Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Five Questions for BP's Tony Hayward
BP CEO Tony Hayward today faces what is sure to be a tough inquisition before the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Here are five questions Hayward should be forced to answer under oath:
1. Do you agree that the Deepwater Horizon disaster could have been averted if BP had exercised a greater degree of concern for safety?
In advance of the hearing, Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Henry Waxman and Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations Chair Bart Stupak sent Hayward a detailed letter elaborating five separate cost-cutting and corner-cutting decisions made by BP. Had BP made a different decision in any of these and other instances -- prioritizing safety over profit -- it is likely the Gulf catastrophe could have been averted. The Committee is sure to focus on these issues.
2. If you believe that the Gulf gusher is simply an unfortunate accident, rather than the result of BP's negligence and recklessness, do you therefore agree that deepwater drilling is too risky and dangerous?
3. Even if this disaster could have been prevented if BP had not been so reckless, doesn't the scale of the gusher and the fecklessness of BP's response mean that deepwater drilling should be abandoned?
It is evident that the gusher is having a devastating effect on the Gulf's ecology, but no one knows how serious it is or will be. This disaster has far outpaced scientific knowledge about the deep sea.
The disaster has also shown that, while oil giants do have the technology to drill a mile below sea level and miles into the earth's core, they do not have commensurate capacity to handle an oil geyser a mile below the ocean's surface. There is not even a serious capacity to control oil on the surface.
4. After the explosion, BP claimed 1,000 barrels a day were leaking into the ocean. The government now estimates 60,000 barrels are gushing a day. Some experts believe the amount may be more like 100,000. Some skeptics have understandably raised questions about whether BP's initial public statements on the size of the leak were made in good faith. Will you release all internal estimates and related documentation on the size of the oil gusher, and continue to release such information publicly as you generate it?
More generally, will you presumptively share publicly all materials you are now generating related to capping the well, capturing oil and cleaning up the ocean and shore?
Information about BP's operations in this regard can no longer be considered proprietary and nonpublic, if it ever should have been. BP is now performing essentially public functions in trying to address the gusher. BP remains in control of the remedial process only because the government does not have the technological capacity to take over.
5. You have agreed to pay $20 billion into an escrow fund to pay victims of the oil gusher. You have also agreed to suspend dividend payments for this year. But BP's liabilities may vastly exceed $20 billion. Do you pledge to make available the resources of the entire BP corporate structure to satisfy these liabilities?
Behind this question: There is good reason to be concerned about BP trying to isolate liability in one or more subsidiaries, and then either entering the subsidiary into bankruptcy, or manipulating the corporate form in an attempt to pay all of what it will owe.
For Tony Hayward and BP, the hard questions are just beginning.
Robert Weissman is president of Public Citizen, which is calling for a BP Boycott
27 Comments so far
Show AllGreat questions, doubt old tony haywire will answer these questions because they are not part of the commissions questions, most likely tame questions at that and which I rather think those have been given to the enemy... uh, er, bp, to peruse so the answers will be well rehearsed, like one of o's feel good pep talks.
Let's see, what would the commission ask:
'How ya doing tony? great day ain't it?'
'How was breakfast?'
'Is there anything we can do for you?'
'How many breaks you want to take today?'
'Want some beer wine whiskey?'
Sure is a 'poster child' of how corporations incorrigibly act as they are above the law, beyond the law and in fact they are the law, they bought it.
True, but the 'buyers' are just as culpable. I think americans rather bash a brit. than a good old boy.
The question I would like to see or hear Tony and the entire BP board, plus shareholders answer:
"Do you have anything to say in your defense before the sentence is carried out and justice is served?"
Here's my question.
"If BP intends to own up to its responsibilities regarding this disaster then why is BP trying to restrict media access to the affected beaches?"
Here's a very poignant video on YouTube (its provenance nothwithstanding):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jPjJPVdR4g&feature=popular
q
Tony:
No.
No.
No.
No.
No.
Any more questions?
Oh, and since my work here seems to be done, can I have my life back now?
Nobody should be ASKING anybody anything.
BP is a person, but has more rights than the biological variety.
If a person so much as purposefully dumped a teaspoon of motor oil into a watershed, they could be prosecuted for trespassing, vandalism, and, under new laws, "eco-terrorism."
The law does not, for ordinary persons, allow the excuse of "But I didn't mean to hurt anyone" when the activity is so inherently dangerous that it should be punished regardless of actual "intent."
For instance, shooting a rifle at a crowded playground is criminal whether you meant to kill children or not. Too dangerous too allow.
This is, essentially, a description of "criminal negligence."
BP is as guilty of this as the proverbial cat in the goldfish bowl.
They should all go down, assets seized, prison doors slamming shut behind them.
But they won't.
They'll walk. And we'll let them, just like we have all along.
Unless we get up and stop them, right the fuck now.
Elections are useless. That much is clear. The current population is stupid and slothful and completely unable to fend for itself, unlike the last great depression.
The wheel, she spins, and maybe none of us make it out of this turn. Given the way we let our home be despoiled, who can make the case we are even worth saving?
Cheers.
BP grossly underestimated-by a factor of 100 X - the actual amount of oil gushing from its ruptured well - perhaps because BP knew only a small % of the oil would come to the surface.
Why ?
Because BP used toxic dispersants to hide the oil underwater where it could migrate far away and cause far greater damage to marine life. It also knew that the dispersed oil would look coral-colored, not black, and therefore look more attractive on camera. It also knew that dispersants would ensure that very little of the dispersed oil would ever wash up on the beaches. So, dispersants would reduce BP's beach cleanup costs.
Meanwhile the oceans, where most of the worlds oxygen is generated via phytoplankton - are put at risk !
BP executive decisions have compounded their crime again and again in the interest of their own profits ! Thus far, our federal agencies have allowed them to use dispersants and call their own shots. That should stop immediately !
There needs to be a 180 degree shift in policy on this disaster - by containing the oil - not dispersing it.
There are a many ways to absorb and remove nondispersed oil that naturally floats to the surface of the water. Those methods should be employed ASAP !
Contain the oil first and then remove it !
I got an e-mail from one of those lefty-type groups asking for money, that said the terms of this $20 billion escrow account will allow it to be paid in increments, over several years. If that is true, why isn't that being mentioned by all of the people writing about this issue. It is an important factor in whether people will get compensation in a timely fashion.
The money will be available to injured parties immediately, courtesy of, you guessed, it, US taxpayers, who will then be reimbursed by BP over about 4 years according to the attached schedule:
http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7062966
While the deal's not perfect (BP isn't paying interest over this period, I noticed), it's no small accomplishment on Obama's part. Those who will get some compensation from this may be glad they don't live near Prince William Sound or in Bhopal, for instance.
If we had a Forrest Taft to kick CEOs down hard enough, Tony would have more to answer than that. Anyone remember the movie "On Deadly Ground" ? With Forrest Taft, Aegis would have been allowed to get away with faulty oil drilling equipment just like BP. It's 1994 film. Everyone should watch this film.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Deadly_Ground
Now how do we get Steven Segal to kick Tony's ass?
Questions for the House ECC committee
Who approved the drilling permit in the first place?
Who approved of tax breaks for Big Oil?
Who approved of dumping toxic solvents ("dispersants") into the Gulf?
Who approved of subsidies to Big Oil?
Who is conducting this hypocritical charade for public relations purposes?
Socialist, i totally agree!
I heard a bit on the radio tonite and i was actually disgusted by the hypocritical senators telling him he should resign his job position. What an obvious ploy to deflect from themselves. We didn't vote for Hayward, we voted for these criminals.
No, i personally didn't, but i am saying 'we' as america, in the generic sense.
Idea to stop spill______________Why would this not work??
Underneath the ocean, on the seafloor:
Drill another well, parallel to the gusher now, and take down in it a "man-hole cover" like metal object to the appropriate depth(1/4, 1/2, 1, or 2 miles down), then move it sideways (parallel to the ocean floor) until this metal object lodges and cuts off the flow of the oil upwards, underneath the seafloor..You have over 3 miles off earth to try and cut off this upwards flow.. 3 miles to stop the gush!! Why is this not being tried or discussed or, even not possible?? Could this work?? Let us know what you think..
Probably because all the components are now compromised including the strata above the oil so disturbing anything is just going to make the situation worse.
The 3-Stooges solutions is all BP has come up with so far. Get in line and take a number. (You can't be serious!?)
I've been reading common dreams for years. I've almost made many comments but i'm a plumber not a writer. Now as far as this oil well leak goes maybe they should consult a plumber. They cut the pipe over what is called a flange. Looks to be 8 to 10 bolts holding these 2 flanges together. Now you can't tell me they can't remove the bolts and insert a blank flange over the top of it stopping the flow of oil. Hell, they could install a valve over the top of this flange and control the flow. They don't want to stop the flow of oil any more than they wanted to save the people of louisiana after Katrina and no one.... NO ONE will make me beleive anything else.
I've had a journeymans plumbing liscense in texas for a long time.
Takes a plumber not a rocket scientist!!!
I decided to guess what the questions might be before reading the article.
I guessed three: Next of kin? Blindfold? Cigarette?
But I'm stumped about the rest-- I suppose "Last words?" and "Buried or burned?" are possibilities.
LOL for real. Good one.
Either BP is a reasonably well run company, in which case deep water drilling is something that should not be allowed.
Or BP is run irresponsibly, in which case its assets should be confiscated for the costs of the spill, its charter revoked, and any criminal negligence should be prosecuted.
I think (1)they are waiting for storm season, and (2)hope to pin the mess on the BOP.
As a Small Person I don't hold out much hope that justice will result from the 'So You Think You Can Dance' show at the Washington hearing rooms. But...It was the funniest spectacle in a long while. Congresspersons Apoplectica was staged almost faultlessly with many of the performers able to forget, at least temporarily, the quite different routine they had learned at the behest of their patrons. As the scorned lover, Tony the Haymaker riveted the audience with his intuitive projection of one chastised, angry, remorseful and ,yet, strangely amused. Remarkable particularly during the choral uprisings of the early second act. The final act, the one where the fat lady actually sings, is scheduled for presentation in the far, far distant future.
What a silly show.
BP has been acting at the behest of the USA.
Put the USA in the dock then I will bother to read the story.
I quite agree.
the whole thing is a CHARADE. THEATRE..to make it appear as if the USA is "getting mad AT" SOME corporation - and a "british corporation" "about bad drilling for oil" ....
but in reality - what's 20 BILLION dollars from THE CORPORATE WORLD whose biggest SPONSOR is the USA itself?
that's NOTHING compared to the TRILLIONS upon TRILLIONS of dollars of Corporatism in ALL their forms -- not JUST ONE "oil company" .
this is theatre to make the USA LOOK like it is after "justice" ...but a distraction from the REAL agenda- which is to dissuade people from questioning corporatism ITSELF....
through the THEATRE of congress getting "MAD".
it's the OIL version of Madoff in Wall Street.
the basics are the SAME - PRIVATE GIANT CORPORATOCRATIC rule. ...which is the USA itself.
More good news is that the open faucet is also spewing odorless methane into the gulf, just gets better and better.
Check this out:
My old brain cells got me to thinking about a submarine sinking in the pacific, russian, and the US Navy along with howard huges, I believe, clausdestinely were able to salvage some things from it 5 km down in the pacific.
http://rusnavy.com/news/othernavies/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=8716
""""""""""""""""
15.02.2010
CIA declassified secret salvage operation of Soviet submarine K-129.
Project 629A diesel-electric submarine K-129 of Soviet Pacific Fleet sank in 1968 northwest of Hawaii in unclear circumstances. On board the sub were three R-21 ballistic missiles armed with nuclear warheads.
American intelligence has not promulgated even the minutest particulars of so called Project Azorian (erroneously called Project Jennifer by press) – lifting of K-129 sub in 1974. Industrial tycoon Howard Hughes sponsored for the operation about $1.5 bln in today's money.
However, U.S. National Security Archive sent a request based on Freedom of Information Act and consequently CIA issued a report last Friday which illuminates those events but does not disclose all secrets of Project Azorian though.
In particular, the 50-page report published in 1985 in CIA in-house journal says that the US President Richard Nixon with intention to gain samples of Soviet nuclear weapon and cryptographic equipment made a decision to lift K-129 despite advices of top-ranking military chiefs and the fact that the sub was laying at the depth of 5,000 meters.
Even enormous cost of operation and anxiety of worsening relations with the USSR did not make Nixon to wash out his plan. In shortest term a special vessel Hughes Glomar Explorer was launched. To conceal the real purpose of the platform, it was built as a drilling vessel and named after manufacturer Howard Hughes.
Hughes Glomar Explorer was permanently in the spotlight of Soviet ships and helicopters. Being afraid that the Soviets would try to storm the vessel, the crew blocked heliport of Hughes Glomar Explorer with crates, says the CIA report.
With military honors the Americans buried at sea bodies of six Soviet submariners found inside the sunken K-129 and took away submarine wreckage. It is uncertain what exactly fragments were taken, what were the results of study and whether the project recovered its budget. According to Lockheed's engineer who took part in the operation, they could not lift either missiles or cryptographic hardware with codebooks which might be useful for intelligence; they only managed to pick up two torpedoes with nuclear warheads.
The report says Project Azorian provided the U.S. with "incorporeal benefits" – strengthening morale of intelligence officers and improvement in lifting techniques of submerged heavy wreckage.
"Lifting a 1,750-ton sub from 5-km depth had never been carried out before. Government or authority which is frightened of undertaking responsibility for foreseeable risks while pursuing an objective would not be true both to themselves and people they serve for", says the reporter.
From the viewpoint of historians and journalists, this statement is a bureaucratic excuse of another not-worth-powder-and-shot expensive venture, summarizes FOX News.
Source: RusNavy.com, photo: Hughes Glomar Explorer at California on Aug 29, 1975 (AP)
So who should be in charge of this? People who have done what is posted above or should we just let bp keep' jacking off the mule', dilly dallying around acting intelligent?
The technology and equipment is available though it would take some effort to bring it 'online', so to speak.
Matter of fact, several of these should, at the expense of oil industry, be available and at the ready.
Wrong person to ask those questions - he was the frontman and everyone knew what he was and did say. Why didn't Congress ask T. Hayward to produce the employees of BP who could actually answer the questions, and produce them in front of Congress tomorrow?
stubones49 June 19th, 2010 4:05 pm
This excellent Article by Jason Leupold {link below:} has been somehow "Undiscovered" by this site and any of the major news outlets...It seems that rubbish and tabloid journalism trumps true investigative reporting even here on our internet. In all fairness, I am not refferring here to articles posted on CommonDreams....
http://www.truth-out.org/documents-employees-reveal-bps-alaska-oilfield-plagued-by-major-safety-issues...
And while I am on the subject, just before the Gulf Gusher I watched A stellar documentary account of the Exxon Valdez Tragedy Titled: "BLACK WAVE: LEGACY OF THE EXXON VALDEZ"...
This "Recent and New" documentary totally disappeared from the television circuit shortly after the Gulf Disaster...I wonder how much money British Petroleum spent to suppress the showing of this Historical account which closely mirrors this Incredable saga playing out in the Gulf of Mexico...
http://www.ovguide.com/movies_tv/black_wave_the_legacy_of_the_exxon_valdez.htm
Stuart Sneed:
Totally "screwed by BP whistleblower" at Prudhoe Bay, Alaska....