Recent British Government and Saudi Relations
Mandelson and Brown
The Following appeared in the Daily Mail 15th Feb 2008:
“Saudi Arabia’s rulers threatened to make it easier for terrorists to attack London unless the corruption investigation by the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) was stopped, according to documents shown to the High Court. The previously secret files reveal the warning by the Saudis that they would go ahead and cut off intelligence links with the UK about potential terror strikes and suicide bombers. It was alleged in court that Prince Bandar, the head of the Saudi National Security Council, was behind the threats to withold information.”
The SFO inquiry arose out of BAE’s £43billion Al-Yamamah arms deal with Saudi Arabia in 1985, which provided Tornado and Hawk jets plus other military equipment. Due to political intervention the British Government, namely the Prime Minister, dropped the SFO investigation into corruption.
Against this background, is it any suprise that the British Government have refused to intervene.
You can read the letters between the Government and Lisa via the “Government” menu on the right.
Queen Takes “Careful Note”
However a breakdown of the correspondence is as follows:
- Buckingham Palace forward details of Lisa’s case which the Queen has taken “careful note” to Lord Mandelson, a member of the UK Labour Government.
- Letter sent to Prime Minister Gordon Brown stating, “On the 27th March 2009 you made a statement to the BBC and said “Discrimination has no place in the 21st century.” I agree wholeheartedly with you.”
- Reply from the Government to Lisa was, “It is not the role of Government to tell individual companies how to run their business.”
Compare this stance however to Gordon Brown’s statement on BBC Radio 4 ” Woman’s Hour” with regards to the current Amicus / Unite dispute with British Airways: Mr Brown, “It’s not in the company’s interest, it’s not in the workers’ interest, it’s not in the national interest.” Gordon Brown said while the strike was “regrettable and unacceptable, ministers should try to act as honest brokers between the company and the trade union, Unite. It is worthy of effort to try to prevent it.”
Gordon Brown ‘talk to airlines (BMI) about the issue’
Here is a further example of the Government’s entanglement in “company business” that actually involves BMI, taken from the Daily Mail:
“Prime Minister Gordon Brown has condemned airlines who run ‘ghost flights’ of empty planes in order to keep valuable slots at key airports. He said the practice – which burns up costly fuel yet transports few if any passengers to the detriment of the environment – was ‘clearly unacceptable’. Mr Brown told MPs today he would ‘talk to airlines about the issue’ after a newspaper article alleged that Britain’s third-biggest airline Bmi British Midland would operate so-called ‘ghost flights’ this winter.”
So how does Lisa’s reply from the Labour Government of “It is not the role of Goverment to tell individual companies how to run their business” stand up now? Maybe it was because Lisa’s situation involved the Saudi Authorities and the Government refused to become involved.
Harriet Harman Minister For Women and Equality
Minister For Women and Equality Refuses to Reply
Lisa has also written on more than one occasion to Miss Harriet Harman, Labour Minister for Women and Equality with the full details.
Again we gave Miss Harman the following scenario:
“A black person works for an airline and this airline starts to operate to South Africa. Unfortunately at this airline the managers are not only culturally illiterate but are also guilty of racial stereotyping. The result of this cultural illiteracy is that the company issued a memo stating that due to “apartheid” being enforced in South Africa, (despite it not being the case for many years but merely due to the managers pitiful knowledge), there is a requirement for all black crew to walk behind the white crew. The option is, if the black person is not prepared to walk behind the white crew, it’s a move to another section of the airline which will mean a cut in take home pay of approximately 20%. The black person refuses to fly to South Africa. The black person is dismissed and the Tribnal find that the company had only implemented a “proportional response to achieve a legitimate aim” and also that the black crew would consider the company were merely abiding by the “rules of a different culture.”
If you replace black with female and South Africa with Saudi Arabia, you have exactly Lisa’s case.
Miss Harman has failed to reply.
.
