Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences • Hacker News Board

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#31

Post by olddustytrail » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:55 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #12

mattzito wrote: post #4

This feels like a nothingburger: - Infosys already had a $100m/year contract with BP - the new contract is 1.5b over 10 years, so a significant increase, but as part of the contract infosys becomes the primary IT partner for BP, therefore not an unimaginable increase - Infosys's customers include Shell, Aramco, Chevron, and others. They're one of the top IT services company for the energy industry, so this isn't an o…

The article’s opening paragraph makes it sound like Sunak’s father in law was acting on non-public information to get a piece of the new oil and gas leases that were being offered: > A firm founded by Rishi Sunak’s father-in-law signed a billion-dollar deal with BP two months before the prime minister opened hundreds of new licences for oil and gas extraction in the North Sea. That angle doesn’t make sense if you rea…

Would they have signed the same deal if North Sea operations were being shut down?

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#32

Post by tharax » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:55 PM UTC

krona wrote: post #19

bparsons wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is still a conflict of interest. In most non-corrupt countries, the politician would have to disclose and recuse themselves of any decision impacting the interested party.

> It is still a conflict of interest. His wife isn't in government, and AFAIK Sunak owns no part of Infosys.

In fact, according to her tax disclosures she doesn’t even expect to stay in the UK…

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#33

Post by Arrath » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:55 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #24

samwillis wrote: post #6

As much as I don't trust the current and recent crop of senior UK government politicians, this is a editorialised title. The company, Infosys is his father in laws (his wife does have shares), and as far as I can see there is no link between this IT contract and North Sea oil rights. But maybe I'm wrong and it a simple bribe, but I doubt it. Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too mu…

> Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too much opportunity of corruption or the appearance of it. Quite the contrary, the richer a person is, the harder they are to corrupt (both in theory - need more money to sway them - as in practice - much cheaper to corrupt someone else), and the less they care about being corrupted (they can afford to follow their principles, e.g. Musk buying T…

> the richer a person is, the harder they are to corrupt ... and the less they care about being corrupted

Perhaps by outside forces, but what about corrupt practices that furthers their own private interests in exclusion of the e.g. country they're leading?

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#34

Post by jareklupinski » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:55 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #24

samwillis wrote: post #6

As much as I don't trust the current and recent crop of senior UK government politicians, this is a editorialised title. The company, Infosys is his father in laws (his wife does have shares), and as far as I can see there is no link between this IT contract and North Sea oil rights. But maybe I'm wrong and it a simple bribe, but I doubt it. Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too mu…

> Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too much opportunity of corruption or the appearance of it. Quite the contrary, the richer a person is, the harder they are to corrupt (both in theory - need more money to sway them - as in practice - much cheaper to corrupt someone else), and the less they care about being corrupted (they can afford to follow their principles, e.g. Musk buying T…

> the richer a person is, the harder they are to corrupt

to a certain point

obviously if the only thing a person cares about is "more money" (which, in a billionaire's case, is self-evident), you can assume they'll do _anything_ for _even a little bit_ of money

see: extremely wealthy people never tipping

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#35

Post by _jal » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:56 PM UTC

mattzito wrote: post #4

This feels like a nothingburger: - Infosys already had a $100m/year contract with BP - the new contract is 1.5b over 10 years, so a significant increase, but as part of the contract infosys becomes the primary IT partner for BP, therefore not an unimaginable increase - Infosys's customers include Shell, Aramco, Chevron, and others. They're one of the top IT services company for the energy industry, so this isn't an o…

If people in positions of power fail to avoid the appearance of impropriety, they erode faith in the system. That leads to very real corruption, even if the original acts were ethical.

And from a practical standpoint, any honest politician should want to avoid it, if nothing else to avoid arguing about bullshit from a defensive stance. So there is very much an argument that smoke needs careful fire investigation.

The next step down the this road, of course, is arguing that people are above reproach precisely because of their position. "When the President does it, it's not illegal", etc. Corrupting a government is a process, if you look at other corrupt countries, comparisons are an easy way to sort of spot, "you are here."

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#36

Post by cowpig » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:56 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #25

slantedview wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is still problematic though because revenue from these new licenses will effectively flow to the PM through this _new_, significantly larger, contract. This is why divestment is important for politicians.

How is he going to divest? Divorce his wife?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_trust

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#37

Post by slantedview » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:56 PM UTC

r_thambapillai wrote: post #10

samwillis wrote: post #6

As much as I don't trust the current and recent crop of senior UK government politicians, this is a editorialised title. The company, Infosys is his father in laws (his wife does have shares), and as far as I can see there is no link between this IT contract and North Sea oil rights. But maybe I'm wrong and it a simple bribe, but I doubt it. Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too mu…

Its super unlikely to be a direct bribe, I think that much is fair to say. But I think viewed differently, the article is saying: Sunak's family has a tremendous interest in BP and Shell needing consulting services. Might this have an indirect effect on Sunak's willingness to legislate in ways that are highly likely to increase the amount of consulting services BP and Shell need? Its not bribery, by any means, but I…

Bribery doesn't need to be direct for it to be bribery. And in this case no bribes are even needed since Sunak can benefit from his own decision.

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#38

Post by hobs » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:56 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #24

samwillis wrote: post #6

As much as I don't trust the current and recent crop of senior UK government politicians, this is a editorialised title. The company, Infosys is his father in laws (his wife does have shares), and as far as I can see there is no link between this IT contract and North Sea oil rights. But maybe I'm wrong and it a simple bribe, but I doubt it. Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too mu…

> Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too much opportunity of corruption or the appearance of it. Quite the contrary, the richer a person is, the harder they are to corrupt (both in theory - need more money to sway them - as in practice - much cheaper to corrupt someone else), and the less they care about being corrupted (they can afford to follow their principles, e.g. Musk buying T…

Every action Musk has taken post twitter has been to economically support it, he tried his damndest to get out of buying it after making a ridiculous offer, and is selling Tesla stock to do it.

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#39

Post by dragonwriter » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:56 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #29

mrd3v0 wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Two-party "democracy" gave the UK a decade of ill-represented government. The switch from FPTP to a proportional ranked voting system needs to happen for its democracy to be sustain itself in the future.

The issue with the UK is that the opposition is even worse. Proportional voting doesn’t change that.

> The issue with the UK is that the opposition is even worse.

> Proportional voting doesn’t change that.

Yes, it does. That is, proportional electoral systems increase the diversity of viable and represented parties, so if “the opposition” is bad in an FPTP system with the narrow set of parties it supports (can be as small as two, but regional dynamics will sometimes make it more nationally), proportional representation very much is a solution.

Re: Sunak’s family firm signed deal with BP before opening new North Sea licences

#40

Post by mrguyorama » Tue, Aug 01, 2023, 6:57 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #24

samwillis wrote: post #6

As much as I don't trust the current and recent crop of senior UK government politicians, this is a editorialised title. The company, Infosys is his father in laws (his wife does have shares), and as far as I can see there is no link between this IT contract and North Sea oil rights. But maybe I'm wrong and it a simple bribe, but I doubt it. Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too mu…

> Fundamentally though, a billionaire should not be a political leader, too much opportunity of corruption or the appearance of it. Quite the contrary, the richer a person is, the harder they are to corrupt (both in theory - need more money to sway them - as in practice - much cheaper to corrupt someone else), and the less they care about being corrupted (they can afford to follow their principles, e.g. Musk buying T…

You are ignoring that there is a second parameter: Willingness to be corrupted. I believe that there is extreme overlap between high personal wealth and a willingness to be corrupted, which would make richer people worse politicians.

Everyone says "everyone has a price" but we have examples of normal people being given the opportunity to have way more power and giving it up for the greater good (for example, smedly butler who was supposed to become some sort of supreme leader in a fascist plot, but turned the conspirators in instead, and basically got no reward for doing so, and the conspirators largely went unpunished)