全部版块 我的主页
论坛 提问 悬赏 求职 新闻 读书 功能一区 真实世界经济学(含财经时事)
4554 4
2009-07-31
这些材料是我从网站上搜到的,感觉不错。这个公司已经控制了我国大部分省分的水务,所以,做为一个有点责任的青年,有必要把这些东西转过来。记住:外国控制的水务必然是价格奇高的。
原文:http://www.acme-eau.org/Nouveau- ... n-Anglais_a214.html


       It is well known that the company will use bribery to obtain watercontracts. Indeed, corruption appears to part of their corporateculture. In mid-1996, five out of 13 directors on the main board ofVivendi/Generale des eaux were under investigation for corruption(mostly in connection with their jobs with other companies)However, itis often very difficult to obtain sufficient evidence and to find courtsystems willing to cooperate in prosecutions.
  
  Some of themost significant recent convictions for bribery involving officials ofVivendi and their many subsidiaries and affiliates are listed below.All of the convictions were obtained in the U.S. and Europe. Thisprobably reflects the greater difficulties that face judicial andregulatory institutions in the global south when trying to regulate thebehavior of transnational corporations in the context of veryimbalanced global power relationships. It is likely that Veolia employsthese corrupt practices even more commonly in the developing world,given the weaker rule of law and judicial institutions
  
  .Strasbourg, France, 1991: Andre Fougerousse resigned as mayor ofOstwald and municipal councilor of Strasbourgafter allegedly receivingpaybacks from Vivendi, Saur and Suez. Mr. Fougerousse claimed thepayments were normal and that other officials received similarcutbacks.
  
  St. Denis, Isle de La Reunion, France, 1996 :Two senior Vivendi/General des Eaux executives were convicted ofbribing the mayor of St. Denis in order to obtain a water contractafter admitting in court in October 1996 that Vivendi had fundedelected officials in order to obtain a water concession.
  In 1996Jean-Dominique Deschamps was fined US$27,000 in addition to an 18-monthprison sentence after courts found him guilty of bribing officials inas many as 70 cities throughout France. Mr Deschamps was then Vivendi’sdeputy director general and sought to secure water contracts for theVivendi conglomerate.
  
  Angouleme, France, 1996 : The formermayor of Angouleme, Jean-Michel Boucherone, admitted to acceptingUS$55,000 from Vivendi affiliate Generale des Eaux in exchange forawarding a contract to the company. He was sentenced to two years inprison (plus two suspended years) and fined US$172,000.
  
  NewOrleans, Louisiana, USA, 2001 : Professional Services Group (PSG),purchased by Vivendi subsidiary US Filter in the mid-1990s, signed thecontract to operate New Orleans sewer service in 1992. A PSG executiveand a member of the New Orleans Sewerage and Water Board were convictedin connection with bribery charges as PSG was seeking an extension tothat contract. Aqua Alliance, PSG’s parent company, pleaded guilty tothe charge of bribery and was levied a US$3 million fine.
  
  Milan, Italy, 2001 : Alain Maetz, a senior manager in Vivendi’s waterdivision was convicted for bribery and received a prison sentence ofone year and ten months with a conditional discharge. Judges said Mr.Maetz had paid a bribe to the president of the Milan city councilduring the bidding procedure for the contract for a wastewatertreatment plant in the south of Milan. Massimo De Carolis, the thenformer city council president received an almost three year sentencefor receiving the US$2 million bribe. The contract was worth US$100million.
  
  Bridgeport, Connecticut, USA, 2002 : Between 1996and 1999, PSG gave US$700,000 to two close associates of Joseph P.Ganim, the mayor of Bridgeport, in order to obtain a contract tooperate the city’s wastewater treatment plant. Ganim was subsequentlyconvicted in U.S.
  District Court on 16 counts, including extortionand bribery in connection with taking kickbacks for steering the citycontract to PSG. The associates and eight other defendants also pleadedguilty to charges in connection with the case.
  Unethical andsocially irresponsible behavior by multinational corporations is amajor problem in contemporary society. The problem is much deeper thanthe legal definitions of what is considered bribery or criminalbehavior by a corporation. The legal definitions change over time andfrom country to country.
  
  For example, in the U.S., politicalcontributions by corporations are used as financial inducements toencourage actions by politicians in the interests of thesecorporations. Within guidelines, this behavior is called lobbying(really not so different from bribery) and is considered legal. Asidefrom the actual content of the law, the economic power and influence oflarge transnational corporations within the politics of a country candistort outcomes.
  
  For example, in both Lesotho and Pakistanindividuals have been convicted of receiving bribes from watercompanies, but the companies themselves have not been convicted ofpaying those bribes. In most countries, the legal, political and socialstructures tend to privilege actions of large transnationalcorporations over other social actors such as unorganized consumers andespecially poor and low-income citizens.
  
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

全部回复
2009-7-31 18:19:54
 VEOLIA IN ASIA
  AND THE PACIFIC
  
  
  In Asia Veolia’s Chairman and CEO Henri Proglio hopes to double profits every two years mainly through the demand in China. In 2002 Vivendi’s Asia operations contributed a mere 2% of total revenue but are seen by industry analysts to have great potential for corporate expansion.
  
  China
  
  According to industry analysts, China holds a large potential for the expansionist dreams of the major water corporations. With China’s strong government control over civil society, large corporations such as Veolia have met with little resistance to their schemes. Veolia has been involved in a number of deals in the vast country including a wastewater contract in Beijing, a US$19.3 million water supply contract in Changle (Fuijan Province) and it has acquired water assets worth US$54.4 million in Huhhot (Inner Mongolia province). A new law in 2002 outlawed fixed returns, but Veolia is still counting on a 15% rate of return. When the new law took effect, Veolia’s subsidiary, Berlinwasser, rescinded its fixed return contract in Xian. While the large water corporations have received a number of contracts they are seeing increased competition from Asian players. Although the Chinese government has introduced market liberalization, not all authorities are welcoming foreign corporations with open arms. Large investments are needed in the country, but as elsewhere, Veolia is bringing little real investment and expecting corporate welfare from the state, the development banks and the consumers.
  
  In Chengdu, the relationship with Veolia turned sour. The city has a water surplus, but has been forced to buy from a more expensive source, the Veolia/Marubeni project, through a “take or pay” contract, which has impeded the city’s attempts to produce cost savings. The European Investment Bank provided US$26.5 million toward the project and the Asian Development Bank provided US$48 million.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2009-7-31 18:20:11
  CONCLUSION
  CONCLUSION
  
  
  Despite Veolia’s global track record of corruption, broken promises, environmental degradation, price-gouging, obfuscation, misdirection and secrecy, the world’s largest water company continues to enjoy substantial support within powerful pockets of financial and political circles In some instances, the private water industry has garnered that support the old-fashioned way—by bribing officials..
  
  But support for Veolia, and for the private water industry generally, also stems from ideology, specifically the fashionable variety wherein government is viewed as an incompetent, inefficient, even outdated construct bloated by idle bureaucrats, while market forces and the “ownership society” are celebrated as humanity’s panacea.
  
  What the water privateers, their champions and apologists are loathe to admit is that while companies like Veolia have profited from a cultural wave in celebration of the free market, market forces have nothing whatsoever to do with water delivery. Water service is a natural monopoly. Once Veolia lands its preferred contract, which is to say one that lasts so long it will outlive the contract negotiators, dissatisfied communities do not have the option of simply waking up one morning and turning to a competitor. The promise of private sector superiority in the water sector is a hoax.
  
  The risks, however, are not. While publicly operated water systems are managed to deliver clean, safe and affordable water to you and your family, privately operated systems are managed to get as much money as possible from you and your family.
  
  While the demand for water is on the rise, the supply is shrinking, due to water-intensive agriculture, population growth, industrial pollution, breakneck development and other ecological threats that are depleting freshwater supplies. More than one billion people lack access to clean drinking water and 2.5 billion do not have sanitation services.
  
  Veolia is not the solution. But as the company has demonstrated time and again, in every corner of the globe, Veolia is part of the problem.
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2009-7-31 22:27:45
Veolia 在公关上就是舍得花钱 然后一步步占有市场
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

2010-7-15 16:09:47
说实话,在中国不这样能成事么
二维码

扫码加我 拉你入群

请注明:姓名-公司-职位

以便审核进群资格,未注明则拒绝

相关推荐
栏目导航
热门文章
推荐文章

说点什么

分享

扫码加好友,拉您进群
各岗位、行业、专业交流群