.jpg)
JUST IN - Canada June 23 2014- interesting..
Creating jobs -- and protecting the environment, too
By Monte Solberg ,QMI Agency
First posted: Sunday, June 22, 2014 08:00 PM EDT
Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline Enbridge counsel Rick Neufeld is silhouetted against a map of the Northern Gateway pipeline, as he takes part in the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project Joint Review Panel hearings in Edmonton in this Sept. 4, 2012 file photo. (David Bloom/QMI
Thanks to YouTube, we know cats and dogs can snuggle up and live together in harmony, so why not environmentalists and resource development companies? The answer is they already do, though it depends on what you mean by environmentalists.
To listen to some environmental organizations, you might think Canadians love nothing better than to rinse out their paint cans down at the river, or harpoon whales because they take up too much room. Don’t believe it.
Regular Canadians know it’s important to get along well with nature. We’ve been making environmental progress for decades, and we’ve done it while preserving and creating jobs, which is key.
That’s because Canadians consistently rank the economy and jobs as their number one concern, while the environment usually ranks near the bottom of the list.
During the Ontario election one poll listed the environment as the top priority for only 2% of Ontarians. That’s partly because Canadians believe we’re already doing a lot to protect the environment. It also reflects the concern that if the wrong people make decisions about the environment it will drive away jobs. (Ontario’s job-killing wind power policy immediately comes to mind).
Finally, it is human nature to want to get ahead, meaning people want policies that lead to economic growth. The good news is, you can have a strong economy while improving environmental outcomes.
Every country needs to find a balance between the need for jobs, affordable energy and respect for nature. Importantly, many of the people who love nature most are the ones who work in it every day, raising cattle, drilling for oil, harvesting trees or digging minerals out of the ground. They tend to be the same people who give their own money to conservation organizations like Ducks Unlimited, Nature Conservancy and Delta Waterfowl.
They also produce much of the country’s wealth, which is used to fund health care, education and pensions. It’s also used to clean up the environment, expand our national park system and to fund technologies that improve the environment. It’s a system that can and should be improved but it’s also why our rivers, air and land are cleaner today than they were a generation ago.
This brings us to Enbridge’s Northern Gateway Project, which both the NDP and the Liberals oppose, though it too has jumped through hoops to strike that right balance. (Disclosure: my company provides some consulting services to Enbridge.) Yes, the NDP may claim they have a modest carbon footprint, but their unemployment footprint is embarrassingly large -- the result of scaremongering and constantly emitting job-killing policies.
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau has weakly declared that he supports pipelines, but not the current route for Northern Gateway. Mostly he just smiles.
Neither opposition party has revealed how they would get full value for Canada’s landlocked oil reserves, which are often discounted due to lack of access to markets.
And, all the while, thousands of oil tankers cross the forbidding North Atlantic every year and cruise into Canada’s pristine eastern waters where they enter those picturesque maritime ports, delivering North Sea crude oil. Whatever you do, please don’t tell the Liberals and the NDP.
COMMENT:
I work as an independent inspector on big inch pipeline construction (in Alberta) and for the last 3 years the company I inspect has been Enbridge. It absolutely behooves me why 'big media' in the land pit their 'resources' AGAINST Canadian pipeline projects. If ONE of them had the 'kahonies' to do the research they'll find that most 'big oil' spend MILLIONS yearly on strategies, efforts, and implementation of safety standards and environmental protection... they are world class and second to none.
For example... right now our project could be going ahead but, as Enbridge is concerned for bird nesting and the young having opportunity to leave the nest naturally, we are on hold. We arent allowed to do any topsoil disturbance within 300 mtrs of an existing nest. Three different 'unconnected' environmental teams sweep the areas continuously and mark where any wildlife (nests, burrows, etc.) may be raising their young. This policy is followed with the strictest adherence.
Contrary to popular belief, environment IS 'big oils' largest concern.... right next to cooperation with all locals, especially the native bands. Enbridge liaison teams spend countless hours going from band to band and encouraging first chance at ALL the jobs (whether providing equipment or labor)... dont let anyone tell you different, its a CRUCIAL part of the process. Some take advantage of it, most dont.
Again, take a look at what REALLY is being done and quit being 'duped' by those with another agenda.
COMMENT:
The incident at Kalamazoo was terribly unfortunate however, remember a few things...
1. the pipeline protocols and practices in the United States are night and day compared to Canada.
2. Our National Energy Board is ALL over the big players (Enbridge, TransCanada etc are used as example for the rest)... they are under complete scrutiny at all times by independent agencies.
The Kalamazoo incident was a result of corrosion that was never detected... because of incidents like that, our government mandated frequent testing (law) with 'smart pig' technology. That technology is world class and includes a device that travels the length of the pipeline and measures for ANY discrepancy in the line, inside and out... dents, thinning, corrosion, stress fractures etc. The location of the impertinence's are determined to the centimetre with engineering determining if a location needs to be supported. All our pipeline companies have (currently) existing and continuing 'integrity dig' programs (preventive maintenance) in place (again, by law) which is ongoing 24/7. Believe me... 'big oil' spends millions yearly staying ahead of the game... they have no interest in a spill any more than you or i...
comment:
I asked you this quest in the Calgary SUN, but perhaps you coyuld also answer it here for Torontonians --
Seeing as you are an expert on pipelines, I have a question.
The bulk of the arguments against seem to settle on the perceived problems and dangers associated with tankers sailing through narrow straights to get to open ocean water and the possibility of major spills.
The proposed route for the pipeline turns south to Kitimat, and my question is -- at the point it heads south, why could it not somehow be routed to Prince Rupert where there is easy access to open ocean waters to ship to China.
Surely Enbridge could do this! In fact from their application they indicate going to Rupert as the back-up plan.
Your thoughts??
COMMENT:
Kitimat is an existing deep water port... one of the deepest/widest channels on the whole upper coast (qualified for the largest supertankers).... its well protected from open water large waves and has three times the width necessary for two way tanker traffic (Transportation Canada) its pretty much a 'no-brainer'... lets remember that the Haisla Tribe/BC Government have existing agreements in place for Liquid Natural Gas and continuous year round tanker traffic...with a pipeline yet to be constructed all the way across northern BC.
Isnt it unusual that ALL the so called 'issues' that plague the Northern Gateway Project are non-existent with the LNG Canada project? Thats because the right amount of dollars has been agreed upon to cross the concerned 'nations' land for a 30 year period. It wont be ANY different with Gateway... its ALL about the money... the rest is smoke and mirrors....
COMMENT:
Yes Monte - we should all play fair. Sadly, the enviro crazies among us cannot / will not do so - it is their way or the highway. But not a pipeline, and certainly no new refineries - much to the chagrin of the "we should keep it for ourselves" crowd that scream for more of the latter ( not realizing the eco nazis have condemned any new builds ) And the PM ? He will get no props from the greens either, even though he just set aside $252 million for the National Conservancy Plan - which allocates $100 million to the Nature Conservancy of Canada, $37 million for marine & coastal conservation, $50 million for wetlands restoration, and finally $50 million to restore and conserve high risk species & their habitat. No Monte, they will be-atch it's not enough, it's too late, it's a self serving spit in the bucket, blah blah blah.......and still the trains keep-a-rollin all night long, the tankers ply the bering strait, not to mention the straits of Juan de Fuca..........but hey - no pipelines ok ?
COMMENT;
The attacks against the pipeline is a policy of Disinformation that is funded by our competitors (Russia, Saudi Arabia, and other champions of human rights). Just look at the stranglehold that Comrade Putin has over Europe with his state-owned GazProm.
http://www.torontosun.com/2014/06/21/creating-jobs----and-protecting-the-environment-too
and... the horror is the global nightmare unemployment among our youth around the world... it's horrific
BLOGGED:
CANADA MILITARY NEWS- GLOBAL YOUTH UNEMPLOYMENT- June/July 2014- Canada is flying high over some nations- and education does matter- and poverty in 2014 is UNITED NATIONS DISGRACE- and the horrific constant butchering of heretic muslims of innocent muslim women and children- STATS
http://nova0000scotia.wordpress.com/2014/06/23/canada-military-news-global-youth-unemployment-junejuly-2014-canada-is-flying-high-over-some-nations-and-education-does-matter-and-poverty-in-2014-is-united-nations-disgrace/
------------------
USA IS WORSE OFFENDER THAN CHINA...
---------------------
Greenpeace
UK's executive director says issue of international programme director flying
from Luxembourg to Amsterdam is 'a really tough one' http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jun/23/greenpeace-defends-top-executive-flying-to-work
Greenpeace defends top executive flying to work
Issue
of Pascal Husting flying from Luxembourg to Amsterdam is 'a really tough one',
says Greenpeace UK's executive director
·
Pascal
Husting, former director of Greenpeace France, during a demonstration in
Biscarrosse, in south-western France. Photograph: Jean-Pierre Muller/AFP/Getty
Images
The
head of Greenpeace UK has defended the need for one of the environmental
group's top executives to fly to work several times a month, and apologised to
supporters for a mistake that saw a member of its finance team lose £3m on currency markets.
Responding
to fresh revelations in the Guardian that the organisation's finance
team is in disarray, and that Pascal Husting, Greenpeace's
international programme director, flies several times a month from his home in
Luxembourg to offices in Amsterdam, John Sauven wrote in a blogpost: "as for
Pascal’s air travel. Well it’s a really tough one. Was it the right decision to
allow him to use air travel to try to balance his job with the needs of his
family for a while?"
He
added: "For me, it feels like it gets to the heart of a really big
question. What kind of compromises do you make in your efforts to try to make
the world a better place?
"I
think there is a line there. Honesty and integrity to the values that are at
the heart of the good you’re trying to do in the world cannot be allowed to
slip away. For what it’s worth, I don’t think we’ve crossed that line here at
Greenpeace."
Sauven,
the executive director of Greenpeace UK, also addressed internal disquiet over
a restructuring that has seen staff moved from Dutch wages in Amsterdam to
lower, regional wages around the world. "That’s a pretty hard thing to do
and get perfectly right, especially when people’s jobs are involved. Perhaps
there are things that could have been done better or differently to communicate
better about the planned change and help it happen more smoothly."
On
the issue of Greenpeace International's handling of its £58m budget, he
apologised to supporters and said improvements had been made. "There’s now
a new head of finance, and we’ve put checks in place so that it can never
happen again."
-----------------
Greenpeace losses: leaked documents reveal extent of
financial disarray
Emails
and meeting notes show group’s finance department has a long history of
problems in its handling of the £58m budget
Adam
Vaughan The Guardian, Monday 23 June 2014 10.09 BST
A
close-up of the logo on the new Rainbow Warrior ship. Photograph: Alex Milan
Tracy/Corbis
The
handling of Greenpeace International’s £58m budget has been in disarray for
years, with its financial team beset by personnel problems and a lack of
rigorous processes, leading to errors, substandard work and a souring of
relationships between its Amsterdam headquarters and offices around the world, documents
leaked to the Guardian show.
Coming
after it emerged that a staffer had lost £3m on the foreign exchange market by
betting mistakenly on a weak euro, the documents show that the
group’s financial department has faced a series of problems, and that its board
is troubled by the lack of controls and lapses that allowed one person to lose
so much money.
Greenpeace,
which prides itself on being largely funded by relatively small individual
donations, apologised to supporters for the loss, claiming
that the “serious error of judgment” was the result of a single staff member
“acting beyond the limits of their authority and without following proper
procedures”. But the documents show that internally the group is worried about
the organisational failings that allowed it to happen.
Minutes
of a board meeting in the spring this year say: “The board takes this [the £3m
loss] very seriously and is deeply concerned that there should be such
financial loss at a time of transition – when reserves are stretched and income
is substantially lower than projected, and it is particularly troubled by how
it happened, ie the lack of strong, coherent processes and controls that
prevent the possibility that contracts can be entered into without due
authorisation.”
One
of the biggest and highest-profile environmental campaigning groups, Greenpeace
has more than 2,000 employees globally and thousands more volunteers. It is
based in Amsterdam and has 28 offices around the world, which campaign and
raise funds independently, including Greenpeace UK, which this year
successfully sent six activists to climb to the top of the Shard,
Europe’s tallest building, to send a message opposing Shell’s plans for oil
drilling in the Arctic.
The
leaked material also reveals that:
•
the group’s public face and top campaigner, executive director Kumi Naidoo,
admits that internal communications are a “huge problem” and staff have “good
reason” to be upset at a range of problems;
•
staff are concerned at being shifted from Amsterdam on Dutch wages to national
offices on lower local wages, as part of a major restructuring effort to
decentralise the group;
•
the group did not campaign to have one of its three ships, the Arctic Sunrise,
released by Russia because the political circumstances would have made it a
“wasted effort”.
A
sign aboard the Greenpeace ship the Rainbow Warrior III during an open day in
London, November 2011. Photograph: Graeme Robertson for The Guardian
The
Guardian has also learned that one of the group’s most senior executives,
Pascal Husting, Greenpeace International’s international programme director,
works in Amsterdam but flies between the city’s offices and his home in
Luxembourg several times a month.
Naidoo
defended the arrangement, saying: “Pascal has a young family in Luxembourg.
When he was offered the new role, he couldn’t move his family to Amsterdam
straight away. He’d be the first to say he hates the commute, hates having to
fly, but right now he hasn’t got much of an option until he can move. He wishes
there was an express train between his home and his office, but it would
currently be a 12-hour round trip by train.”
The
loss of £3m, paid out this year, comes as the group is already dealing with
lower than expected income, despite the Arctic 30 incident last year, when dozens of
its activists and several journalists were imprisoned by Russia over a protest
at oil drilling in the Arctic. Greenpeace International has said it will soon
report a £5.4m deficit – which includes the £3m – for 2013.
Mike
Townsley, the group’s head of communications, told AP last week of the £3m
loss: “Hindsight is 20/20, but we believe if he [the individual who made the
transactions] had followed rules and procedures, this wouldn’t have happened.”
However,
a strategy document dated November 2013 shows that problems seem to extend well
beyond one individual and that Greenpeace International’s senior executive team
was aware of widespread problems in its finance department that date back
years.
“[The]
international finance function at GPI [Greenpeace International] has faced
internal team and management problems for several years and the situation did
not improve during 2013 despite efforts and support,” the document warns.
“This
has resulted in errors and sub-standards in the quality of financial systems,
information and support provided to the teams, units in GPI and NROs [national
reporting offices], and have on occasions adversely affected relationship
between GPI and NROs.”
As
the story of the losses unfolded last week after it was broken by Der Spiegel and picked up by
international media, Townsley emailed colleagues to say: “This is a bad story
for us and the best we can do is be honest and respectful to our audiences.”
The
leaked material seems to show disquiet over a continuing major restructuring,
aimed at moving staff from Greenpeace International’s base in Amsterdam to
national offices across the world to fulfil Naidoo’s goal of better tackling
environmental problems in the global south. “This [2014] will be a testing year
for all of us,” the strategy document warns.
Some
staff are concerned at being moved from Dutch wages to lower, local wages at
regional operations. An audio recording of a staff meeting this year includes a
male employee telling Naidoo and other senior staff: “One of the biggest
challenges is salaries … If I had to identify one problem clearly it’s going to
be salaries.”
The
audio recording reveals Naidoo telling the same meeting: “On communications …
let me just concede that we have a huge problem with the way we are doing
communications, I want to own that and take responsibility for that. It’s not
where it needs to be.”
He
added: “There’s good reason why people actually are upset about a range of
things. But when I looked at what the problem was, it was actually a patent
lack of communication, not just a lack of communication but not communicating
at the right time, and things not clear.”
He
later sent an email to staff admitting: “Last Thursday’s staff [meeting] was tough;
hardly surprising given what we are trying to achieve and the impact that it
will have upon all of us.”
The
documents and material also give an insight into internal debates over future
actions in Russia following the Arctic 30 last year, which eventually saw the
release of all 30 activists and journalists and, earlier this month, the release of the group’s icebreaker, the Arctic Sunrise.
The ship is still in Murmansk, Russia, while Greenpeace arranges for people to
examine its condition.
“[After
the Arctic 30] one of the key debates we need to have is defining the ethical
and appropriate levels of risk that we are willing to take,” minutes of the
board meeting this year note. The minutes also say: “It was queried why there
has been no campaigning to bring attention to the AS [Arctic Sunrise] and gain
public support for a successful return of the ship since the safe return of the
activists. Pascal [Husting] said that under the current political circumstances
launching a campaign to free the ship would probably be a wasted effort.”
Gerald
Steinberg, president of NGO Monitor, which seeks to make NGOs more transparent
and accountable, said he saw parallels with the financial problems Amnesty International had
experienced in recent years.
“The
extent of it [the financial problems] was not something I expected [at
Greenpeace]. But it’s part of the fact that NGOs keep things very much within
the organisation; there’s no culture of accountability. They call on
governments to be accountable but they lack this in so many ways, so in that sense
it’s not a surprise.”
Two
Greenpeace activists display a banner beneath the clock face of Big Ben on the
first anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Photograph: David Bebber/Reuters
He
said a shift in culture was required to address the problems. “It requires a
cultural change. NGOs tend to see themselves as insurgents. They have now
become the establishment but without the structures that are required for such
large organisations – they can no longer think of themselves as insurgents but
as corporate organisations. That hurts their self-image but there is no other
way to avoid the financial meltdowns that can take place.”
Naidoo
told the Guardian that changes were already under way to address the handling
of its budget. “Greenpeace International’s annual accounts have always been
given a clean bill of health by independent auditors. However, there have
definitely been ongoing problem with some of the systems and high staff
turnover in our international finance unit, no denying it.
“That’s
why I hired a new head of finance who has over 20 years’ experience working
with international NGOs. We have also strengthened his team. He’s already put
checks in place to make sure the problems we have had are a thing of the past.”
He
also said the restructuring was not about reducing staff numbers but about
redeploying people. “This restructuring is not about reducing the number of
people working full time on Greenpeace campaigns; it’s about making sure we
have people where we need them, and increasingly that’s not in Amsterdam. The
big environmental issues are increasingly in the southern hemisphere, be it
Indonesian or Amazonian deforestation, Chinese coal plants or overfishing in
the Indian and Pacific Ocean.”
----------------
Umweltschützer
als Spekulant: Greenpeace-Mitarbeiter
Greenpeace-Aktion
vor Ibiza: "Ernste Fehleinschätzung"
Panne
bei Greenpeace: Ein Mitarbeiter der Finanzabteilung hat bei Spekulationen mit
Devisen nach SPIEGEL-Informationen Millionenverluste erwirtschaftet. Das Geld
stammte aus Spenden.
Hamburg
- Die Umweltschutzorganisation Greenpeace wird von einem Finanzskandal
erschüttert. Ein Mitarbeiter in der Greenpeace-Zentrale in Amsterdam verlor bei
Währungsgeschäften insgesamt 3,8 Millionen Euro. Das Geld stammte nach
SPIEGEL-Informationen aus Spenden, die von finanzstarken
Greenpeace-Länderorganisationen wie der deutschen an die Zentrale in Holland
überwiesen wurden.
Bei Termingeschäften
setzte ein Mitarbeiter der Finanzabteilung auf sinkende Eurokurse. Doch es
kam schließlich ganz anders. Dem Mitarbeiter sei eine "ernsthafte
Fehleinschätzung" unterlaufen, und man habe ihn mittlerweile entlassen,
sagt Mike Townsley von Greenpeace International.
Derzeit
laufen noch weitere Untersuchungen, wie es zu diesem Millionenverlust kommen
konnte. Als Ursache habe man auch Organisationsfehler im internen
Kontrollsystem entdeckt. Diese seien mittlerweile aber behoben, versichert
Townsley. Derzeit schließt die Umweltorganisation aus, dass sich der betreffende
Finanzexperte persönlich bereichern wollte. Auch Korruption sei nicht im Spiel
gewesen.
"Wir
können uns bei unseren Mitgliedern nur entschuldigen und auf ihr Verständnis
dafür hoffen, dass auch unsere Organisation und unser Personal nicht frei von
Fehlern sind", sagt der Greenpeace-Sprecher weiter. Der Verlust sei
gravierend, aber nicht existenzbedrohend. Die Gelder waren bestimmt für jene
Länderorganisationen, die sich noch im Aufbau befinden.
Aktuelle
Kampagnen der Öko-Aktivisten, so Townsley, seien nicht gefährdet. Greenpeace International
verzeichnete im letzten vorgelegten Jahresbericht von 2012 Einnahmen von rund
270 Millionen Euro, das meiste davon Spenden der knapp drei Millionen
Unterstützer.
Themen
im neuen SPIEGEL
Sie
wollen wissen, was in der neuesten SPIEGEL-Ausgabe steht? Melden Sie sich jetzt
einfach für den SPIEGEL-Brief an. Die Redaktion des Magazins informiert
Sie persönlich und kostenlos per Mail.
·
Die neue Ausgabe des Digitalen SPIEGEL können Sie am Sonntag ab 8 Uhr herunterladen.
Die neue Ausgabe des Digitalen SPIEGEL können Sie am Sonntag ab 8 Uhr herunterladen.
-----------------------
Financial
Scandal: Organizational Change Has Led to Chaos in Greenpeace
By
Michaela Schiessl
REUTERS
Last
week, news emerged that a Greenpeace employee had lost millions in donor money
through ill-conceived currency deals. Now the environmentalists are in danger
of losing their biggest asset: their credibility.
On
the day the scandal hit newspaper headlines, Greenpeace International Executive
Director Kumi Naidoo didn't panic. A South African with Indian roots who grew
up in a township under the Apartheid regime, a couple million missing euros was
far from the worst Naidoo had seen.
Instead
of tearing out his hair, Naidoo twittered cheerfully about a lecture he was
giving on the dispersal of power. He wished other climate activists happy
birthday and counselled "young people out there" not to "put any
faith in the current generation of adult leaders."
Unfortunately,
Naidoo hasn't been particularly committed to following his own advice. Had he
been, the organization he leads, Greenpeace International (GPI), might not have
found itself facing a crisis last Monday after having lost €3.8 million ($5.2
million) through currency trading.
Acting
independently and in violation of the organization's regulations, a finance
department employee signed forward currency contracts worth €59 million to
minimize Greenpeace's currency risks. But when some of the contracts came due,
the European currency had -- contrary to expectations -- risen against many
others.
The
damage extends far beyond the lost millions. Greenpeace has been careful to
cultivate an image as intrepid defenders of the environment. Calling themselves
the rainbow warriors, activists hang from factory chimneys, throw themselves in
front of whaling ships or risk jail time in Russia by calling attention to the
plight of the Arctic. Now, another activity has been added: playing the
financial markets. For an organization almost entirely financed by donations,
the revelation is a PR disaster, endangering from one day to the next the
greatest asset Greenpeace possesses: its credibility.
Greenpeace's
New Direction
This
scandal is about much more than one person's momentous mistake, it's about an
entire organization in a state of upheaval. Naidoo wants to shift Greenpeace's
focus from the industrialized countries to Africa and countries like Brazil,
China and India. That, he argues, is the only way to counteract the threat of
climate change. "We need to create an understanding in the developing
countries that we will lose our planet if they follow the example of the
industrialized nations," Naidoo says.
Since
he took the job in 2009, Naidoo has put all of the organization's efforts into
raising sustainability-awareness in the world's emerging economies. It's a huge
effort that is plunging Greenpeace into disorder. It's also expensive:
In 2012, Greenpeace spent close to €90 million on fundraising -- one third of
all expenditures. And that's not the only thing angering critics. Naidoo also
envisions future campaigns no longer being coordinated from Amsterdam, but
delegated to various national offices, requiring more coordination and
communication. Just integrating the different cultures involved in the
organization requires so much effort that other things have been neglected,
like financial oversight.
If
GPI was still the tightly run organization it once was, the risky investment
strategy would never have come to pass, or at the very least, a professional
crisis management apparatus would have been on hand to deal with it. Instead,
Naidoo rushed to Boston to receive a prize for his civil disobedience-related
pursuits.
When
Naidoo returned to Amsterdam on Thursday, Greenpeace Germany, the branch that
attracts the most donations, had lost 700 supporting members. Greenpeace
Switzerland, which is just as financially robust, wrote a dismayed letter to
its supporters asking "for forgiveness, from the bottom of their
hearts."
But
while the national bureaus were placating enraged donors, top staff members
were meeting in Arnheim to discuss staffing issues, leaving many of the desks
at Greenpeace headquarters empty. At least one staffing issue has been cleared
up though: The finance-department employee who finalized the contracts was
fired.
Vacuum
Led to Mistake
The
lack of supervision is a direct result of Greenpeace's restructuring. Because
the campaigns have been delegated to individual countries, Greenpeace
headquarters has become less important. Kumi Naidoo is rarely present and
doesn't even have his own office there. He confirmed that many of the 150
people who work at headquarters will have to go; the main office is dissolving.
When
former Chief Operating Officer Willem van Rijn left the organization in
December 2012, his successor didn't arrive until May 2013. It was during this
leaderless time that a finance department employee had the grandiose idea to
sign massive and unsupported forward contracts with the currency broker Monex
Europe. The euro crisis hadn't yet ended and the Greenpeace employee was
certain that the value of the euro would drop.
Because
Greenpeace International regularly sends large sums of money to fund national
bureaus that cannot finance themselves, he bought 14 different currencies last
spring, including Russian rubles, Chinese yuan and Thai baht.
Deals
to limit exposure to the vagaries of the currency markets are normal in
international business. Most, though, are limited to a span of just a few
months to maintain flexibility. But the Greenpeace employee signed longer-term
contracts. He bought currencies worth €36 million in 2013, and an additional
€23 million in 2014. And the euro went up.
Greenpeace
International management didn't notice that they were sitting on a time bomb
until August 2013. Lawyers were brought in, but the contracts were watertight.
There was no escape.
Imposed Silence
Then
came Greenpeace's second mistake: It said nothing. Greenpeace Germany wasn't
informed of the situation until March 2014, after the losses had already been
recorded on the balance sheet. Many other bureaus didn't find out until a May
meeting in Madrid. Even then, though, the story didn't get out. It only hit the
headlines last week.
The
organization has explained its cover-up by saying it was waiting for the final
audit by KPMG, the business consulting firm it had hired. They say they would
have naturally included the losses in the soon-to-be published 2013 annual
report, including the €2.1 million losses forecast for 2014.
But
did management hope to the issue would somehow go unnoticed? Perhaps Naidoo
underestimated just how explosive the news would be. The South African has a
different style than his two German predecessors, Thilo Bode and Gerd Leipold.
The minutiae of daily business are not his thing -- a political scientist who
completed his PhD at Oxford, Naidoo sees himself less as a manager and more as
climate-change ambassador.
The
tall, charismatic executive director is constantly jetting around the world,
from the World Economic Forum to the Munich Security Conference, to save the
world and convince companies, unions and religious leaders to take part in the
fight against climate change. There's hardly any time left in his 70-hour
workweek to check the balance sheets.
As
an adolescent, Naidoo got his start by fighting against the Apartheid regime in
his hometown of Durban. He was exiled and then worked for Nelson Mandela's ANC
after the latter's release from prison. He led Civicus, a civil-rights
organization, until 2008.
In
Naidoo, Greenpeace found a man who, instead of being a dyed-in-the-wool
environmentalist, combined environmentalism with social issues. His role models
are Mandela and Gandhi. He wants cooperation instead of singular triumphs. When
it comes to environmentalism, he argues, everybody should be willing to talk to
everybody.
'It
Can Never Happen Again'
The
Germans in particular pushed back against his leadership style, afraid of
losing their clout at home. There have also plenty of disagreements centering
on money, focusing on questions as to how much the German chapter must provide
to others and whether donors should be informed about the new focus? There
wasn't even an informational campaign regarding Greenpeace's new direction.
German
Chief Executive Officer Brigitte Behrens plays down the conflict. So far, she
says, the delegation of international campaigns has worked and supporters are
regularly informed about all activities through Greenpeace news. She also
argues that German donations haven't been affected by the misbegotten purchase
of foreign currencies. Because of Greenpeace Germany's organizational structure
and strict legal restrictions in the country, the donations can only be used
for campaigns. But, even so, the money is gone. "I'm very shaken,"
she says. "It can never be allowed to happen again."
Naidoo
will try to compensate for the loss by saving on infrastructure, and not by
cutting back on campaigns. The supervision gap has been closed, he says. From
now on, all foreign currency contracts must have leadership's blessing.
But
the PR damage remains. "We will overcome this scandal," GPI program
director and Greenpeace veteran Pascal Husting believes. "But I was always
proud that Greenpeace had a clean slate. This thing is going to stick to us
forever."
Translated
from the German by Thomas Rogers
-----------------
BLOGGED:
Why is Sea Shepherd, Greenpeace and PETA-
sooooooo heavily funded???... and so violent?- 60% world youth have no jobs,
economy in tatters- 3 billion children women starving abject poverty- u must
change
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.