That's Shell!
Sir: Anne McElvoy (`The moral maze', 13 January) merrily takes to task both business and its critics, and wins two cheers from this side. Of course, your cartoons of Old Nick in eager endorsement of the Shell logo test our sense of humour somewhat, but at least he looked a cheerful soul.
In fact, Miss McElvoy raises some crucial issues. She writes: 'The same people calling for boycotts of Shell would be horrified if big business were allowed direct interven- tion in British politics. Interference is a wonderful thing, as long as it is for the sake of a cause we happen to agree with.' That is exactly the point. Who decides? Campaign groups? If so, which ones? Multinationals have no business assuming this self-appointed mandate. That is an argument we have consistently and strongly stated at Shell. It is considerably clearer and more specific than the 'lame' positions she ascribes to us, that, simply, 'the compa- ny does not get involved in politics'. In pub- lic statements we have said: 'Politics is the business of governments and politicians. The world where companies use their eco- nomic influence to prop up or bring down governments would be a frightening and bleak one indeed.'
But, in any case, quis custodiet ipsos cus- todes? If the new guardians of public ethics and probity are to be self-appointed activists, perhaps we should examine their mandate, too. To whom are they account- able? Are you sure that the moral frame- work they espouse is necessarily one that you endorse?
Of course major businesses address polit- ical issues every day of their lives. But parti- san political intervention, where business attempts to remove this administration or install that one, must be repugnant to any democratic process.
At Shell, we don't claim to be saints. From time to time, we'll get things wrong. Any business will. But the real test of an ethical company is how it puts things right. We've taken a great deal of heat on our record in Nigeria. And some of the criti- cisms have been justified. But today we are spending $100 million a year on environ- ment-related projects there; another $20 million annually on community pro- grammes. We are seeking to make things better, on the spot, with goodwill and com- mitment, in dialogue and co-operation. And I tend to think that's of more value in bringing real benefits than if our approach were one of protest and confrontation. Mark Moody-Stuart
Shell Centre, London SE1
Previous page
