The Independent

Sorry, couldn't think of a better site to really publicise filthy imperialist war profiteering :D

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...aq-469737.html

RAQ: British Companies Making a Fortune out of Iraq Conflict

A total of 61 British companies are identified as benefiting from at least £1.1bn of contracts and investment in the new Iraq. But that figure is just the tip of the iceberg.

by Robert Verkaik , The Independent
March 13th, 2006

British businesses have profited by at least £1.1bn since coalition forces toppled Saddam Hussein three years ago, the first comprehensive investigation into UK corporate investment in Iraq has found.

The company roll-call of post-war profiteers includes some of the best known names in Britain's boardrooms as well many who would prefer to remain anonymous. They come from private security services, banks, PR consultancies, urban planning consortiums, oil companies, architects offices and energy advisory bodies.

Among the top earners is the construction firm Amec, which has made an estimated £500m from a series of contracts restoring electrical systems and maintaining power generation facilities during the past two years. Aegis, which provides private security has earned more than £246m from a three-year contract with the Pentagon to co-ordinate military and security companies in Iraq. Erinys, which specialises in the same area, has made more than £86m, a substantial portion from the protection of oilfields.

The evidence of massive investments and the promise of more multimillion-pound profits to come was discovered in a joint investigation by Corporate Watch, an independent watchdog, and The Independent.

The findings show how much is stake if Britain were to withdraw military protection from Iraq. British company involvement at the top of Iraq's new political and economic structures means Iraq will be forced to rely on British business for many years to come.

A total of 61 British companies are identified as benefiting from at least £1.1bn of contracts and investment in the new Iraq. But that figure is just the tip of the iceberg; Corporate Watch believes it could be as much as five times higher, because many companies prefer to keep their relationship secret.

The waters are further muddied by the Government's refusal to release the names of companies it has helped to win contracts in Iraq.

Many of the companies enjoy long-standing relationships with Labour and now have a financial stake in the reconstruction of Iraq in Britain's image. Of the total profits published in the report, the British taxpayer has had to meet a bill for £78m while the US taxpayer's contribution to UK corporate earnings in Iraq is nearly nine times that. Iraqis themselves have paid British company directors £150m.

Some excellent one side of the coin grimfing going on in there

Remember this?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4029905.stm


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...CiqGwD954L9L00

Brown emphasized that despite the military withdrawal, Britain will remain strongly engaged in Iraq.

"We will take forward a collaborative approach to build skills and capacity for the government of Iraq as a source of crucial revenue — a priority will be developing the expertise of the Oil Ministry," he said. "And we are in discussion with many of our own companies who are interested in investing in Iraq."

If it's so they can start coughing up , good.

Originally Posted by ObnoxiousJockGit

I presume the British Loggies are having their own sleepless nights considering the time frame?

Loggies, scaleys, gunners, even the sappers - yup - everybody who has kit strewn over theatre that they helpfully (yes, not sarcastic, I must be ill) left for the next roulement(s). We now have to get it all out - except the bits the agreement that will be negotiated with the Yanks will require us to leave - which won't be completed until after it has been ripped out and shoved, broken, into an ISO.

First, of course, we need to work out what is there. That would be a start. Then we need to figure out where it might be (cluebat: 'COB' isn't adequate - 'SLB' is no longer ours, etc, etc. The Palace - err, right.)

Then we (okay, the Loggies) need to work out how to get it to SPOD and then it just gets expensive.

Originally Posted by ABrighter2006

Not unsurprising, given that the key decision makers are The Iraq Investment and Reconstruction Task Force (IIRTF) As part of the US Department of Commerce, it's not rocket science.

As part of its charter it is (was?) specifically required to give contracts only to US organisations - hence the fuss much earlier in this saga regarding the inability of coalition companies to get any deals from the Bremer administration.

The UK Government itself is a lightweight player in projecting UK PLC in the infra rebuilding that needs to be completed in Iraq (and elsewhere) - no change there then.

Yes, favours done by HMG to HM citizens? Nil. HMG FO & BERR as competent player on world stage? Outclassed by even the Frogs. Well done!

Business as normal. Carry on.

Originally Posted by Idrach

Then we (okay, the Loggies) need to work out how to get it to SPOD and then it just gets expensive.

Hows the rail infrastructure looking?

http://www.iraqrailways.com/private/mapen.htm

Originally Posted by Barrack Room Lawyer

Hows the rail infrastructure looking?

http://www.iraqrailways.com/private/mapen.htm

I'll check for the freight terminal at BAS next time I'm there. If they are planning one, they haven't let me know (yes, okay, doesn't surprise you). But I've been all over the sodding dump and haven't seen a thing.

IIRC there were (defunct) tracks into SLB? Around the south end somewhere? It was years ago and the memory fades.

Edited to add: Rail would clearly be a sensible way to do things - both from leaving civvy useful infrastructure behind and from a cost p.o.v. I don't think there's enough time left but I'll let any RLC experts comment. BTW - My great-grandfather was an RE SSgt train driver in WW1.

Originally Posted by Idrach

Originally Posted by Barrack Room Lawyer

Hows the rail infrastructure looking?

http://www.iraqrailways.com/private/mapen.htm

I'll check for the freight terminal at BAS next time I'm there. If they are planning one, they haven't let me know (yes, okay, doesn't surprise you). But I've been all over the sodding dump and haven't seen a thing.

IIRC there were (defunct) tracks into SLB? Around the south end somewhere? It was years ago and the memory fades.

Edited to add: Rail would clearly be a sensible way to do things - both from leaving civvy useful infrastructure behind and from a cost p.o.v. I don't think there's enough time left but I'll let any RLC experts comment. BTW - My great-grandfather was an RE SSgt train driver in WW1.

Does the line run all the way to the port, and does it pass through Basra Airport?

Line links the "Rail terminal" in Northern Basra, to the port of Basra, and then routes down to Um Qasr - from memory, the line was intended to run to the airport, but the spur was never completed (this predates TELIC). The line does pass quite close to the southern end of the airfield, but this is probably more to do with the airport boundary being extended after GW1, not sharp planning, etc.

Originally Posted by arfah

Originally Posted by rockpile

Leaving Iraq to go to ....Afghanistan. Brown is going to get the most publicity out of 'bringing the troops home' between now and July and then as quietly as possible deploy them to Afghanistan

So there's gonna be a UK General Election in late July, early August then ?

Earlier than that; springtime is my best guess. The way Crash Gordon is spending now, nobody'll want to lend him money much later than spring. No, if the man has any sense he'll call a snap election some time in the spring, just as the days are getting lighter, people are feeling better and the gigantic public spending splurge has had time to effect a temporary blip in everyone's fortunes.

The best thing the Tories can do in the mean time is to try to frighten Brown any which way that they can, and to try drop Mandelson in the smelly again since he's the only really devious brain left in the Labour Party now. Brown, at heart, is a ditherer and a second-in-command; he needs someone else's boot up his backside every so often to keep him on track, and forcing him to weather the best of a bad lot will make him very indecisive.

Originally Posted by Mr Happy

Quick Economics 101 for you...

In a recession you want governments to spend spend spend, lower taxes and spend some more.

You as an individual may hole up in the attic but the correct thing for the govt to do is to spend/hire/create employment etc. If you were a team player you'd go out and spend spend spend too. Shame on you...

Ahh Keynsianism, that darling theory of the Loony Lefties. So marvelously seductive, and last time we tried it we ended up going cap in hand to the IMF for a loan (which came with a quick lesson in economics thrown in).

The state of the economy at the moment is this: the Government is sitting at the bottom of a deep, dark hole staring up at a patch of sky, wondering what to do next. The average household is in a similar sort of state.

What you're suggesting is that each of 'em break out the pickaxe and get digging and hope they come out in Australia, or the Land of Never-Never, where no doubt you'll be waiting to greet them, along with Lord Lucan and Shergar.

The fact is this: the government is currently spending way beyond its means. It is hideously inefficient in its spending; one pound input as tax has about thirty pence value when finally spent; seventy pence in the pound is wasted by the Government. This isn't actually unusual for governments; ALL of them are hideously wasteful.

No, what makes our little monster such a liability is the fact it is so big, and takes such a lot of feeding. The way to recover from a recession is to cut Government spending, cut taxes, and cut regulation of business so that the people of the country can get on with digging themselves out of the hole with the Government interfering as little as possible, and taking as little tax as possible to do only the things a Government can do (police, justice, military, international relations, NHS, basic social security safety net); all other departments need to be ruthlessly downsized to cut the government's bills.

What you do NOT do in a recession is create an enormous mountain of Government debt because you're then saddled with paying the interest on this debt with money that you otherwise could've not taxed off your citizens at all, and which they would have loved to have kept for themselves.

What you also do NOT do in recession is hike up taxes on high earners, and create a byzantine mess out of the tax system. High earners usually either dodge supertaxes or simply scarper out of the way; you lose the low-level taxes you would have gotten off them when they do that, plus you lose the investment in your country's infrastructure that you would otherwise have gotten.

Doing all of this is what the 1970s Governments did, and they ended up in the smelly at the end of it all. It took Maggie Thatcher to turn things around, but the process of doing so killed a once-thriving mining industry that we really should have kept going. Personally, I don't want to see another Thatcher government, but if you do, then Keynesian spending is just the thing to bring it on.

Rail does sound interesting, how can we guarantee line security?

What do the Rail Movers and Sappers think?