, and economic rights often go unrealized. Today, large outflows of illicit money - many times larger than all development assistance - greatly aggravate poverty and oppression in many developing countries.
  
  
• Illicit money leaves poorer countries through a global shadow financial system comprising tax havens, secrecy jurisdictions, disguised corporations, anonymous trust accounts, fake foundations, trade mispricing, and money-laundering techniques. Much of this money is permanently shifted into western economies.
  
  
• Reducing these illicit outflows requires greater transparency and integrity in the global financial system. Achieving this is a prerequisite to creating an economic framework that is open, accountable, fair, and beneficial for all.
  
  
• We call upon the United Nations, the G8, G20, WTO, IMF, World Bank, and other international fora, as well as on national governments, world leaders, faith groups and civil society organizations to recognize the linkage between human rights and financial transparency. We further call for decisive steps to ensure that developing countries can retain their resources for sustainable growth and poverty alleviation, which they must achieve if the human rights of all people are to be realized.
  
  
• The undersigned individuals and organizations shall be working together in the coming months to pursue this agenda and look to add additional voices to this effort.
  
  
• The undersigned individuals and organizations shall be working together in the coming months to pursue this agenda and look to add additional voices to this effort.
  
  Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Oxfam, Global Financial Integrity, Center for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, Open Society Institute Justice Initiative, Asia Initiatives, Task Force on Financial Integrity and Economic Development, Tax Justice Network, Christian Aid, National Council of Churches, Harrington Investments, Inc., Asociación Civil por la Igualdad y la Justicia, Thomas Pogge, Yale University, Robert Hockett, Cornell University, Frank Pasquale, Seton Hall.
  for statements and more background please visit Global Financial Integrity
  _________________
  
  
  
• January 7: BLOOD DIAMONDS -- Global Witness today welcomed a decision by the Zimbabwean authorities to cancel a planned auction of diamonds from the Marange fields but warned that the country must take concrete steps to demonstrate their commitment to cleaning up the diamond sector or risk suspension from the Kimberley Process certification scheme. (read the full report)
  _________________
  
  
• December 16, 2009
  Robert Morgenthau retires with a final important case and message
  
  Manhattan District Attorney Robert M. Morgenthau, who has held this public office for 35 years and is about to retire at the age of 90, has filed a final important case. Credit Suisse has agreeed to pay a fine of $536 million. The bank was charged with assisting Iranian, Libyan and Sudanese clients to violate US sanctions and, by means of false documentation, place funds in the Amderican financial markets.
  
  Morgenthau has not only been the model fearless and ethical public prosecutor, going after the Mafia, corrupt industrial titans and crooked politicians, but he has tirelessly gone after money-launderers, dating back to the mid-1980s when he led investigations against the Bank for Credit and Commerce International (BCCI).
  
  Transparency Progress
  
  In commenting on the Credit Suisse case he noted that it was unprecedented for a Swiss Bank and the Swiss government to provide the kind of access to data and records that they did once faced with the US allegations. Mr. Morgenthau said: “The standards of transparency have come a long way since I first began investigating financial crime in the 1960s.  From secret Swiss and Liechtenstein accounts then, to the conduct of BCCI in the 1990s, to this year's actions involving Iranian banks, the standards of transparency have risen, and we expect more from international financial institutions today than ever before.   Credit Suisse's transgressions in this regard were severe - they intentionally hid the involvement of Iranian banks for almost two billion dollars in U.S. dollar transactions.  But, to their credit, from the time we contacted them they gave us excellent cooperation and a high degree of transparency, as well as detailed analysis from their internal investigation.   The message to other banks involved in similar practices should be clear: if you are engaged in sanction-busting misconduct, you should self-report, clean up your shop, and give us a full accounting.  That is what we should expect and demand from major international banks.”
  (click here for the full statement)
  
  _________________
  
  
• On the Record - Obama, Immelt.
  
  On acceptring the Nobel Peace Prize on December 10, President Obama said - “A just peace includes not only civil and political rights -- it must encompass economic security and opportunity.  For true peace is not just freedom from fear, but freedom from want. It is undoubtedly true that development rarely takes root without security; it is also true that security does not exist where human beings do not have access to enough food, or clean water, or the medicine and shelter they need to survive.  It does not exist where children can't aspire to a decent education or a job that supports a family.  The absence of hope can rot a society from within.”
  
  

• Jeff Immelt, Chairman and CEO, GE made the following comment in a speech at the United States Military Academy, West Point, on December 9 -  "Leaders must like and respect people. I think we are at the end of a difficult generation of business leadership, and maybe leadership in general. Tough-mindedness, a good trait – was replaced by meanness and greed – both terrible traits. Rewards became perverted. The richest people made the most mistakes with the least accountability. In too many situations, leaders divided us instead of bringing us together. As a result, the bottom 25% of the American population is poorer than they were 25 years ago. That is just wrong. I was recently at an event with some unemployed steel workers. Their stories are truly sad. They just want to work. They want to be led. What is my responsibility? What will your responsibility be someday? Technically, nothing. Financially, nothing. We do not have to care. But we should. It begins by people telling the truth. We do have to compete to be great; we must improve training and education; we cannot protect everyone in a global economy. In my career, I have had to deliver difficult news that I believed was in the best interest of the enterprise. At the same time, ethically, leaders do share a common responsibility to narrow the gap between the weak and the strong. I have taken on the challenge to increase manufacturing jobs in the United States. These are the jobs that have created the midwestern middle class for generations. Manufacturing jobs paid for college educations, including mine. They have been cut in half over the past two decades.

  Many say this is a fool’s mission. I don’t have all the answers. What I can bring … what GE can bring … are investments, training and operating approaches to help everyone win. The residue of the past was a more individualistic “win-lose” game. The 21st century is about building bigger and diverse teams; teams that accomplish tough missions with a culture of respect. We are committed to renewing American leadership. We are developing better listeners; systems thinkers. We are creating structures that build speed around competency."

• governance news/top pay
  July-August - from the European Commission in Brussels, to various legislative bodies across Europe, to the desk of the powerful U.S. finance committee chief in the House of Representatvies, Barney Frank, a host of proposals are about to be made to impose limits on what bankers get paid. The U.S. House of representatibves has now passed new rukles on pay at banks and Congressman Frank declared "“There is a risk to the system when the incentive structure is huge,” as his committee approved legislation that Bloomberg reported "would let regulators ban incentive pay at banks and give shareholders a vote on bonuses in response to public outrage over Wall Street pay." The influential New York Times calls for action and warns in an editorial of big bonus payments.
  
  The Associated Press reported that the UK's Fimnancial Services Authority laid out has laid out plans to curb risky pay practices in banks but dropped some of the tougher measures that had been proposed. It said banks should spread two-thirds of the bonuses of senior employees over three years. But its code of practice, to be introduced next year, excludes specific measures on deferred bonuses as well as the linking of payouts to the performance of banking groups as whole.

  Sir David Walker has just finalized a report called for by the UK Government where he stresses that controls on pay need to be viewed in terms of broad reforms of corporate governance. His report is remarkable. The guiding theme is important and simple: “In an open market economy in which, in normal times, most companies are either listed or in private hands, the achievement of good corporate governance reflects successful balancing among an array of influences which is probably at its widest in case of banks. A critical balance has to be established between, on the one hand, policies and constraints necessarily required by the regulator and, on the other, the ability of the board of an entity to take decisions on business strategythat board members considerto be in the best interests of their shareholders.” (...see Executive Compensation). Sir David Walker has said that among the 39 major proposlas in his report are : ' Recommendations on remuneration that are as tough or tougher than anything to be found elsewhere in the world.