Paz on 24/1/2007 at 21:53
Slightly sloppy writing on my part there, I think.
Chimpy is right that there's certainly a distinction to be made between BAE saying "hey government dudes, can you call off the heat?" and the government doing it because they ALSO benefit from calling off the heat.
As Malygris suggests though, that doesn't remove the issue. If anything it complicates it, as now you have a single business which is so intertwined with the economic functions of the nation that the government will prevent their own fraud offices from looking too closely at various dodgy dealings (which are pretty undeniably dodgy, if you care to look at any of the info which has emerged from this).
I think their influence extends beyond merely (haha "merely") being economically untouchable, however. I've no idea of the precise numbers which a business like, say, Tesco bring to the UK - but I assume they're at least comparatively huge. I think our government would be far more inclined to investigate the internal workings of Tesco in a serious fraud case, regardless of economic consequences. There's something about arms-dealing which always seems another step removed from the law.
I realise that's not a direct comparison, of course.
To say it's "happy circumstance" that BAE have reached this position is, I'd say, probably understating how they reached it. Behind the scenes I should imagine there is a shitload of wrangling, lobbying and making the right kind of contacts in order to secure themselves as the company of choice for "this sort of thing". And we (almost) know that they're not adverse to greasing a few palms in this respect.
At the heart of it, it's all seriously murky.
Also, I assume if you're a devoted free market capitalist type, you wouldn't really enjoy the favourable position that BAE are currently enjoying. Why do they enjoy such protection to the detriment of any competitors? Presumably the answer is "because the competitors are from abroad, so it still benefits the UK economy this way". Soooo, fuck, now there's the issue of national boundaries to trade and soforth.
Think I'll stop the post there before it spirals into space ;)
Chimpy Chompy on 24/1/2007 at 23:18
I'm just biased cos its conceivable I might look for a job with an arms-related business one day. ;) But, yeah, definitely lots of room for murkyness there.
Aerothorn on 25/1/2007 at 02:20
I'm starting to get the impression that no one bothered to read the linked article:(
Malygris on 25/1/2007 at 06:33
Originally, that was kind of my point. But then a discussion sprung up anyway.
