The 2006 Roger Award for the Worst Transnational Corporation (TNC) in Aotearoa/New Zealand has been won by Progressive Enterprises, in its first ever appearance in the keenly contested annual corporate race to the bottom. Telecom, a previous winner, and a finalist every year since the Award began, in 1997, was a very, very close runner up (the judges really agonised over their decision).

The seven finalists were: Progressive Enterprises, Telecom, Toll, ANZ, British American Tobacco, Contact Energy and ABB. The criteria for judging are by assessing the transnational (a corporation which is 25% or more foreign-owned) that has the most negative impact in each or all of the following categories: Economic Dominance - monopoly, profiteering, tax dodging, cultural imperialism ; People - unemployment, impact on tangata whenua, impact on women, impact on children, abuse of workers/conditions, health and safety of workers and the public, cultural imperialism ; Environment - environmental damage, abuse of animals ; Political interference - cultural imperialism, running an ideological crusade . The judges were Laila Harre, from Auckland, National Secretary of the National Distribution Union (NDU) and former Cabinet Minister; Mary-Ellen O’Connor, from Nelson, a senior educationalist and political activist; Geoff Bertram, from Wellington, a Victoria University economist; Brian Turner, from Christchurch, President-Elect of the Methodist Church and a social justice activist; Paul Corliss, from Christchurch, a life member of the Rail and Maritime Transport Union and Cee Payne-Harker, from Dunedin, Industrial Services Manager for the NZ Nurses’ Organisation and health issues activist. For the full details of the Roger Award, go to www.cafca.org.nz and follow the Links. It is organised by CAFCA and GATT Watchdog, with the support of Christian World Service (all of which are Christchurch-based organisations).The previous winners are; BNZ/Westpac (joint), Telecom, Tranz Rail (three times), Juken Nissho, Carter Holt Harvey. Monsanto and TransAlta.

Because of her obvious conflict of interest, the Chief Judge, Laila Harre, played no role whatsoever in the judges’ final vote to pick Progressive as the winner. She accepted that position long before the lockout by Progressive. It is no surprise that Progressive won the Roger because of that September 06 national lockout of its supermarket distribution centre workers, an all-out attack on its own workers, a naked attempt to smash the unions representing them and to starve those lowpaid workers into submission. The Australian TNC failed completely and had to back down after one of the biggest union fightbacks in recent NZ history. To quote the Judges’ Report: “Typical of the transnational culture, there was a willingness to act off-shore in a way that would not be acceptable under the nose of home-country investors and stakeholders… an award of this nature to Progressive is not a stamp of approval for its locally owned rival Foodstuffs. Indeed competitive pressure from Foodstuffs’s lightly unionised and generally lower paid workforce has contributed to Progressive’s tactics…” (for a very detailed account of the 2006 Progressive lockout dispute, see Watchdog 113, December 2006; “Retrogressive Progressive: TNC Locks Out Distribution Workers; Families Without Pay For 28 Days”, by Joe Hendren, which can be read online at http://www.converge.org.nz/watchdog/13/02.htm. Ed.). Telecom was the (very close) runner up because “in 2006… it continued to disappoint customers, argue every point with regulators, and so totally mismanaged the roll out of ‘faster cheaper broadband’ while frustrating its competitors that it probably cost NZ a fortune in lost opportunities…”.

Because of space restrictions, we have not been able to incorporate the full Judges’ Report into this issue of Watchdog. But you can access it online at the CAFCA Website (follow the Roger Award Links). Ed.

Wellington Did Roger Event Proud

The event to announce the winners was held in Wellington on March 21. It was only the second time the capital has hosted it, the previous occasion being in 2001. Different organisers this time, but the same venue (a central city church hall, which, very obligingly, allowed the organisers to sell alcohol on the premises). An ad hoc group was set up to organise it and they did an excellent job – particular thanks are due to Sam Huggard, who also organised the event the only time it has been held in Dunedin (2004). This was the first time that there has been an admission charge (plus drinks had to be paid for), but that didn’t deter the 100 or so people who attended. They certainly got value for the few dollars it cost them, including a band, a lavish spread which put the usual “nibbles” to shame and a raffle (the prizes included a copy of “The Hollow Men” personally signed by Nicky Hager, who was present, and a DVD of “The Last Resort” documentary. Jeremy Agar’s review of the book appears in this issue, and his review of the film appeared in Watchdog 113, December 2006, which can be read online at http://www.converge.org.nz/watchdog/13/11.htm).

The previous Roger event in Wellington had been a great night of music, comedy, politics and fun. This one lived up to that high reputation, and more. As in 2001, wellknown trade unionist Michael Gilchrist was the MC and he did a most entertaining job. I was the opening speaker, representing the Roger Award’s Christchurch organisers, and I couldn’t resist by closing my speech (which you can read at www.cafca.org.nz, follow the Roger Award Links) by saying that it was a unique way to celebrate my (56 th) birthday. This led Michael Gilchrist to immediately incite the crowd to sing “Happy Birthday”. At least I’d already got the speech out of the way first. I might add that the fact that it was my birthday played no part in the event planning, and it had originally been scheduled for a week later. Indeed, I had not told anyone in Wellington about that coincidence. Further entertainment was provided by Abi King-Jones and Errol Wright, the makers of the extremely successful “The Last Resort”. They both spoke and then screened a clip from it. That film actually contains coverage of a previous Roger event (Christchurch, 2005) but they correctly considered it repetitive to screen that, so instead they focused on the 2005 Overseas Investment Bill (see any Watchdog from 2003-05 inclusive for details on that), including the Parliamentary debate accompanying its passage into law. I still find it hard to watch footage of the late Rod Donald, alive and in fine form, just months before his 2005 sudden death at a tragically young age.

The guest speaker was Bryan Gould, a Kiwi who was a former long serving MP in the British Labour Party (he was a contender for the leadership one leader before Tony Blair) and former Vice Chancellor at Waikato University. Now retired to the Bay of Plenty he has made quite a stir this year with his book “The Democracy Sham: How Globalisation Devalues Your Vote” (Jeremy Agar’s review is elsewhere in this issue). He presented a big picture analysis of the role of TNCs. To quote from the press release that he put out to accompany his speech to the Roger Award event:

“If governments were able to intervene to create different conditions in different countries, there would no longer be a single global market. Instead, the major transnational companies dictate to elected governments the policies they must pursue.  If they do not get their way, international investors simply threaten to take their investment elsewhere. If the huge transnational companies are able to call the shots, as they do, there is no room for democracy. The whole point of democracy is that it guarantees the diffusion of power throughout society, to offset what would otherwise be the overwhelming economic power of the hundred or so major conglomerates that dominate the world economy.

“If elected governments can no longer do this, the democracy we think we enjoy is a sham. There is no point in electing governments to protect our interests if the reality is that they must do the bidding of the big players in the global economy. Those who proclaim that the market is always right and must never be gainsaid should acknowledge that that position is incompatible with democracy.  You can proclaim the infallibility of the market or you can opt for a functioning democracy. You cannot have both” (his full press release is on the CAFCA Website, follow the Roger Award links).

Three of the six judges were present (the South Islanders put in their apologies). Wellington’s Geoff Bertram and Mary Ellen O’Connor (who divides her time between Wellington and Nelson) did a double act in running through the finalists, accompanied by a PowerPoint. The Chief Judge, Laila Harre (who had had to miss the previous year’s event in her hometown of Auckland) wasn’t going to be kept away this year and she did an excellent job of announcing the winner. Although she had played no role in picking Progressive, because of her obvious conflict of interest, she took great relish in bestowing the Roger Award on her vanquished adversary from the Great Lockout of 2006. Contrary to popular belief, the winners do not get to keep or borrow the surrealistically ugly Roger Award trophy, which was there on the night in all its repellent glory. Nope, all they get is a laminated certificate to hang on the boardroom wall (none has ever been returned to us). This year the two certificates were presented to George Bush (or rather a leading Wellington unionist in a Bush mask), as the personification of imperialism. “George” put on a good act then he got out while he could.

The Workers United Will Never Be Defeated

This year’s event included a whole extra dimension; for the first some of the victims of the winner were there on the night, namely some honest to God low paid and formerly locked out Progressive distribution centre workers, who had come down from Palmerston North under the leadership of veteran NDU leader, Dion Martin. They were there as a bloc in their black “Stood Up: Fought Back” T shirts and brandishing placards saying things such as “Locked Out But Won’t Shut Up”. They had no prior knowledge of the winner and you could feel their tension rise as Laila built up to her announcement. Once she had said that Telecom was the runner up and Progressive the winner, they stood up and erupted into a joyous explosion of clenched fist salutes and union chants that the whole crowd joined. It was quite something, I tell you. Then they came up the front, complete with union banners and placards, and several of them spoke, in the shy and halting fashion of grassroots workers. One woman said something that really registered with the crowd, namely that Progressive Enterprises had had her worried duringt the lockout, because she wasn’t sure how she was going to feed her babies. This brought it all back to earth, from all the lofty talk of economics and politics right back down to the stark reality that this year’s winning TNC had tried to starve its workers into submission – and if this had been the Third World, would probably have had them clubbed and/or shot, as well. I had joined Christchurch’s Progressive workers on a march and picket during the 2006 lockout and had had the strong impression of being among people who didn’t get paid much, didn’t have much full stop, and were just taking the first halting steps to fighting back. Once aroused they were not about to go back to being treated like shit again, and they have become one of the most militant groups of workers in the country. After the event was over (which Michael Gilchrist ended by inviting us all to go to the pub over the road) they hung around, getting their photos taken with the Roger trophy and there was no way they were going to give me back the laminated certificate intended for Progressive’s Chief Executive Officer. They explained that they wanted it to brandish at their boss in Palmerston North and to hang on their smoko room wall (I sent Progressive another one).

The event was a highly memorable occasion and a great success. Thanks are due to the organisers and to all those who took part and helped on the night; to those who researched and wrote the Judges’ Report and Financial Analysis; and especially to the judges, who give up part of their summer holiday to work, for no material reward, let alone pay, through bulging envelopes of material (which can include hundreds of clippings, articles, whole conference papers, booklets, even audiotapes and DVDs) in order to be able to decide who is the worst TNC in the country. It’s like a sightseeing trip through a sewer in a glass bottomed boat. Their absolute dedication to duty can be measured from the fact that I received a phone call from the worried wife of one of them saying that he’d just come home from nearly a fortnight in hospital with a serious health problem and was concerned that he wouldn’t be able to meet his judging commitments. We talked, he declined my invitation that he resign on health grounds, he asked for a few days to gather his strength and his wits (he was on major painkillers) and he did his bit – by laptop, literally from his sickbed. Now that’s bloody dedication.

Excellent Media Coverage

The only other time that the Roger Award event had been held in Wellington, it had attracted absolutely zero media coverage. What a pleasant contrast this time. Radio New Zealand really gave it the saturation treatment – I alone was interviewed for its News, Business, Morning Report and Afternoons With Jim Mora programmes. Morning Report sent a reporter to cover the event and he taped Laila Harre announcing the winner (complete with background chanting and shouting from the Progressive workers), plus interviews with Laila and Bryan Gould, as well as myself. In a first, TVNZ covered it in some detail, albeit on the crack of dawn Business programme (so I had get up in the dark the next morning and make my way to the central Wellington studio, for the live interview. At least TVNZ paid for the taxis). Private radio stations covered it, and it was also prominent in online news outlets – Scoop sent its own photographer to cover the event and that report and photos were prominently displayed. The TVNZ Business interview and Radio NZ coverage were both on their respective Websites, which meant that a lot more people could hear and see them (funnily enough, not everybody gets up at 6 a.m. to watch the business news on TV. Apparently it’s on at that time so that the hard charging executives can watch it while they’re at the gym).

And, in contrast to the last Roger which was ignored by the papers, it did get some print coverage this year. The Dominion Post ran a story on it and the NZ Press Association circulated an article, which heavily relied on my press release announcing the winner. That was run almost verbatim in the Bay of Plenty Times and quite possibly in other provincial papers. One quibble that we do have with the media coverage is that they invariably stick it into their Business section (or specialist radio or TV programmes about business). As far as we’re concerned, the Roger Award is News with a capital N, not merely of interest to those who read, watch or listen to the business news. But that is the only quibble, and we are very happy that it regularly attracts such excellent mainstream media coverage. A German member of CAFCA (one who actually lives in Germany) contacted us to say how impressed he was by our radio, TV and Internet news coverage, which was far in advance of that accorded any equivalent event or group in his country. We have also discovered that the Roger Award now has its own entry in Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia (we don’t know who put it up there, it wasn’t us).

And as with every year, it drew a reaction from some of those it targeted. One of the finalists (not even one of the winners) contacted us, not once but twice, to vent displeasure with the Roger Award in general – which it described as “at best a one day wonder” – and with its appearance as a finalist. That TNC was also outraged on a previous occasion when it was a finalist. It’s nice to be noticed. Progressive Enterprises, which was the actual winner, declined to comment to the media. It had presumably learnt its lesson from the public relations fiasco that was its September 06 lockout of its lowpaid workers. Telecom has never commented on the Roger, despite having been a finalist every single year – presumably it doesn’t care, and correctly considers that the public thinks that it is such a bastard anyway that there is nothing it can say to rectify that. I found out myself just how much public support there is for the Roger Award when I went onto a radio panel show the day after the winner was announced. I was expecting some flak, along the usual lines, but my fellow panellists, both high profile figures, were entirely on side. One was delighted that Progressive had won, because she had been outraged by its lockout; the other expressed annoyance that Telecom hadn’t won, because he thought that it richly deserved to.

Still Plenty Of Rogering To Be Done

The Roger Award is over for another year but there is no likelihood of it being put out to pasture for the foreseeable future. There is no sign of any let up in the recolonisation of this country by TNCs. Just consider the fact that Australia is the single biggest source of that takeover – according to Statistics NZ, as of March 2006, Australian investment was at $68 billion, 29% of the total foreign investment (the US was second, on 17%). Of the seven finalists in the 2006 Roger Award, four are either fully or partly Australian-owned. The latest craze is for corporate takeovers by private equity funds, which is only accelerating the process.

TNCs make massive profits out of New Zealand. These can truly be called New Zealand's biggest invisible export. In the decade 1997-2006, TNCs made $50.3 billion profits.Only 32% was reinvested, and in some years more was sent overseas than was earned or the reinvestment was significantly offset by capital being taken out of the country. Foreign investors are not great for employment - they only employ 19% of the workforce, despite owning a huge proportion of the economy. Foreign ownership does not guarantee more jobs. In fact, it quite often adds to unemployment. TNCs have made tens of thousands jobless and that is an ongoing process.

Ask the 99 workers at Otautau’s Bright Wood NZ mill if they think foreign investment is a good thing. In January 2007, the US TNC pulled the plug because the Southland mill is no longer convenient for it, and tossed fully one seventh of the tiny town’s total population out of work – with four weeks’ notice and no redundancy payments. We can only agree with the Engineers Union which said: “The company has no community stakeholding or responsibilities, they’ve basically plundered and bailed” ( Press, 31/1/07). Since then the TNC has further mucked its workers around by saying half of them can continue to have jobs there. Workplace morale must be at rock bottom.

In the early days of his honeymoon wih the media and public, National’s new Leader, John Key, suddenly discovered “the underclass”. He might care to investigate the cause and effect role of foreign ownership with unemployment and poverty. He might like to revisit the policies of his party and Labour which have put “making New Zealand attractive to foreign investment” as their highest priority, leading to a race to the bottom, a low wage, poor conditions economy, with countless hundreds of thousands trapped in the ranks of the working poor. We look forward to both National and Labour admitting their grievous errors in actively collaborating with this TNC recolonisation. Both Key and Cullen, self-proclaimed financial wizards, might like to explain the role that foreign control plays in NZ’s truly dreadful current account deficit, currently at $14.4 billion, more than 9% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) – 5% is seen as the trigger pojnt for alarm. The media now routinely report, albeit buried in the business pages, that the main cause of this is not that sinful Mum and Dad Kiwis are not saving enough but actually because the foreign owners of NZ firms are exporting such huge sums out of the country as profits, rather than reinvesting. Finsec, the bank workers’ union, has singled out the four main Australian-owned banks as being among the main culprits (BNZ and Westpac jointly won the 2005 Roger Award, ANZ was a finalist in 2006).

The Overseas Investment Office (OIO) approved foreign takeovers totalling $20 billion in 2006 (its first full year of operation), up from $14 billion in 05. Remember that the 2005 Overseas Investment Act does not require OIO approval for any takeovers of less than $100 million (it used to be $10m as recently as 1999), so that $20 billion figure is a conservative estimate only of how much of NZ was sold overseas in 2006. And don’t expect to learn anything much officially from the OIO on the subject. Under the previous Overseas Investment Commission regime, it was obliged to issue annual statistics and half yearly reports to Parliament. Not having seen any of these during the OIO’s first year in operation, CAFCA wrote and asked for them. We, eventually, got a reply saying: “There is no longer any obligation for the Office to file reports with Parliament” and that our request was refused on the grounds that the “documents requested do not exist” (13/2/07, OIO e-mail to CAFCA). We don’t remember that particular aspect of the 2005 Overseas Investment Act being shouted from the rooftops, it was certainly news to us. So, all things considered, we expect to be doing plenty of Rogering for some time yet. It’s a dirty job but someone’s got to do it, and CAFCA’s rather fond of it, actually. So, let’s get stuck in!