Shape GB’s National Childrenswear Survey measured more than 2,500 children, aged four to 17, with 3D body scanners Waistlines of girls starting secondary school are more than 8cm (3in) bigger than those of their counterparts 30 years ago, a study has shown. Their male classmates have waistlines nearly 7cm bigger and chests nearly 8cm bigger than 11-year-old boys three decades ago, according to Shape GB’s national childrenswear survey. The survey, which was partly publicly funded, is based on data from more than 2,500 children aged four to 17, who were measured with 3D body scanners in 2009-10. The results show how children’s body shapes have ballooned since the last major survey, which was released by the British Standards Institute in 1990 and based on measurements taken from more than 8,300 children in 1978. An average 11-year-old girl today is 148.78cm tall, compared with 146.03cm in 1978 – an increase of 2.75cm or 1.88%. But her waistline is on average 70.2cm, the survey found, compared with 59.96cm in 1978. Because the 3D scanner does not compress the skin like a tape measure does, and the scanner also measures the small of the back, it produces width measurements around 1.9cm larger. Even accounting for that difference, the average 11-year-old girl’s waist has increased by 8.34cm or 13.9%. Today’s results put her hip measurement at 81.78cm, compared with 77.81cm in 1978, and chest at 78.4cm, compared with 71.31cm in 1978. The average boy of 11 now stands 148.18cm tall, up from 144.63cm in 1978 – a 3.55cm or 2.45% increase. His chest is 78.45cm, compared with 68.76 in the 1978 survey. When the differences in measuring method are accounted for there is still a 7.79cm, or 11.33% increase. His waist has also expanded, from 61.49cm on the average 1978 boy to 70.02cm today, and his hips are 80.21cm, compared with 73.22cm in 1978. Select Research, the company who managed the survey, said the scans, which recorded nearly 200 different measurements per child, also showed that boys and girls’ body shapes differed before the age of seven, contrary to many retailers’ assumptions. They said that many clothes currently labelled for five-year-old boys were based on them being 110cm tall, while the data shows the average as 115cm. The Shape GB data is being used by sponsoring retailers Next, Monsoon, Shop Direct and George at Asda to design clothes. It is also to be used in the development of a Body Volume Index (BVI) for children as an alternative scale to Body Mass Index (BMI), which relies on simple height and weight measurements. Richard Barnes, MD of Select Research, said it was too early to draw conclusions on childhood obesity trends from the data. He said: “The increases in waist circumference since 1978 show that children have got bigger. However, increases in height and chest size show that children in the UK have grown over the years in many ways.” Children Schools Secondary schools Health Health & wellbeing Health policy Children’s clothes guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Beijing-run Hong Kong newspaper says police suspect artist of tax-dodging, bigamy and spreading pornography on web Chinese police say they have “firm evidence” that the detained artist-activist Ai Weiwei avoided tax, and he has begun “confessing”, a Hong Kong newspaper under Beijing control said on Thursday, drawing a denunciation from his sister. It also said Ai was suspected of bigamy and “spreading pornography on the internet”. The Wen Wei Po newspaper said it had the firmest details yet of the accusations that Chinese police are developing against Ai, whose secretive detention this month drew an outcry from human rights groups and western governments, alarmed by the ruling Communist party’s campaign against dissent. Ai was detained at Beijing airport on 3 April. He had a hand in designing the Bird’s Nest stadium for the 2008 Beijing Olympics and has juggled an international art career with colourful campaigns against government censorship and political restrictions, often using the internet. His family has said the government’s assertion that Ai is suspected of “economic crimes” is a pretext for hitting back against his activism. Citing unnamed sources, the Wen Wei Po said investigators had gathered “a large amount of evidence that Ai Weiwei is suspected of avoiding taxes, and the sums are quite large”. “A source revealed to this newspaper that firm evidence has been collected about Ai Weiwei’s suspected economic crimes,” the newspaper said. The Wen Wei Po is a Chinese-language paper published in Hong Kong by mainland authorities and is sometimes used to make Beijing’s case on contentious issues. “As the investigation has deepened, the public security authorities have accumulated quite solid witness, documentary and circumstantial evidence and Ai Weiwei has had quite a good attitude in co-operating with the investigation and has begun to confess about the issues,” the report said. Ai’s sister, Gao Ge, told Reuters that police had given his family no information about his whereabouts or the accusations against him and the Hong Kong newspaper was being used to vilify him without giving Ai a chance to respond. “This is not evidence. It’s using a small paper to push their own position without giving Ai Weiwei any fair redress,” Gao said. “It’s clearly against the law to hold him for so long without any notice to us.” The bigamy accusation, she said, was “absurd”, and airing other charges without allowing Ai to respond was grossly unfair. Ai, 53, is the most internationally prominent of dozens of Chinese dissidents, rights lawyers, activists and grassroots agitators detained or put in secretive custody since February, when fear of contagion from Middle East uprisings triggered a crackdown by China’s domestic security apparatus. The government said this week it was “unhappy” with foreign support for Ai. “The Chinese people also feel baffled – why do some people in some countries treat a crime suspect as a hero?” a foreign ministry spokesman, Hong Lei, told reporters. Chinese authorities have arrested a veteran dissident, Zhu Yufu, on subversion charges, his ex-wife and a friend said on Wednesday, making him the fourth activist known to have been arrested and likely to face trial in a crackdown on dissent. Ai Weiwei China Art guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Exclusive: Three mission members say calls to recant UN report disregard the rights of Palestinian and Israeli victims Read the full statement by Jilani, Chinkin and Travers Three members of the UN fact-finding mission on the Gaza war of 2008-09 have turned on the fourth member and chair of the group, Richard Goldstone, accusing him in all but name of misrepresenting facts in order to cast doubt on the credibility of their joint report. In a statement to the Guardian , the three experts in international law are strongly critical of Goldstone’s dramatic change of heart expressed in a Washington Post commentary earlier this month. Goldstone wrote that he regretted aspects of the report that bears his name, especially the suggestion that Israel had potentially committed war crimes by targeting civilian Palestinians in the three-week conflict. The three members – the Pakistani human rights lawyer Hina Jilani; Christine Chinkin, professor of international law at the London School of Economics; and former Irish peace-keeper Desmond Travers – have until this moment kept their silence over Goldstone’s bombshell remarks. But their response now is devastating. Though they do not mention Goldstone by name, they shoot down several of the main contentions in his article and imply that he has bowed to intense political pressure. They write that they cannot leave “aspersions cast on the findings of the [Goldstone] report unchallenged”, adding that those aspersions have “misrepresented facts in an attempt to delegitimise the findings and to cast doubts on its credibility”. In their most stinging criticism, the three joint authors say that “calls to reconsider or even retract the report, as well as attempts at misrepresenting its nature and purpose, disregard the rights of victims, Palestinians and Israeli, to truth and justice”. They point to the “personal attacks and the extraordinary pressure placed on members of the fact finding mission”, adding that “had we given in to pressures from any quarter to sanitize our conclusions, we would be doing a serious injustice to the hundreds of innocent civilians killed during the Gaza conflict, the thousands injured, and the hundreds of thousands whose lives continue to be deeply affected by the conflict and the blockade”. The four-person fact finding mission was set up to look into allegations of war crimes committed by both Israel and Hamas during the war in which 1,400 Palestinians – at least half of whom were civilians – and 13 Israelis died. The Goldstone report concluded that some Israelis could be held individually criminally responsible for potential war crimes. In his Washington Post article, Goldstone said evidence had since come to light as a result of subsequent Israeli military investigations into the conflict that showed that Israel had not targeted civilians as a matter of policy. Had he known that then, “the Goldstone report would have been a different document,” he wrote. Goldstone’s apparent retraction of key elements of the fact finding mission he led was seized upon with delight by the Israeli government which called for the report to be set aside in the light of his comments. An Israeli minister claimed that Goldstone had himself promised to work to have his own report “nullified”. But his three fellow members of the mission state that they “firmly stand by” the conclusions of the report . They say that neither Israel nor Hamas has come up with any convincing evidence contradicting the findings. The three authors cite the final UN report into the Gaza war, written by a follow-up committee led by Judge Mary McGowan Davies, that criticised Israel for the slow pace with which it has conducted its investigations and for its complete refusal to address some of the most serious allegations about its conduct. “The mechanisms that are being used by the Israeli authorities to investigate the incidents are proving inadequate to genuinely ascertain the facts and any ensuing legal responsibility.” The statement of Jilani, Chinkin and Travers will set back any attempt by Israel to have the Goldstone report revoked. The UN human rights council, which commissioned the fact-finding mission, has already made clear that the report could only be withdrawn if all four of its authors unanimously made a formal written complaint or if the UN general assembly or human rights council voted to drop it. Gaza United States Palestinian territories United Nations Israel Middle East New York Ed Pilkington guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Pennsylvania porcupines better watch their backs from September to March. The state game commission this week instituted a hunting season for the prickly creatures, much to the dismay of wildlife biologists who say too little is known about their population, reports the Philadelphia Inquirer . One member of the eight-person board…
Continue reading …In a blind taste test, volunteers were unable to distinguish between expensive and cheap wine An expensive wine may well have a full body, a delicate nose and good legs, but the odds are your brain will never know. A survey of hundreds of drinkers found that on average people could tell good wine from plonk no more often than if they had simply guessed. In the blind taste test, 578 people commented on a variety of red and white wines ranging from a £3.49 bottle of Claret to a £29.99 bottle of champagne. The researchers categorised inexpensive wines as costing £5 and less, while expensive bottles were £10 and more. The study found that people correctly distinguished between cheap and expensive white wines only 53% of the time, and only 47% of the time for red wines. The overall result suggests a 50:50 chance of identifying a wine as expensive or cheap based on taste alone – the same odds as flipping a coin. Richard Wiseman, a psychologist at Hertfordshire University , conducted the survey at the Edinburgh International Science Festival . “People just could not tell the difference between cheap and expensive wine,” he said. “When you know the answer, you fool yourself into thinking you would be able to tell the difference, but most people simply can’t.” All of the drinkers who took part in the survey were attending the science festival, but Wiseman claims the group was unlikely to be any worse at wine tasting than a cross-section of the general public. “The real surprise is that the more expensive wines were double or three times the price of the cheaper ones. Normally when a product is that much more expensive, you would expect to be able to tell the difference,” Wiseman said. People scored best when deciding between two bottles of Pinot Grigio, with 59% correctly deciding which was which. The Claret, which cost either £3.49 or £15.99, fooled most people with only 39% correctly identifying which they had tasted. In 2008, a study led by Adrian North, a psychologist at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, claimed that music helped boost the flavour of certain wines . North, who was commissioned by a Chilean winemaker, reported that Cabernet Sauvignon was most affected by “powerful and heavy” music, while Chardonnay benefited from “zingy and refreshing” sounds. Psychology Food science Food & drink Ian Sample guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …A Pro Publica investigation introduces a new word in the Gulf Coast lexicon: spillionaire. As in, the nickname given to someone—usually someone politically connected—who raked in a lot of money from BP’s unregulated $16 billion cleanup fund for localities. It puts a particular focus on St. Bernard Parish…
Continue reading …As the Deepwater Horizon crisis continues, new chief executive Bob Dudley battles to turn the oil group around Bob Dudley, chief executive of BP, will face hostile shareholders on Thursday and, barring an 11th-hour breakthrough, the humiliating prospect of his controversial proposed alliance with Kremlin controlled oil company Rosneft collapsing. It was reported late on Wednesday that BP had broken off talks to buy out its Russian partners, the oligarchs who make up AAR and stand in the way of the Rosneft alliance being consummated. It is thought that AAR demanded too high a price for its 50% share in the joint venture TNK-BP in return for not blocking the alliance. A source close to AAR said: “It is up to BP to make a sensible proposal to get out of the mess it has created.One has not been forthcoming… They [BP directors] now face the consequences of their actions.” BP and AAR declined to comment. Almost a year on from the Deepwater Horizon accident in the Gulf, the present situation hardly represents the turnaround that Dudley, or BP, had hoped for. Dudley took the helm on 1 October, after his predecessor, Tony Hayward, paid the price for what is officially the world’s biggest offshore accidental oil spill. Less than four months into the job, Dudley announced an audacious proposal to transform the fortunes of BP , looking not west to the US but east: a $16bn share swap with Rosneft – the first of its kind between an oil major and a national oil company – to cement a new joint venture to explore the Arctic. BP has had its fingers burnt in Russia before. In the late 1990s, it lost out in a dispute with AAR. The two sides made up to eventually form TNK-BP, the Russian joint venture at the heart of the impasse over the proposed Rosneft deal. Last month an independent arbitration tribunal upheld an injunction , secured by AAR, which prevents the two companies consummating the deal. AAR had successfully argued that the Rosneft deal contravened the TNK-BP shareholder agreement, which requires BP to offer the joint venture first refusal over any business opportunity in Russia. Dudley claimed that AAR had been properly consulted on the deal when analysts queried him days after he had unveiled the Rosneft alliance. It soon transpired that AAR felt otherwise. But BP still looked secure, with the proposed Rosneft alliance seemingly having the blessing of the Kremlin. Rosneft chairman Igor Sechin was also deputy prime minister and in charge of Russia’s energy policy, a key player to have onside. At a dramatic Friday night press conference at BP’s St James’ Square headquarters in London in January, when the deal was announced, those listening in by phone overheard Dudley quietly thank Sechin, after his speech, for his “very nice words”. Dudley calculated that AAR would not dare to challenge the deal. The last oil oligarch to cross the Kremlin – Mikhail Khodorkovsky, ironically the boss of the dismantled oil company whose assets went to Rosneft – is still languishing in a Siberian prison cell. But Russian politics, particularly involving energy, are unpredictable at the best of times. Dudley, it seems, guessed wrong and BP is paying the price. To make matters worse, on Monday, Sechin quit his Rosneft post in a Kremlin reshuffle, leaving BP more isolated than ever. Iain Armstrong, analyst at stockbroker Brewin Dolphin, said: “It’s such a political misjudgment by Dudley. If it wasn’t for the fact that the chief executive position of BP is a poisoned chalice right now, he would be out. BP is lurching from one crisis to another.” BP’s two-month period of exclusivity with Rosneft – during which it was supposed to formally sign the alliance – expires on Thursday. It seems unlikely Rosneft would extend the deadline, which means it is free to seek other partners for the proposed deal. Now the tough negotiations will begin in earnest. All is not lost for BP however. It still has an advantage over other rivals wanting to become Rosneft’s partner, since the two companies have been in talks for years about exploring the Arctic. And AAR, which claims it wants to be involved in the Arctic exploration, would also lose out if BP was not able to form the alliance, whether through TNK-BP or not. But it is clear that if Dudley wants the deal to go ahead, he will have to cut a deal with AAR. It will not come cheap and could take weeks to negotiate. If BP cannot resurrect the Rosneft alliance, it will have little impact on the business in the short term. Exploration was not due to begin for several years and the chances of success are uncertain in any event. But it would be a major blow for Dudley, particularly as BP had championed the alliance as “historic” and an example for the rest of Big Oil wanting to team up with national oil companies to follow. Brewin Dolphin’s Armstrong says: “If the deal did not happen it would be a blow to Bob Dudley’s reputation. It would represent a setback for BP’s rehabilitation.” The Rosneft debacle is terrible timing for BP. The annual general meeting, at the ExCel centre in East London, was always going to be a stormy affair because of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. A protest by environmental activists is planned outside the conference centre before the meeting begins. Investors are also angry that the company paid bonuses to its finance director and head of refining last year, and about the £1m golden goodbye for Hayward. Big funds such as the California state pensions fund Calpers and Florida’s equivalent SBA, who own 0.4% of BP, as well as activist funds such as the Christian Brothers Investment Services group, will vote against the approval of BP’s report and accounts. The less environmentally and corporate governance-minded investors also have reasons to be unhappy. BP’s share price is still almost a third lower than it was just before Deepwater Horizon at a time when oil prices have surged and it lags behind rivals such as Shell. Hayward plots his City comeback Former BP chief executive Tony Hayward paid the price for the Deepwater Horizon disaster, leaving the company on October 1 last year. But he is already plotting his City comeback. He has been lined up as senior independent director of commodities group Glencore in its $60bn flotation. The role could be announced on Thursday when, as expected, Glencore formally fires the starting gun on the listing. Hayward is also reported to be setting up an oil and gas investment fund which could list in London through a £1bn flotation this year. Hayward was appointed as a non-executive director of BP’s Russian joint venture, TNK-BP, soon after he stepped down as BP chief executive. He joined just before the full-blown row erupted between BP and its Russian partners, who co-own the venture, over the proposed alliance with Rosneft. But even if it ends in tears for Hayward at TNK-BP, his wife Maureen could keep his BP association alive. She is reported to be writing a book in his defence of her husband, who was villified for such gaffes during the Gulf crisis last year such as “I want my life back”, and telling the Guardian: “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” The comments were made in mid-May, when the official size of the spill was still estimated at 5,000 barrels a day. By the following month, it was increased to up to 40,000 barrels a day. BP is now contesting the official figures, which are likely to be one of the factors determining how much it will have to pay in fines. BP Bob Dudley Tony Hayward Oil and gas companies Russia Oil Oil Energy industry BP oil spill Pollution Oil spills Europe Tim Webb guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …As the Deepwater Horizon crisis continues, new chief executive Bob Dudley battles to turn the oil group around Bob Dudley, chief executive of BP, will face hostile shareholders on Thursday and, barring an 11th-hour breakthrough, the humiliating prospect of his controversial proposed alliance with Kremlin controlled oil company Rosneft collapsing. It was reported late on Wednesday that BP had broken off talks to buy out its Russian partners, the oligarchs who make up AAR and stand in the way of the Rosneft alliance being consummated. It is thought that AAR demanded too high a price for its 50% share in the joint venture TNK-BP in return for not blocking the alliance. A source close to AAR said: “It is up to BP to make a sensible proposal to get out of the mess it has created.One has not been forthcoming… They [BP directors] now face the consequences of their actions.” BP and AAR declined to comment. Almost a year on from the Deepwater Horizon accident in the Gulf, the present situation hardly represents the turnaround that Dudley, or BP, had hoped for. Dudley took the helm on 1 October, after his predecessor, Tony Hayward, paid the price for what is officially the world’s biggest offshore accidental oil spill. Less than four months into the job, Dudley announced an audacious proposal to transform the fortunes of BP , looking not west to the US but east: a $16bn share swap with Rosneft – the first of its kind between an oil major and a national oil company – to cement a new joint venture to explore the Arctic. BP has had its fingers burnt in Russia before. In the late 1990s, it lost out in a dispute with AAR. The two sides made up to eventually form TNK-BP, the Russian joint venture at the heart of the impasse over the proposed Rosneft deal. Last month an independent arbitration tribunal upheld an injunction , secured by AAR, which prevents the two companies consummating the deal. AAR had successfully argued that the Rosneft deal contravened the TNK-BP shareholder agreement, which requires BP to offer the joint venture first refusal over any business opportunity in Russia. Dudley claimed that AAR had been properly consulted on the deal when analysts queried him days after he had unveiled the Rosneft alliance. It soon transpired that AAR felt otherwise. But BP still looked secure, with the proposed Rosneft alliance seemingly having the blessing of the Kremlin. Rosneft chairman Igor Sechin was also deputy prime minister and in charge of Russia’s energy policy, a key player to have onside. At a dramatic Friday night press conference at BP’s St James’ Square headquarters in London in January, when the deal was announced, those listening in by phone overheard Dudley quietly thank Sechin, after his speech, for his “very nice words”. Dudley calculated that AAR would not dare to challenge the deal. The last oil oligarch to cross the Kremlin – Mikhail Khodorkovsky, ironically the boss of the dismantled oil company whose assets went to Rosneft – is still languishing in a Siberian prison cell. But Russian politics, particularly involving energy, are unpredictable at the best of times. Dudley, it seems, guessed wrong and BP is paying the price. To make matters worse, on Monday, Sechin quit his Rosneft post in a Kremlin reshuffle, leaving BP more isolated than ever. Iain Armstrong, analyst at stockbroker Brewin Dolphin, said: “It’s such a political misjudgment by Dudley. If it wasn’t for the fact that the chief executive position of BP is a poisoned chalice right now, he would be out. BP is lurching from one crisis to another.” BP’s two-month period of exclusivity with Rosneft – during which it was supposed to formally sign the alliance – expires on Thursday. It seems unlikely Rosneft would extend the deadline, which means it is free to seek other partners for the proposed deal. Now the tough negotiations will begin in earnest. All is not lost for BP however. It still has an advantage over other rivals wanting to become Rosneft’s partner, since the two companies have been in talks for years about exploring the Arctic. And AAR, which claims it wants to be involved in the Arctic exploration, would also lose out if BP was not able to form the alliance, whether through TNK-BP or not. But it is clear that if Dudley wants the deal to go ahead, he will have to cut a deal with AAR. It will not come cheap and could take weeks to negotiate. If BP cannot resurrect the Rosneft alliance, it will have little impact on the business in the short term. Exploration was not due to begin for several years and the chances of success are uncertain in any event. But it would be a major blow for Dudley, particularly as BP had championed the alliance as “historic” and an example for the rest of Big Oil wanting to team up with national oil companies to follow. Brewin Dolphin’s Armstrong says: “If the deal did not happen it would be a blow to Bob Dudley’s reputation. It would represent a setback for BP’s rehabilitation.” The Rosneft debacle is terrible timing for BP. The annual general meeting, at the ExCel centre in East London, was always going to be a stormy affair because of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. A protest by environmental activists is planned outside the conference centre before the meeting begins. Investors are also angry that the company paid bonuses to its finance director and head of refining last year, and about the £1m golden goodbye for Hayward. Big funds such as the California state pensions fund Calpers and Florida’s equivalent SBA, who own 0.4% of BP, as well as activist funds such as the Christian Brothers Investment Services group, will vote against the approval of BP’s report and accounts. The less environmentally and corporate governance-minded investors also have reasons to be unhappy. BP’s share price is still almost a third lower than it was just before Deepwater Horizon at a time when oil prices have surged and it lags behind rivals such as Shell. Hayward plots his City comeback Former BP chief executive Tony Hayward paid the price for the Deepwater Horizon disaster, leaving the company on October 1 last year. But he is already plotting his City comeback. He has been lined up as senior independent director of commodities group Glencore in its $60bn flotation. The role could be announced on Thursday when, as expected, Glencore formally fires the starting gun on the listing. Hayward is also reported to be setting up an oil and gas investment fund which could list in London through a £1bn flotation this year. Hayward was appointed as a non-executive director of BP’s Russian joint venture, TNK-BP, soon after he stepped down as BP chief executive. He joined just before the full-blown row erupted between BP and its Russian partners, who co-own the venture, over the proposed alliance with Rosneft. But even if it ends in tears for Hayward at TNK-BP, his wife Maureen could keep his BP association alive. She is reported to be writing a book in his defence of her husband, who was villified for such gaffes during the Gulf crisis last year such as “I want my life back”, and telling the Guardian: “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” The comments were made in mid-May, when the official size of the spill was still estimated at 5,000 barrels a day. By the following month, it was increased to up to 40,000 barrels a day. BP is now contesting the official figures, which are likely to be one of the factors determining how much it will have to pay in fines. BP Bob Dudley Tony Hayward Oil and gas companies Russia Oil Oil Energy industry BP oil spill Pollution Oil spills Europe Tim Webb guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …As the Deepwater Horizon crisis continues, new chief executive Bob Dudley battles to turn the oil group around Bob Dudley, chief executive of BP, will face hostile shareholders on Thursday and, barring an 11th-hour breakthrough, the humiliating prospect of his controversial proposed alliance with Kremlin controlled oil company Rosneft collapsing. It was reported late on Wednesday that BP had broken off talks to buy out its Russian partners, the oligarchs who make up AAR and stand in the way of the Rosneft alliance being consummated. It is thought that AAR demanded too high a price for its 50% share in the joint venture TNK-BP in return for not blocking the alliance. A source close to AAR said: “It is up to BP to make a sensible proposal to get out of the mess it has created.One has not been forthcoming… They [BP directors] now face the consequences of their actions.” BP and AAR declined to comment. Almost a year on from the Deepwater Horizon accident in the Gulf, the present situation hardly represents the turnaround that Dudley, or BP, had hoped for. Dudley took the helm on 1 October, after his predecessor, Tony Hayward, paid the price for what is officially the world’s biggest offshore accidental oil spill. Less than four months into the job, Dudley announced an audacious proposal to transform the fortunes of BP , looking not west to the US but east: a $16bn share swap with Rosneft – the first of its kind between an oil major and a national oil company – to cement a new joint venture to explore the Arctic. BP has had its fingers burnt in Russia before. In the late 1990s, it lost out in a dispute with AAR. The two sides made up to eventually form TNK-BP, the Russian joint venture at the heart of the impasse over the proposed Rosneft deal. Last month an independent arbitration tribunal upheld an injunction , secured by AAR, which prevents the two companies consummating the deal. AAR had successfully argued that the Rosneft deal contravened the TNK-BP shareholder agreement, which requires BP to offer the joint venture first refusal over any business opportunity in Russia. Dudley claimed that AAR had been properly consulted on the deal when analysts queried him days after he had unveiled the Rosneft alliance. It soon transpired that AAR felt otherwise. But BP still looked secure, with the proposed Rosneft alliance seemingly having the blessing of the Kremlin. Rosneft chairman Igor Sechin was also deputy prime minister and in charge of Russia’s energy policy, a key player to have onside. At a dramatic Friday night press conference at BP’s St James’ Square headquarters in London in January, when the deal was announced, those listening in by phone overheard Dudley quietly thank Sechin, after his speech, for his “very nice words”. Dudley calculated that AAR would not dare to challenge the deal. The last oil oligarch to cross the Kremlin – Mikhail Khodorkovsky, ironically the boss of the dismantled oil company whose assets went to Rosneft – is still languishing in a Siberian prison cell. But Russian politics, particularly involving energy, are unpredictable at the best of times. Dudley, it seems, guessed wrong and BP is paying the price. To make matters worse, on Monday, Sechin quit his Rosneft post in a Kremlin reshuffle, leaving BP more isolated than ever. Iain Armstrong, analyst at stockbroker Brewin Dolphin, said: “It’s such a political misjudgment by Dudley. If it wasn’t for the fact that the chief executive position of BP is a poisoned chalice right now, he would be out. BP is lurching from one crisis to another.” BP’s two-month period of exclusivity with Rosneft – during which it was supposed to formally sign the alliance – expires on Thursday. It seems unlikely Rosneft would extend the deadline, which means it is free to seek other partners for the proposed deal. Now the tough negotiations will begin in earnest. All is not lost for BP however. It still has an advantage over other rivals wanting to become Rosneft’s partner, since the two companies have been in talks for years about exploring the Arctic. And AAR, which claims it wants to be involved in the Arctic exploration, would also lose out if BP was not able to form the alliance, whether through TNK-BP or not. But it is clear that if Dudley wants the deal to go ahead, he will have to cut a deal with AAR. It will not come cheap and could take weeks to negotiate. If BP cannot resurrect the Rosneft alliance, it will have little impact on the business in the short term. Exploration was not due to begin for several years and the chances of success are uncertain in any event. But it would be a major blow for Dudley, particularly as BP had championed the alliance as “historic” and an example for the rest of Big Oil wanting to team up with national oil companies to follow. Brewin Dolphin’s Armstrong says: “If the deal did not happen it would be a blow to Bob Dudley’s reputation. It would represent a setback for BP’s rehabilitation.” The Rosneft debacle is terrible timing for BP. The annual general meeting, at the ExCel centre in East London, was always going to be a stormy affair because of the Deepwater Horizon disaster. A protest by environmental activists is planned outside the conference centre before the meeting begins. Investors are also angry that the company paid bonuses to its finance director and head of refining last year, and about the £1m golden goodbye for Hayward. Big funds such as the California state pensions fund Calpers and Florida’s equivalent SBA, who own 0.4% of BP, as well as activist funds such as the Christian Brothers Investment Services group, will vote against the approval of BP’s report and accounts. The less environmentally and corporate governance-minded investors also have reasons to be unhappy. BP’s share price is still almost a third lower than it was just before Deepwater Horizon at a time when oil prices have surged and it lags behind rivals such as Shell. Hayward plots his City comeback Former BP chief executive Tony Hayward paid the price for the Deepwater Horizon disaster, leaving the company on October 1 last year. But he is already plotting his City comeback. He has been lined up as senior independent director of commodities group Glencore in its $60bn flotation. The role could be announced on Thursday when, as expected, Glencore formally fires the starting gun on the listing. Hayward is also reported to be setting up an oil and gas investment fund which could list in London through a £1bn flotation this year. Hayward was appointed as a non-executive director of BP’s Russian joint venture, TNK-BP, soon after he stepped down as BP chief executive. He joined just before the full-blown row erupted between BP and its Russian partners, who co-own the venture, over the proposed alliance with Rosneft. But even if it ends in tears for Hayward at TNK-BP, his wife Maureen could keep his BP association alive. She is reported to be writing a book in his defence of her husband, who was villified for such gaffes during the Gulf crisis last year such as “I want my life back”, and telling the Guardian: “The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.” The comments were made in mid-May, when the official size of the spill was still estimated at 5,000 barrels a day. By the following month, it was increased to up to 40,000 barrels a day. BP is now contesting the official figures, which are likely to be one of the factors determining how much it will have to pay in fines. BP Bob Dudley Tony Hayward Oil and gas companies Russia Oil Oil Energy industry BP oil spill Pollution Oil spills Europe Tim Webb guardian.co.uk
Continue reading …Donald Trump is not a particularly giving man. Sure, he heads up a charity, the Donald J. Trump Foundation, but after reviewing that charity’s IRS forms, the Smoking Gun concludes that Trump “may be the least charitable billionaire in the United States.” Trump’s foundation gave just $6.7 million to…
Continue reading …