Corporate Sustainability and Social License - “Words And Figures Differ”

Debates concerning the roles and purposes of corporations within society are longstanding. Some scholars and practitioners view shareholder returns as the primary or sole driver of company board and executive decisions. Others adopt a broader perspective because companies necessarily rely on, interact with, and impact other stakeholders such as employees, customers, and the broader community.

Corporate models that prioritise and encompass these broader stakeholder harms and impacts are referred to as, and reflected within, “corporate social responsibility” or “corporate sustainability” frameworks. When operating well, these frameworks require companies to publicly acknowledge and mitigate the societal harms caused by their activities. These models recognise that corporations are a legal creation, exist because of policy concessions, and require long term community support to continue to operate successfully.

Asbestos is a classic case study of the ability of companies to benefit from short-term profits, while socialising most of the longer-term harms.

This show, using information from Asbestos Awareness Australia, considers the continuing harms and externalities generated by the prior activities of James Hardie and CSR against the stated corporate sustainability and social license objectives and achievements of these publicly listed companies. We show that "words and figures differ".

We also can received bitcoins at: 13zBL1oRib9VJu8Uc9zUGNhxKDBBgUpDN1

Please share this post to help to spread the word about the state of things....

[animalfarm]

The article Martin is reading appears to believe the ramblings of a judge as to how those in government see corporate intent. Many appear to have forgotten that corporations now have the status of “people” and those individuals believing this rhetoric are going to be sadly disappointed with the eventual outcome. It was the Austrian-Libertarian Milton Friedman who said, “A company has no social responsibility to the public or society; its only responsibility is to its shareholders”. Friedman went on to say, “In a free-enterprise, private-property system, a corporate executive is an employee of the owners of the business. He has direct responsibility to his employers. That responsibility is to conduct the business in accordance with their 'desires'. The key point is that, in his capacity as a corporate executive, the manager is the agent of the individuals who own the corporation and his primary responsibility is to them. The only responsibility a corporation has is to maximize profit”. These ideas were introduced around the time of Nixon and accelerated through Reagan; and since then, the Friedman Doctrine that has been the only game in town. Since then the world of Neoliberalism (Austrian economics), deregulation, and corporate ownership & control of the state have played a major role in the fracturing of democracy and society.

If you wish to understand corporate and corporate-owned-state intent when it comes to corporate profits, may I redirect your attention to the Investor State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) agreement embedded in the last round of “Free Trade” agreements (i.e. Trans-Pacific Partnership). If you look closely you will find the TPP has granted new rights to thousands of multinational corporations to bypass domestic courts and directly prosecute the Australian government before a panel of designated global corporate lawyers. Under this system, these lawyers with global powers independent of any state, can award the corporations unlimited sums to be paid by Australia’s taxpayers; including for the loss of expected future profits. The corporations need only convince these lawyers that an Australian law or safety regulation that is relied on for a clean environment, essential services, and healthy communities, violates their “Free Trade” agreement rights. These decisions are not subject to outside appeal and the amount they can order taxpayers to give corporations has no limit. The suppression of enforcement of the ISDS agreement to date (e.g. plain tobacco packaging) has only occurred for political reasons to ease global populations into this new Global Capital paradigm. One must get used to the reality Global Capital now controls much of the planet through their corporations, political corruption, and financial oppression; and those countries that resist the onslaught of Global Capital will see a future of sanctions and siege.

[itsonlyaflshwound]

Faulty Takata airbags sent the company under through law suits and replacements and is still ongoing. JH should be bleed dry to fix there negligence...there is no honour in men these days ethics are a myth. I think myself lucky having grown up in the 80's and 90's

[bretloyd]

Look at Former Foreign Minister J Bishop's involvement in the JH escape.

[ltrn]

externalisation - outsourcing risks to the system :)

[gregorywright]

Australia should become part of the United States. We have 50 million heavily armed US Marines ready to secure the beaches.